Microsoft is building a Chromium-powered web browser that will replace Edge on Windows 10

Microsoft's Edge web browser has seen little success since its debut on Windows 10 in 2015. Built from the ground up with a new rendering engine known as EdgeHTML, Microsoft Edge was designed to be fast, lightweight, and secure, but it launched with a plethora of issues that resulted in users rejecting it early on. Edge has since struggled to gain traction, thanks to its continued instability and lack of mindshare, from users and web developers.

Because of this, I'm told that Microsoft is throwing in the towel with EdgeHTML and is instead building a new web browser powered by Chromium, which uses a similar rendering engine first popularized by Google's Chrome browser known as Blink. Codenamed "Anaheim," this new browser for Windows 10 will replace Edge as the default browser on the platform, according to my sources, who wish to remain anonymous. It's unknown at this time if Anaheim will use the Edge brand or a new brand, or if the user interface (UI) between Edge and Anaheim is different. One thing is for sure, however; EdgeHTML in Windows 10's default browser is dead.

Many will be happy to hear that Microsoft is finally adopting a different rendering engine for the default web browser on Windows 10. Using Chromium means websites should behave just like they do on Google Chrome in Microsoft's new Anaheim browser, meaning users shouldn't suffer from the same instability and performance issues found in Edge today. This is the first step towards revitalizing Windows 10's built-in web browser for users across PCs and phones. Edge on iOS and Android already uses rendering engines native to those platforms, so not much will be changing on that front.

In addition, Microsoft engineers were recently spotted committing code to the Chromium project to help get Google Chrome running on ARM. Perhaps some of that work will translate over to getting Anaheim running on Windows 10 on ARM, too.

I expect we'll see Microsoft introduce Anaheim throughout the 19H1 development cycle, which Insiders are currently testing in the Fast ring. This is a big deal for Windows. Microsoft's web browser should finally be able to compete alongside Chrome, Opera and Firefox, and those who are all-in with the Microsoft ecosystem will finally be getting a browser from Microsoft that works well when browsing the web.

There's still lots we don't know about Anaheim, and I'm sure we'll hear more about it officially from Microsoft in the coming weeks. What are your thoughts on this? Let us know in the comments.

Updated: Updated info about Microsoft engineers also committing code to Chromium.

Zac Bowden
Senior Editor

Zac Bowden is a Senior Editor at Windows Central. Bringing you exclusive coverage into the world of Windows 10 on PCs, tablets, phones, and more. Also an avid collector of rare Microsoft prototype devices! Keep in touch on Twitter: @zacbowden.

  • Countdown to Google purposely sabotaging Anaheim in 3...2...1... But seriously, as long as it's still works smoothly on low end devices, then I'll give it a shot.
  • Google won't shoot themselves in the foot... even to spite Microsoft. ;0) This makes sense actually. One... Nobody can complain anymore that the new Chromium-based "Edge" is not "standards compliant". Because even if that were true, from now on it'll just be the same "non-compliance" that Chrome itself is following.... or rather... not following. Two... if Microsoft is serious about PWAs and wrapping them in UWP for submission to the store... they have to admit that devs today are probably testing their PWA web apps against Chrome only. That's why many of these "wrapped" apps are so buggy... because the developers writing them are writing them with Chrome in mind. They work perfectly fine... in Chrome. Before MS can seriously start wrapping apps in UWP they must begin with.... stable... PWAs. Three... many ppl won't touch WoA simply because they can't install Chrome. Or they won't use the MS Store beause they can't find their blessed Chrome on it. It's ridiculous and insane yes. But that's they way many ppl are. Four... most enterprises today have standardized on Chrome. This move gives MS' browser a fighting chance in Enterprise. Which is where all the big bucks are spent folks. Very humble and practical on Nadella's part to admit when he's beat. If you cant beat em... join em.
  • I think they could beat them if they wanted to. They just don't want to "waste resources". In other words follow through on their word.
