[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/g/ - Technology


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: Microsoft_Edge_logo.svg.png (38 KB, 1024x1092)
38 KB
38 KB PNG
Is it really that bad?
>>
Not really.
>>
Yeah really.
>>
>>72705072
this isn't 2011 so no, it's not. Move on now.
>>
yes
>>
>>72705072
It's not the single best browser available, and it can't even be the single best privacy-respecting browser since it isn't one to begin with. Therefore, it really is "that bad," if by "that bad" you mean bad enough not to use. That's how software works, you don't use mediocre or even decent software just because it's not terrible, you use the best, *because* it's the best.

>t. uses falkon
>>
>>72705072
its fine now, it's basically a skinned chrome these days.
>>
>>72705072
yup
>>
I have no trouble with it.
>>
It's chromium botnet.
But it's spying you for Microsoft instead of Google.
>>
I swear its the most clear browser for downloads. I like the info it gives you as to if you want to choose location and how long it has right on the screen
>>
It’s better than IE which is a low bar to pass.
>>
>>72705116
>>72705298
They haven’t switched from EdgeHTML yet.
>>
File: Untitled.png (121 KB, 1366x737)
121 KB
121 KB PNG
>>72706807
gotta go fast
>>
It's shit. There is a reason it is only supported by one operating system.
>>
File: file.png (49 KB, 1240x625)
49 KB
49 KB PNG
>>72707303
do the needful sir
https://www.microsoftedgeinsider.com/en-us/download
>>
>>72705072
Internet Explorer is unironically better
>>
>>72707321
The macOS build is only a beta release.
>>
>>72707350
so?
>>
>>72707409
So it's only properly released for one desktop operating system.
>>
>>72707415
define properly released
>>
>>72707498
Out of beta.
>>
>>72707505
everything is beta
>>
>>72707521
No. Just because Microsoft makes shit software doesn't mean that is true.
>>
>>72707525
Fucking idiot, Chromium Edge not released yet, all build for all platforms are in beta stage
>>
>>72707534
Nice English, retard. EdgeHTML versions are still the official release of Edge.
>>
>>72705072
probably
>>
>>72707548
But we are talking about Chromium Edge fucking cunt nigger piece of shit
>>
>>72707568
No we aren't. Why would you think that?
>>
>>72707575
holy niggers
>>72707321
>>
>>72707585
This thread is about Edge. Not specifically Edge Chromium. I'm not using your non-free JS and viewing that site, either.
>>
It's not ok, but it's just "meh". I mean, it's 2019, Microsoft could at least release its browser to all OSs
>>
>>72707596
but you responded to >72707321
so you wasn't talking about EdgeHTML at that moment, so go fuck yourself
>>
>>72707619
Yes I was. You're the one who responded to me first.
>>
>>72707596
exhibit #34323234 of mental illness possessed by a linux user
>>
>>72707624
and since that post subject was Chromium Edge, proving your point was incorrect about Edge being released only for windows, you got btfod and now you cant cope, spitting this nonsense
>>
>>72707660
>and since that post subject was Chromium Edge
No, my post was only about Edge. Why do you think I was referring to Chromium Edge?
>>
>>72707626
What do you mean? I don't use Android.
>>
>>72707672
because you replied to >72707321 saying
>The macOS build is only a beta release.
you didn't specified that you was talking about Edge
an since subject of >72707321 was Chromium Edge ofcourse i would assume you was talking about Chromium Edge
>>
>>72707698
You replied in response to my claim about Edge not running on real operating systems with an image that makes no mention of Chromium Edge and a link full of non-free JS. You never actually mentioned Chromium Edge in response to my post, which was not about Chromium Edge.
>>
I'm using it right now
>>
>>72707719
Yes, you was talking about Edge at initial post, and then someone (not me) replied with link to Chromium Edge, and you was more than happy to point out that Chromium Edge is in beta stage for MacOS, and since that point you got BTFOd but you won't admit it and will keep making excuses.

Btw How do you know that Chromium Edge is on Beta stage without visiting non-free JS websites?
>>
>>72707800
>and then someone (not me) replied with link to Chromium Edge
Which I did not open.
>and since that point you got BTFOd
How so? Because you misunderstood a post? Why are you wintoddlers so retarded?
>Btw How do you know that Chromium Edge is on Beta stage without visiting non-free JS websites?
Yes, because one needs to visit that site just to have basic knowledge of a browser. How stupid are you?
>>
>>72707814
>How so? Because you misunderstood a post? Why are you wintoddlers so retarded?
Yes you got BTFOd, you claim you have "basic knowledge of a browser" yet you didn't know that Edge is Windows only, and since you didn't opened the link why the fuck would you post
>The macOS build is only a beta release.
???
You was talking ONLY about Edge and Edge is only windows.
What happened here? please explain
>>
>>72707837
>Yes you got BTFOd, you claim you have "basic knowledge of a browser" yet you didn't know that Edge is Windows only, and since you didn't opened the link why the fuck would you post
I think you're getting the posts mixed up.
>You was talking ONLY about Edge and Edge is only windows.
Edge as a whole, not Edge Chromium specifically. See, >>72707596
>>
>>72707845
>I think you're getting the posts mixed up.
no you don't think that, you just have nothing to say to explain your stupidity

