Skip to main content

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
Zac Bowden

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.

305 Comments
  • 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 etc....so 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!
  • "feature rich" I would question, but the others I'd easily agree with.
  • "most feature rich" is an obvious joke. Edge is still lacking features that have been standards for every other browser, including IE, for 15 years. And those battery tests MS touted? Most third party independent testers who replicated them didn't get the same results. Speed-wise it's not the fastest either but at this point the differences are academic.
  • What are you smoking? :) seems good
  • This is unfortunate. Let's hope they take this opportunity to keep their new browser decoupled from the operating system so it can be updated rapidly. Part of the issue with Edge was it was tied to the OS and updates were too slow compared to other browsers.
  • I thought it was April 1st for a second there... other than the nightmare of Fav sync that I just fixed after 6 months of trying, I was happy with Edge, and still am. Its a great touch browser. Hope they do it right, and without any of the issues with memory that Chrome suffers from. Hmmm maybe this means that Microsoft Android is also around the corner. Uggghh...
  • I thought exactly the same thing once I saw the news.....is it April 1st yet?!!!!
  • I just don't get it. Why would changing the rendering engine affect the product's popularity, if that is indeed the issue here? In addition to Edge we already have Chrome, Firefox, Opera, and even Internet Explorer, so what's the sense in introducing yet another browser? This really does feel like April 1st.
  • Edge is a huge flop. Useage is miniscule. No reason for Microsoft to continue developing it when they can just switch to Chromium and not have to worry about it. Chromium is better supported and will take much less effort.
  • Right now it's usage share is what 4.2%? whether or not that is a success depends on the goals Microsoft set for it. Regardless, I disagree with your point that they just won't "have to worry about it". They still need developers that knows the renderer inside and out if and when there are issues so that they can fix the problem ASAP. We know this because they have developers now contributing to the codebase to get their hands dirty.
  • That is way less work than maintaining your own engine. 4.2% is atrocious for the default browser. No way Microsoft set their goals that low or even close to that number. They must have been expecting double digits at least.
  • If Edge was that much of a flop then simply "switching to Chromium" isn't going to change that, is it!!!!
  • No. It will decrease their overhead though.
  • I'm trying to think what this actually means. I have no real problems with Edge. It has all the extensions I need, has gotten to the point where it runs well with several dozen tabs open, and I love the Ink support. Edge is my default browser. I think Opera is Chromium based. Is that right? I really like Opera too, so if that's any indication, then I guess I don't care, as long as Microsoft preserves the Inking support on top of the Chromium rendering engine. It seems an interesting twist to incorporate parts of Chrome into the default Windows browser. Would that mean that people who know the new MS browser is built on the some underpinnings will stop downloading Chrome? I am curious to hear how MS pitches this. It seems most likely that they'll focus on the special features they'll build on top of Chromium (hopefully including Ink support). And I take it as a given that this won't report anything I do back to Google, which is the main reason I don't use Chrome as a browser except when I'm accessing Google services (gmail, Google Play for app development, etc.). I think Chromium is just the open source components and rendering engine and not attached to Google. Can anyone confirm?
  • Yes Opera these days uses Chrome engine. Just hope they leave I. E. as an option so that the web based interface to some of our NEC PBX systems can still do real-time changes. Only works with I. E.
  • Many things only work on IE.
  • So yet another Chromium browser... like we don't have enough of these already... They couldn't decouple Edge from the OS?? smh
  • Seriously. If this is true, this is not good for the industry. If this happens, what are some non-Chromium browsers we can use instead?
  • Well, there's Firefox. And, uh...
  • The industry doesn't give a damn about Edge..oh, ~4.2% do :))))
  • The biggest problem of Edge is those "I don't have any problem with Edge". These comments are really bad because Edge really has lots of issues (you could say you don't care, or your usage is limited that hardly to trigger, but just for average user, it's not really good enough for everyday use). Edge still has lots of issues and I don't think there's enough investment / priority to fix all the issues before it's too late that finally at certain point that needs to give up. One thing I'm afraid of is that whether the biggest issue is EdgeHTML, or actually UWP itself. I think many of stability issues are due to limitation of UWP while the compatibility issues are due to EdgeHTML (frankly speaking, there's less compatibility issue than years ago, but the stability is no better than years ago after recent upgrade). Switching the engine can only solve half of the problems, and we have no idea if UWP want to fix their issues soon enough, or eventually get the same destiny as EdgeHTML.