  • This is long overdue, and it is good that Microsoft is finally realizing that the engines powering Edge just don't cut it. It may be officially standards compliant, but those aren't the standards people are using when building their websites. Edge on Android is powered by Blink, and it runs beautifully. Sites work, and I don't worry that they won't. Meanwhile, Edge on Windows/Windows Mobile is a total hit or miss on whether a given site will work 100% as expected. I threw in the towel a long time ago, and other than Microsoft's own sites, almost all my browsing is on Opera and Brave. (I can't bring myself to use Chrome. Same on Android, other than to use it only for managing my Google account.)
  • @Ferris Bueller Well, Google have done it in the past with the Youtube app so there is precedent. Besides, this is probably the first comment that I've come across from you that has some common sense in it.
  • @TechFreak1 What Google did in regards to Microsoft and YouTube was significantly different in execution. Arguably, Microsoft was breaking the API licensing agreement in its YouTube app that bypassed various requirements set forth by Google. So, when Google shut it down, they weren't sabotaging it in a sense, but simply enforcing their rules. This is an important distinction because here, it would require them to actually sabotage their own code base to cause any harm to Anaheim. So, if shutting down the MS YouTube app was shooting themselves in the foot, then sabotaging their own code base would be shooting themselves in the abdomen.
  • @pjhenry1216. The standards which are also not adhered to by many third party youtube clients. Furthermore Google said the initial app was not compliant, once Microsoft made it compliant. Their developer (api) key was revoked on the pretext of the work around not serving adverts not correctly. Secondly, the common misconception is that "Android is open source". But when people say Android, most think of the o/s that has access to the google play store. AOSP is truly open source but to access the google play store you have no choice but to use Google's mobile suite. So essentially it's not really open source. I wouldn't put past Google from sly tactics - such as injected coding into the URL of the mobile browser thus preventing the site from rendering correctly in mobile view. Most people didn't really use Windows Phone 8.x to actually do work. So they don't know the little things google has done and is still doing. Speaking of which, Google's "enterprise suite" of web apps do not function correctly in Edge. There are micro stutters, these look like rendering or dropped packet issues. I do agree if Google did something it would be very evident of intent due to past precedence. Thus akin to what you said.
  • True. Google is an Evil company masquerading as a "savior". M$oft is much better when compared to Google or Apple.
  • This is very different. Google never open sourced YouTube or gave official blessing for use of a trademarked name. In this instance Chromium is open source. They can’t just say everybody except you Microsoft. And they won't just break their own codebase to spite Microsoft. This is actually a brilliant move on Nadella’s part.
  • personally I like Edge although I've been getting a weird "it quits allowing me to copy" bug. As for businesses, our web service currently allows users to use both chrome and firefox and I've had to write custom code twice because of bugs in firefox, and another developer is tracking another one down right now. Our web admin has a personal vendetta against edge and if you try to use it, you get an "edge is blocked" screen. It's part of the branding. You can't convince him it's not internet explorer. I think part of the real issue from the start is they stupidly gave it a similar icon.
  • Google won't as Chromium is the open source counterpart to Chrome. I would hope that Microsoft are replacing EdgeHTML with Blink and keeping the rest the same.
  • Chromium is Open Source. They couldn't if they wanted to.
  • Other browsers already utilize the Blink rendering engine; Opera, Vivaldi, Silk.
  • Not only would it be incredibly difficult to poison their own codebase in a way that the changes wouldn't be rejected, Google can only benefit if the default browser on every Windows machine uses the same rendering engine as their own browser. It makes testing their own websites easier.
  • I would think that they'd do that, but Chromium isn't made by Google (so they can't do anything about it). Chrome is just a closed-source fork of Chromium with Google's modifications.
  • Seriously? Seems like a lot of work to just drop it. I didn't have issues with edge and used it daily for the most part.
  • Yeah, same here. It's unfortunate that this has happened, especially for those who spent so much time working on it. How will this effect current features and things like Tabs?
  • Tabs is a great point and this may explain why it hasn't appeared in 19h1 yet.
  • Do you mean Sets? If so, I don't think it's going to amount to that much of a change for implementing it. The big issue with implementing Sets is getting all the other apps out there to work with it, which has been a very difficult feat for Microsoft ever since they started running with it.