Hard mode: answer only to this question
>The macOS build is only a beta release.
Why did you say that? You know Edge is WIndows only. You didn't opened link, so you was unaware that subject was ChromiumEdge, yet you said that macOS builds bla bla...
>>
>>72707893
>no you don't think that, you just have nothing to say to explain your stupidity
I don't even know what you're talking about. It seems you're attributing posts to me that I didn't make.
>Why did you say that?
I was referring to Edge as a whole, not Edge Chromium specifically. See, >>72707596 (You)
>>
>>72707906
> was referring to Edge as a whole
You can't reference Edge as a whole because they are 2 different products, and since Edge is Windows only the only Edge you could be talking about was Edge Chromium.
>>
>>72707929
>You can't reference Edge as a whole because they are 2 different products
No, you can. They are the same project. Edge EdgeHTML will be superseded by Edge Chromium.
> and since Edge is Windows only the only Edge you could be talking about was Edge Chromium
False deduction. Current released versions of Edge are Windows only, regardless of engine.
>>
>>72707942
>False deduction. Current released versions of Edge are Windows only, regardless of engine.
>The macOS build is only a beta release.
yet you was talking about ChromiumEdge, why? i thought you was talking only about Edge, then you was talking about Edge as a whole, but masOS build are Chromium only.
>>
>>72708010
>yet you was talking about ChromiumEdge
False.
>i thought you was talking only about Edge, then you was talking about Edge as a whole, but masOS build are Chromium only.
Is your brain melting or something?
>>
>>72708026
>False.
False.
>>
>>72708037
Your poor comprehension does not change what I said.
>>
>>72708040
You still didn't explained why

>and since Edge is Windows only the only Edge you could be talking about was Edge Chromium
>>
>>72708053
>You still didn't explained why
Yes I did. Scroll up, you goober.
>>
>>72708061
>Current released versions of Edge are Windows only, regardless of engine.
bullshit, you just proved my point
>Current released versions of Edge are Windows only
therefore when you was talking about macOS, you was talking about ChromeEdge
>>
>>72708090
>therefore when you was talking about macOS, you was talking about ChromeEdge
Why are you so dense? I was talking about the Edge project as a whole. So the beta on Unix is relevant to what I said.
>>
>>72705072
ow the edge
>>
>>72708097
>I was talking about the Edge project as a whole
You can't reference Edge as a whole because they are 2 different products, and since Edge is windows only you can't reference it as a whole in context of talking about macOS builds, that exclude Edge from that statement, and only ChromiumEdge is left
>>
>>72708112
>You can't reference Edge as a whole because they are 2 different products
They are the one project.
>and since Edge is windows only
There is a beta build for Unix.
>>
>>72708123
>They are the one project.
not, they aren't
> beta build for Unix
where?
>>
>>72708139
>not, they aren't
Yes they are.
>where?
We were just talking about it.
>>
>>72708154
>Yes they are.
no, they aren't
>We were just talking about it.
>talking
you gotta show me that build, are you retarded to think "talking" is a proof?
>>
>>72708164
>no, they aren't
Good one.
>you gotta show me that build, are you retarded to think "talking" is a proof?
macOS is Unix.
>>
>>72708169
>macOS is Unix.
so in the end, you was talking about ChromiumEdge all that time
>>
So anyone here actually made a switch from Chrome to Edgeium? What's your experience like?
I wouldn't mind trying it but I feel not having Google Sync would be a deal breaker for me. I don't feel like using online MS account for their version of sync.
>>
>>72708187
Edge project.
>>
File: icon.png (4 KB, 225x225)
4 KB
4 KB PNG
Sorry, I use Brave
>>
>>72708213
So Chromium with a skin?
>>
>>72708200
ok i got it, ChromiumEdge it is
>>
>>72708220
Edge project. Learn what a project is, pajeet.
>>
>>72708230
Tbh you're pretty dumb.
>>
>>72708346
Proprietard spotted. Not everything is defined by its market.
>>
>>72707286
>the beta/canary build you installed somehow proves that the regular version of edge has switched to blink
>>
>>72705072
No, I use it when I have to use windows.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.