  • I really am one of those folks that does not have a problem with Edge. Got tabs open all over the place. Been using Windows every day for 30 years, so I'm not a newbie. I assume it is because we don't hang out on the same sites. Someone did point out about the Xfinity.com site, and I guess I have always blamed badly performing websites like that on crappy design. BUT, I have TON of UWP apps that I have just become accustomed to restarting after they "poof" disappear. That has been going on for years. I guess I'm complacent now because in the old days it was freezing and rebooting for this kind of crap that was the pain. But just restarting an app cuz it poofed? I'm good with that, wish it would stop but, not like rebooting in the old days and waiting minutes for a restart.
  • Curious... I open Edge start typing URL, half of it ends up being in the URL bar, half of it in the Bing search box. This is across the healthy sample of the hardware, some of it fairly high end (last observed on 8-gen core i7, 32GB RAM). Reported to MS on first encounter (1609? 1703?), still there. Does it never happen to you?
  • So I went to Edge's Facebook page and sent a message with some questions and then I scrolled *worst mistake ever* I now remember why I avoid MS run pages, so many complaints and hate, it's actually sickening, it gets my blood pumping that there are people that can complain so much and then I start feeling sick to my stomach. Man, it's frustrating. Stupid people.
  • MS deserves every bit of consumer backlash it gets. Yes, edge was screwed up for a long time, but that is no different from every ither Microsoft ambition. I at least thought they got past the hump with edge. I wonder how this new browser will compete with the dozens of other available chromium browsers.
  • It will at least minimize the amount of work Microsoft has to do to attract very few users.
  • This is a mistake.
  • They should continue putting all that development work into a browser that very few people are using? Why?
  • Agreed. Also I can't help wonder if using Chromium has some app related outcome down the line. Probably reading too much into it. Likely means less development for all platforms especially Android. I should point out I use Edge almost exclusively in Windows, but am not a poweruser so whatever.
  • Edge is the #2 browser on windows 10, son.
  • Is it? With 5% of Windows 10 users?
  • Microsoft could also go the Firefox route, which does WebExtensions to be compatible with Chrome but their own rendering engine. I have less of a problem with the EdgeHTML as I do the extension system. My preferred browser is Vivaldi (chromium), so hands off of it. I seriously doubt JvT would sell his company to them. Do not know for sure, but I bet MS made a play for Opera BITD. If so, he was clearly rejected and Opera went to a Chinese company and subsequently dropped their own engine.
  • Pretty sure they do something like that (not super up on the specific details). When they announced extensions for edge they billed them to developers as basically having to make no changes from their chrome extensions (again, not sure about the reality of this, since I don't make extensions)
  • why don't Microsoft just choose to use firefox's engine instead of chromium? at least firefox doesn't hog RAM and CPU like a hungry blue whale, and its just as good or maybe better than chrome. I haven't use chrome for almost a year, and Edge have been my main browser for more than a year. yes, edge is not perfect. it has lot of problems, but at least its lean and don't slow down my computer like chrome does...
  • I use Chromium-based browsers, so it's somewhat hypocritical of me to say this, but I wish they'd chosen Gecko as the rendering engine, purely to help avoid a Chromium monoculture on the web.
  • "I wish they'd chosen Gecko as the rendering engine, purely to help avoid a Chromium monoculture on the web." At the current rate of Microsoft's browser consumption, would it make a significant difference? OTOH, I do realize that more people might use Microsoft's offerings if their browsers were more competent.
  • As we have seen with the massive adoption of Android, Developers seem to be obsessed with open source. Perhaps MS feels that if they convert their web browser to a fork of Chromium, they will get more adoption. That being said, I really like Edge, and all of its features. I really hope that this is one of those behind the scenes things that doesn't change anything, except the rendering engine and website/extension compatability.
  • Microsoft should run up the white flag at their HQ in regards to the consumer markets. They have surrendered unconditionally.
  • "Using Chromium means [...] users shouldn't suffer from the same instability and performance issues found in Edge today. "
    Yeah. That's not how it works. Rather: Using Chromium means users WILL SUFFER from the same instability and performance issues found in Chrome today. Because Edge has a lot of drawbacks, but lack of performance and instability are definitely not amongst those. Unlike with Chrome, which is infamous for its extreme resource requirements (and in turn bad performance on the same machine), and has more vulnerabilities discovered each month than the full Windows system has in half a year.
  • Thank goodness to bad rubbish. Seriously, Edge was awful. It always feels like a bad 3rd party browser to me. I'm happy to see Microsoft do this, it's a win for their users. And less work in the long run for them.