  • They won't replace edge with chrome but edge engine with chromium engine
    The engine is the part that transform the web developer code (html, css, js) to the page you see
    So anything else like tabs, bookmark, autofill and sets are built on to of that
    So changing the engine won't affect the features or atyle that edge already have
  • If it was coded well, theoretically changing the engine shouldn't effect anything else and shouldn't be insanely difficult (if i recall, there was a way to force it to use the IE11 engine at one point, so the ability to switch engines already existed). That said, the rest of the features all depend on whether they deemed them a reason people used Edge in spite of the rendering or if they didn't use it. Microsoft is known for simply dropping features that were insanely useful, but not enough people used them. I'm afraid any usage statistics they've collected on people who use Edge will just emphasize those who just use whatever browser you put in front of them and none of the advanced features. So they may blindly think no one is using any of those other features (like saving tabs for later, etc).
  • I've used Edge as my default browser since it's release and it's been mostly fine, but my requirements for a browser are pretty basic. I don't use extensions or plugins or anything. I think the biggest thing that contributed to Edge's lack of traction was that, despite it being a "modern app", for some ungodly reason, they only updated it during Windows updates. There were several infuriating bugs early on that darn near drove me back to Chrome waiting for a Windows update fix them. A notable one was when it wouldn't refresh new areas when the window was resized. Why they never made it available and automatically updatable through the store I'll never know. Oh well, I'll give the new browser a try, as I do all I can to avoid Chrome, and only keep FireFox installed for when Edge has an issue with a site.
  • The biggest, and what should be the only, question is why can't Ms make Edge work?
  • Yeah no kidding.... Edge has constantly hung and crashed every few days on my surface. That's not to say that Chrome doesn't have it's issues, but the fact that MS can't seem to get Edge completely stable on their own OS is mind boggling.
  • I suspect that creating a browser is pretty hard. And another thing that hinders it is that people start building their pages off of Chrome quarks instead of proper web standards. Same thing happens with apps that run on OSs and is why most break during an update because the OS devs are building their updates based on how you were suppose to code and not quarks and shortcuts.
  • I am sorry. Firefox renders pages incomparably better then Edge.
  • Absolutely!
    Edge is the only browser that I have installed and it works great.
  • Edge would have been great had all web developers followed the actual web standards, and not the Chrome version of web standards. Don't get me wrong: Microsoft's devs did a great job with Edge's rendering and JavaScript engines. And while they have consistently been at the top in terms of sticking to the published web standards, Chrome's devs did not, and well, here we are.
  • @rodneyej. They got rid of the experience engineers and without in house programmatic testing there is not enough data let alone time to fix and catch all the bugs. As I said before it's practically impossible to have developers on the test cycle. People aren't aware how much time that goes into programmatic testing and the tedium of that phase. Some people find that relaxing some people literally go on auto pilot due to the tedium. Under the new financial policy put in play at Microsoft, not enough investment would be forthcoming. Because that is the only way to ensure profits rise BUT that is just a bubble and it's about to pop. I've said before and I'll say it again, Microsoft is past thier inflection point and must invest significantly across the board. What I find daft is that they have edge on Xbox as well - it runs every single device and to throw in the towel. To me is indicative of a poor morale due to the constant re-orgs and utter lack of investment of resources.
  • :))) you expect a bunch of incompetents to succeed?
  • If a system is established. It is hard to topple the system and get to the top of the competition. It requires serious innovation and have to show serious promise in delivering useful features to the people
  • I wonder if Chrome extensions will be more easily available on the new Anaheim browser. I do feel saddened for the devs whose committed years of work on the vision of Edge. Poor initial branding, the unfortunate tie-in with the reviled IE, and the slow couple of years before it took off have been the problem.
  • Opera provides extension that allows extensions installation from Chrome Web Store, so it shouldn't be impossible to do this.
    However MS might limit this as they wanted safe extensions in their Store, and there are a bunch of malicious extensions in Chrome Web Store.
  • Most of the work was made to the edge browser and not the edge engine
    because they built the edge engine from ie old engine but edge browser was built from scratch
    And all the edge browser code will be kept except the part that communicate with the engine
  • If I wanted Google's crap, I'd use Chrome. Don't have any problems with Edge, either.
