I'm sure that's an end goal here, but logging into a Google account through Edge, integrates it into the Windows OS. Sort of like (but not as intensely as) logging into a Microsoft account through Edge. So, while, yes, it's end goal is through rivalry, the method is a partnership.
You log into your Google account so Microsoft can take your browser data into Edge, especially the bookmarks and passwords parts so that you automatically sign in to your favourite websites, when in Edge. Microsoft also offers to copy data from your Chrome profile (on your computer, do not signing in to Google) on a periodic interval, so that any new data that comes in Chrome (bookmarks etc.) shows up in Edge. The whole deal is that Microsoft copies your Chrome experience into Edge so you wonโt notice that Microsoft in a random update changed your default browser to Edge again. Google donโt want this as itโs only Microsoft that stands to gain anything from this. Microsoft is using all kinds of tactics to gain more users to Edge and hope these users will use to Bing to search.
I'm not sure it's a partnership. It looks and reads like the standard authorized data sharing setup. Anyone can configure that. It uses an open protocol that's standardized, let's users control the information shared with explicit consent and is basically what you want out of any entity that holds all your crap. The only thing it's really lacking is a standard protocol for sharing the actual data.
Linux distributions have it.
Microsoft using Google's public documented API is a long way from a partnership.
Not a choice in most business settings. Windows servers, Microsoft cloud, Windows workstations, and a 365 to complement. You have a better, equally integrated solution? Because, if so, I'd love to hear it.
Edit. I'm being serious. I'd love to hear it. If it meets the needs of my employer, I'll pitch it. I have some pull. Who knows... it may work.
I mean, we do. Linux OS, Libre Office, Apache servers, Linux Cloud Service of Choice, PostgreSQL.
But you need techs familiar with those systems and businesses eager to implement Linux at a foundational level early on in the company's development. Because a lot of businesses outsource their IT early on, and because a lot of end-user hardware has Microsoft pre-installed, and because the major IT outsourcers all get big kickbacks from Microsoft to be the default solutions, and because Microsoft has embedded itself at the university level at a global scale, and because Microsoft has successfully lobbied itself as the premier US contractor of choice for federal and state IT setups, it can be harder to find professionals willing and able to configure a Linux environment. This is assuming the company founders even think to ask for alternatives.
That's not to say it never happens. FFS, some of the biggest competitors to Microsoft - Amazon and Google most notably - have relied on Linux/PostgreSQL architecture to keep their overhead low and their integrations non-exclusive. But they're exceptional precisely because they laid the groundwork early.
The problem isn't that integrated solutions don't exist. The problem is that most CTOs don't embrace them early on in the company's development and find themselves trapped in the Microsoft ecosystem well after the point a transition would be easy.
I'm transitioning my (very small) office to OnlyOffice and OwnCloud this summer. I have a lot of autonomy so I can basically just make the decision.
I'm choosing OnlyOffice over LibreOffice because it's a more similar to 360 an I will have to help the staff with very little tech literacy through the transition.
We're not ready to transition the OS just yet (and may not be able to), but as the hardware ages, we may change over some of the less essential systems. Probably Ubuntu or Zorin.
People will complain about everything, but never just switch to Firefox, huh? You can't be helped then. There is just the one browser (and a couple of forks of it).
I wonder if it's an early response to the talk of breaking up Google and Chrome. MS gets more people onboarded to Edge and Google still gets your browser level metrics.
It's not the ability that's bothersome (that part is fine, and has been there). It's the fact that this is part of the first boot screen you see on Edge now, with dark patterns to get you to do it.
Booted my desktop since my work computers windows and I game mostly on my steam deck, and holy shit is Manjaro fast as hell compared to windows in 2025. Like I'm so used to clicking and waiting and in Manjaro you click and it's just there.
I'm currently horrified how my (IT illiterate) employer said we need to update all our 20+ laptops to Win11 now. Consumer laptops that barely run Win10.
To be clear, I'm not the IT guy here, though I do sometimes help out.
I have 1 gmail, and their anti spam has usually been very effective, I have to find some other email with an effective anti spam before jumping the boat.
To put it into perspective: if Leibniz was right and this is truely the best of all worlds, be happy that you don't live in any of the other, more shittier timelines. Like the one where Apple sells monitor stands for $1000. Oh, wait...
What? How was Mozilla ever in any kind of OS integrated way in bed with Google?
Google was just the default search engine in their browser. That's it, and it's dead easy to change the default search engine in Firefox.
Why are you making a completely false equivalence, to make Mozilla look bad? Also Firefox is open source, so Mozilla even lets you use a fork, with all the functionality of Firefox with whatever you don't like changed.
That's what I was saying. Everyone gave Mozilla flack for their deal with Google, and here MS is doing it way, way worse. I actually don't mind that Google was the default search engine in ff. It made it usable out of the box for the vast majority of users, and the minority had to click two button to change it. Seemples.
OK fair enough, but that's not what it looked like to me when I read the headline.
I don't use anything Microsoft, and I use only very few Google things for basic functionality of my phone.
This is literally the standard Google sync account stuff in every Chromium browser. Don't want it? Pick a browser that isn't Chrome based. That basically leaves Firefox or a handful of brand new alpha buggy browsers no one has heard of with dubious update potential.
It's a screen made by Microsoft to match their aesthetic and settings pages, of course. But it's the exact same Google account sync system that every Chromium has, unless you're specifically using an unGoogled version.
I'm somewhat confused on the phrasing of this headline. "more OS integrated than Mozilla was?". Is that meant to be more OS integrated than IE was? To my knowledge there's some grey areas around mozilla's actions recently, but I've never heard of them integrating into the OS.
But yeah I gotta agree on the core... If you don't want want big tech spying on you... getting away from windows is necessary.
Google's MS deal makes it more integrated into the Windows [OS], than Google was integrated into Mozilla's FF browser. Odd phrasing, I'll give you that lol
If these two companies are in bed with each other, they are hate-fucking each other though. Carnal pleasure but no love lost.
I don't find this that infuriating. And you have choices to run a different browser. Granted, most of them are chromium based. Edge's only use case is to download a Firefox fork and/or a better chromium that is neither Edge nor Chrome.