  • Couldn't agree more. I hate Chrome (browser), refuse to install it on any of my computers, and won't even use it on other computers (e.g. at work). One of the particularly disturbing potential developments from this latest short-sighted decision by Microsoft is the possibility that something tainted by Google (the browser rendering engine) could become a key component of future versions of the Windows operating system. I'm not just referring to whatever new browser Microsoft decides to create next, but also features like Sets that'll also rely heavily on a browser engine. Is this going to mean that, as much as I like and prefer to use Windows, in the future there'll be no escaping Google's influence or sticky fingers? Perish the thought...
  • this comment makes no sense if you remember that we're talking about a rendering engine for webpages and not the browser itself. things that suck about google chrome:
    mothership tracking of install ID - not present in chromium.
    mothership hijacking of DNS - not present in chromium.
    mothership correlation of install ID and DNS when user is not signed on to google - not present in chromium
    mothership collection of host telemetry - not present in chromium
    resource usage - not really a problem in modern high ram environments, and only partly a function of the rendering engine. almost all the cons of Chrome are not part of the Blink rendering engine.
    good things that can come of this:
    Web pages load exactly the same way they do in Edge(?) as they do on Chrome. This is VERY important, because every web developer optimize for Chrome, but many do not bother to optimize for Edge. The web looks better when the sites you visit took the time to optimize for your browser.
    PWA's load exactly the same way they do in Chrome. See previous note, and then remember that Microsoft see's PWA's as the best way to get local webapps into the Microsoft store, which is mission critical for Microsoft mobile platforms.
    This potentially saves project Chromium. If you are not familiar with how Google works, once a feature in Chromium is really good, they cut development and move it over to Chrome, just like AOSP. So while the engine is top notch, the "chrome" of Chromium is dated, leaving open source nerds a gimp browser.
    This potentially births Edge(?) on Linux on MacOS (as Chromium is already there), which is a bigger deal than you might think to getting the brightest minds in the world invested in a browser, and is good for anyone who operates in a highly multiplatform environment. This is not a project subject to Google's meddling. That's not how it works.
  • People used to optimize for Netscape. Then, they optimized for IE (which was the best browser for a while). Later, they optimized for Firefox and/or IE and/or Chrome. Right now, Chrome is on top. Why would that be the final outcome that stays forever? Taking a snapshot and assuming that's how it's always going to be is a poor basis for decisions. IE used to be on Mac and was pulled as a business decision. They could reverse that any way they please if they chose to - with or without Chromium. "This is not a project subject to Google's meddling." Hmmm. If that's a bridge, I don't want to cross it. Remember how Microsoft made sure the browser was all over the OS, and not easily separated/replaced? All Google needs to do is expand the role of Chromium, even if there was no hook today (which I'm not convinced there is not). What's Microsoft going to do about it if the logic is to stay compatible with Chrome?
  • I don't think they are gonna change too much of the front end UI. Only the backend would have significant change. So all the things like set aside tabs, fluent design and other stuff would stay
  • Wow that's something
  • I bet that after this happens, Google Chrome will appear in the Microsoft Store
  • But why would it? It's Chromium-based so there's no need for actual Chrome unless you can explain what advantage it'd have for Microsoft?
  • I think the logic was Chromium was not allowed in the MS Store so if these share that commonality then Chrome would be permitted.
  • Doesn't Google refuse to release Chrome on the store (besides the "they don't like Microsoft" excuse) because they can't use their engine?
    Also, wouldn't having Chrome in the store be beneficial for Microsoft? Like as some would say, "validate" the store?
  • Google doesn't refuse to publish chrome in the windows store. Microsoft rules state that only web browsers powered by Microsoft's own render engine can be published in the store.
  • Which is the same rule that Apple has in place for the App Store and that didn't stop Google from releasing Chrome there. No, Google just doesn't want to put Chrome in the Microsoft Store.
  • iOS Chrome is based on the same rendering engine as Safari. So what are you on about?
  • Exactly that. They bent over to be in the Apple store; not so for the MS store.
  • Mostly because they would be missing out on a large chunk of consumers on tablets if they didn't.
  • Because MS's store is a junk yard no one gives a damn about, that's why. Stop being a delusional fanboy.
  • Chromium is a fork of webkit. So the rendering engine on iOS for chrome has been there before chromium. Google is not bending over backwards for iOS. It was just difficult to justify building a brand new version, when there was no indication that it would be successful. Now that the rendering engine for edge will be chromium, Microsoft has no reason to ban chrome from the store. A win-win for all.
  • They can still forbid it because otherwise everyone can make a browser, maliciously modified.
    Or maybe not maliciously modified but not secure. And that would be very bad for the Store that has to be considered as place to get safe software.
    They can still optimize it for windows and allow only browsers based on their optimization. With all the store apps using the same software component is easy to keep at the desired level all the security. Plus Google has not been friendly so far.
    I would keep this rule enforced for the store.
  • I don't think Microsoft would have a leg to stand on anymore. They both use the same rendering engine. We know that Chrome is one of the most secure browsers out there. I just want the 2 companies to get along. I want to buy a pc and have the ability to chose Chrome. Buy an Android phone and use office.
  • Actually they 'validated' the Microsoft Store by making Chrome installer available in the Store. Microsoft banned the app because it was a browser running on an engine that was not EdgeHTML. I'm hopeful that Google will make Chrome available in the Microsoft Store once they adopt Chromium.
  • They didn't ban it for that reason. It was because it was an installer and not an actual app
  • "Microsoft banned the app because it was a browser running on an engine that was not EdgeHTML." Sorry but that's not at all why it was removed. It was removed becasue it was just an installer and not an app. The risk with allowing installers in their store, is that they have no control over the content that is transmitted through the installer, which could be malicious.
  • Also- I didn't mean to sound so negative. I've been comparing this to what happened to Groove.
    But now that I think about it, Microsoft announced early 2017 that Spotify and iTunes was coming to the store- end of 2017, Groove was shut down.
    But Chrome hasn't been announced to come to the Microsoft Store- so maybe I'm wrong/
  • Are you suggesting that Groove was the sacrifice for iTunes and Spotify to come on the Microsoft Store? And extending that, Edge is being sacrificed to potentially bring in Chrome? Hmmm.
  • Yup, sounds like Michromesoft is coming......
  • I don't like this pun 🤣
  • I'm lost Dan. Are we giving up epub, ink, tabs set aside, and sets to get this? Or are they only subbing tthe rendering engine and keeping the shell
  • I'm guessing on the front side it'll be similar if not the same. It wouldn't make sense, did example, to lose epub of they're selling ebooks in the store.
  • Good question. Or they just have to build those into the new browser, and share with Chromium community, effectively handing over their unique features?
  • The only reason why chrome isn't on the store is a rule that says only browsers powered by Microsoft's edgeHTML engine are allowed on the store. Microsoft has always justified this as being for "security reasons" And just because the new browser will be chromium based doesn't mean it'll be the same as Google chrome. Google chrome does very well at incorporating the entire Google ecosystem of products together, and has a lot of enhancements, additions, and tweaking to make it as stable and quick as it is. Unfortunately chromium comes with the downside of consuming RAM like no other for tab intensive browsing. One last note. Technically Chrome doesn't use "chromium" browsing engine, it uses a forked derivative of chromium called the blink browsing engine
  • "Technically Chrome doesn't use 'chromium' browsing engine, it uses a forked derivative of chromium called the blink browsing engine ..." Chromium uses the Blink engine, as does Chrome, as does every Chromium-based browser. Blink was forked from WebKit -- back in 2013, IIRC. There is no "Chromium" engine. So the new Microsoft browser will use the same rendering engine as Chrome.
  • Agreed, that's a good move on Microsoft's part. I do feel sorry for those who spent all that time developing Edge though.
  • Why do you feel sorry for the devs? Do you think Microsoft is demanding a refund on their salaries??? ;-)
  • I'd feel bad putting effort into something that just gets cancelled, even if I did get paid for it. I take pride in my work.
  • Don't worry Chakra core is still quite active on GitHub actually, it's many times better for resource constrained devices than the V8 engine so no work was put to waste. I'd bet they'll do it in the same vein how Node.js can handle both V8 and Chakra core wherein Edge would support V8 and Chakra without the developer knowing about it through either shims or something like the WSL implementations.
  • Because if Anaheim is just more of the same, why not go the established Chrome way?
  • Trophy for the most friendly, welcoming, front person for a website and a brand goes to.....
  • Because chrome-people don't want a chromium based knockoff. They want chrome, because it's chrome, and because it's google... If another browser would be fine for them, just because it's chromium based, Opera would have way more market share than the 1.5% it has now. And just changing the engine for the sake of it won't help with anything... EdgeHTML is fine as it is. And this switch won't convince anyone to change to Edge (or whatever it will be called). This will just drive existing users away...
  • Right now the reputation of Edge is tainted and when the average user asks their tech-savvy friends what to do, those friends tell them, "Install Chrome". Now that Microsoft is going to build a Chromium-based Edge browser they would stand to gain a big chunk of the browser user base. Why? Because your average user is simply going to use the built in browser on their device. If it works why bother installing Chrome. (This is what you are rationalizing, right Daniel?) However, my guess of why EJ6612 thinks Google would bring Chrome to the Microsoft Store is because they would want to prevent any other Chromium based browser that is not Chrome grow in it's user base. Google is like that. No advantage for Microsoft. All the advantage for Google. I think it's possible only if Google brings their Chrome browser to the Microsoft Store as soon as possible (once policies allow it) and markets the heck out of it. I can see them trying to tout that its better, more stable and secure, has more extensions, etc. It might work, especially if the people are still thinking Chrome is better than whatever Microsoft has built.
  • I never understood why they didn't do that in the first place. Yeah, I lot of work lots that could have been put elsewhere. Edge had/has many problems, not just from the rendering engine, but UWP plateform too.
  • Same reason Apple doesn't do it: it's about having the most amount of control over a system. MS can control all of Edge. Chromium is a different beast.
  • I meant to use an existing rendering engine and concentrate on the features visible by the users. I remember they were pushing for WinJS at the time, they probably wanted to control everything like you said. Unfortunately, it didn't pan out. They need reach developers by using open standards and create value for the users.
  • But EdgeHTML supports open standards already.
  • Right. And the browser is fast, stable, and uses less battery. The reasoning in this article is flawed. Anti edge bias is showing, article should be based on facts.
  • EdgeHTML is also better on resource management which is why it's quite a popular Node.js runtime for JS IoT based apps since V8 is a resource hog. I'm still skeptical they'll be replacing EdgeHTML entirely, it might just be a V8 subsystem under Chakra Core (Edge's runtime) kinda like how Win10 has a Linux subsystem so that it can target both chrome based extensions and Edge extensions.
  • Again I'm lost as to why they would give that up? Seems to me like the basis for Uwp is edge.....
  • Here's hoping it would have the full desktop + webextension APIs like Chrome, so more extensions can be supported for it. I also hope they won't enforce all extensions to be hosted from the MS Store.
  • Where will they be hosted then? The Google Play store? Keep Google from my data. At least MS doesn't sell it.
  • Sure they do. They make money from ads just like Google.
  • No, just no.
  • Actually they do, just nowhere near as much as Google simply because they don't need to.
  • Their entire business model is not hinged on ads (unlike Google) so they can be more strict with how they engage the ad economy, and also since they serve the enterprise and government they need to be far more security conscious by default .
  • But they still do it.
  • Should we explain the concept of "degrees" to you too?
  • What does the temperature have to do with it? Microsoft collects your data and serves you ads based on it. They even have ads directly in the UI of Windows 10! I have a hard time weathering that.
  • Good news. More features and faster updates. It won't be tied to Windows updates.
  • If MS claims Edge is safer, faster and more energy efficient, why would they drop it for Chromium? I don't find any issue with Edge. 'Extension' need time to built though.
  • It's faster, better battery life yup I'm lost. This feels like groove. But at the heart of windows....heres my question will anahiem run on Andromeda?
  • Edge has had a plethora of security and stability issues, that while the end user may not realize them web developers have always been left cleaning up edges mess. Often times as a web developer we will actually cut features and water down a websites experience because it simply isn't worth the time investment to bring the full interactive experience to the edgeHTML engine. Especially seeing as Microsoft changed Edges standards more than I change ball caps making us go and fix sites and web apps we already developed. In short edge was a mess that while it was a decent product, the development was flawed from the start and led to it's failure
  • Bloody hell, Edge has been a victim of crappy QA and why, because MS retrenched its quality test team and launched yet another piece of potentially good software before it was ready. Is this a case of MS always being behind, playing catch up or simply incompetance on the part of upper management? Looking at you Nadella.
  • Edge is a victim of poor design. Yes, there were too many bugs, but honestly any improvements are just polishing a ****. The Favorites bar is so poorly implemented it hurts.
  • Edge was released in 2015. Nadella didn't become CEO until 2014, at which point Edge development was already too far advanced not to release it. If anything, the decision to switch to chromium, an open source standard, is exactly a Nadella move.
  • In other words, Nadella not only allowed it to be released, he continued the development for another 3 years before canning it.... Sorry, not with you here. There are dozens of things in development at Microsoft that never get release. Nadella had no obligation to release it, but not only did he release it but he allowed development to continue for 3 more years of development and still couldn't even create a browser that was competitive to Chrome and stable on his own OS. They could have easily added some features to Edge that would make people really interested in using it, However ever since Nadella took over Microsoft they are no longer thought leaders they once were, they are not innovative. They are basically just a utility company.
  • "They are basically just a utility company." Microsoft is very successful at it!
  • The Windows Insider program was..... and still is..... a brilliant concept. Millions of free testers, and some of them can even write and describe an issue with enough detail to dig into it. With or without an in-house QA team. The problem is that MS did (still do?) a terrible job of triage so when those observant people report odd or highly intermittent issues, they get ignored in favor of issues that get massive upvotes. That by definition means that only issues that everyone notices get fixed. The big issues float to the top but the slightly more esoteric ones are ignored.... seemingly forever. We've all seen the results of that process lately. I was an insider from close to the beginning but these days I don't bother reporting issues or giving feedback.... it's like shouting down a well.
  • I thought EdgeHTML was built to be light and that's one reason why Chromium was not chosen. So how will plugins be effected?
  • EdgeHTML had many flaws, it was light weight but it's flaws we're just to much to the point web developers started doing the bare minimum for edge compatibility. Often forgoing interactive features as Microsoft updates tended to break any websites they built and needed fixing later.
  • Plug-ins and extensions are likely components of the shell, which would be independent of chromium
  • Morons abound at MS.
  • Microsoft has brilliant employees, of course, that any Fortune 100 company would love to get their hands on. But MSFT may have some idiot savants occupying corner offices.
  • Those brilliant employees were canned by Nadella to save money and rise the share price, along with the dedicated testers. More like Ms HAD brilliant employees.
  • ...sigh...well I guess as long as they include a tool of some sort to transfer all my data over...but really, what choice do I have? Thanks for killing yet another thing I genuinely enjoy, Microsoft. So now I suppose you'll have e-book support, the same caliber of PDF support, as well as inking capability? Because Edge was a lot more than just another web browser.
  • Exactly, what's going to happen to all of that? Will there be a Chromium version some how? How will you add things via the Microsoft Store?
  • Don't worry. Only the rendering engine is different. Engine is all background. PDF and inking functionality has nothing ro do with the engine.
  • True, those are non-web browser features that it won't affect these things. Unless for whatever reason they are also rendered with EdgeHTML. I bet that they will simply change the engine and rework some of the architecture to accommodate the new engine and possible to make the browser more modular. EdgeHTML might remain still as HTML renderer for apps and other areas in Windows Shell, especially for UWP. But the Web browser will switch to a new engine.
  • I 1000000% agree. If they do this they need to keep the edge she'll. I mean why make a touch mode so recently change the settings and then drop it. Wtf
  • They're not replacing the shell. Just the rendering engine. Your data will probably stay exactly like it is.
  • I really hope this isn't true. It's the only good browser on the market at the moment . It's the most feature rich browser, most secure, least battery consuming and properly also the fastest (at least compared to Chrome).
  • Almost all of those points are not true.
  • That's some pretty potent stuff you've been smoking!