  • So sick of Microsoft abandoning great products right before perfecting them. Edge was my daily browser and I had very few issues with it. It was light fast and tightly integrated.
    I am rapidly going from Microsoft apostle to active avoidance.
    Azure and Office won't sustain them after they completely abandon anything personal and fun. Make a Kinect v3 for Xbox with far field mics and tight Cortana support.
    Invest in Andromeda like your biz depends on it.
    Aquire TV stream service and integrate into Xbox / Windows 10 / Roku
    Revive Groove or integrate music into above TV stream service.
    Build cheap Cortana device (although Invoke is now $50)
    Build high end Cortana/Skype device with video.
  • This doesn't make sense. I don't think anyone makes a choice of a browser because of its rendering engine. Launching a new browser with a different "e" logo is just a waste of resources. It's adoption will likely remain static. Now, if the reason you are moving everything to Chromium, including Office HTML rendering, so that you can improve real-time online collaboration then maybe I could understand this... But, on its face, I think this just is a very weird story.
  • The main players like Google's APIs don't work well with Edge, YouTube for example renders twice as slow. The company i work for has a web based app that is incompatible with IE and Edge, dropdowns and checkboxes just show up in strange places and it's not a priority to fix because they just ask that people "use something else." So i think it isn't a very simple reason more of a roadblock they are trying to overcome. I think calling it a new browser would be a huge mistake, as reflected by all these comments. I'm hoping its just still edge with a different engine.
  • You are absolutely right. This will likely not increase useage of Microsoft's "E" browser. It will greatly decrease their decent l development costs though. This move is a no-brainer.
  • The problem that Edge had wasn't the rendering engine, it was the fact that it took multiple years to slowly add all the features that a browser should have. Poor bookmark design was the biggest hinderance for me. I in no way could rely on it to store hundreds of bookmarks for multiple years. A tool to quickly help organize bookmarks is MIA, manually moving bookmarks is slow, I have multiple computers and my bookmarks are almost always inconsistent. And not to mention the days that I woke up and found every single one of my bookmarks duplicated and had to delete them 1 stinking bookmark at a time. If they are starting from scratch then I doubt we'll see a fully implemented Anaheim browser until 3-4 years from now. Then again it might be a good idea to keep this development group working on a new browser because heaven forbid they start touching something important in Windows - like the file system.
  • So everyone will be Webkit. I don't know if that's a good or bad thing.
  • So they will use Chromium for the html engine, but it will still be a MS app right? And they think this will grow its adoption? Whoever uses Chrome will continue to do so...
  • This is not a browser issue but a web app issue. Google owns the web with YouTube, Google Search, Google Msps, etc... So they get to decide which browsers play nice with their sites. Really no different when IE was king in corporate sites. MS needs some premier web properties... I wonder how Google will play with firefox as it will be the only browser not based on webkit or Chromium...
  • Perhaps this has something to do with allowing PWAs in the Microsoft store? I'm wondering if Google is further along in adopting those web standards in chromium and either Edge will adopt/be replaced completely with chromium completely or just enough that PWAs can exist in the store using Edge?
  • The replacement of EdgeHTML to the generic Chrome HTML source code likely has to do with Windows S mode and future MS devices which can only run Store programs and apps.
    More specifically, now Google will be able to release Google Chrome to the Store which is currently banned because it doesn't use MS default HTML engine.
    [Is this yet ANOTHER sign that MS is abandoning Consumer (non-business) users?]
  • Edge has been my default browser for at least 18 months now. True, when Windows 10 was released, Edge was awful but it has improved a lot since then
  • Why does MS need it's own "built-in web browser"? So it can be used to go directly to the chrome download page? Why reinvent the wheel? I guess so they can bundle it with all their own adware junk. And for those too ignorant to realize they have a choice and can use another browser that isn't bundled with the OS.
  • You can make the "why reinvent the wheel" argument with every browser that ever existed ever. Browsers come and go
  • Which is the same for Chrome. Till today their stuff is burnt into Android and you can't even disable those annoying services because the system becomes unstable. They are doing the same thing.
  • I fully trust Microsoft to fu*^-up this new Anaheim browser as well.
  • They will, it's in their nature looking at their catastrophic history since winjunk 10 was released.
  • Another cancelled project by Microsoft.
  • Hello Netscape, I'm remiss to see how they will not continue to bow to the rabble until Google is controlling all of us... Windows will be lost, conceding every step to the competition because of the misguided public
  • This is the dumbest thing I heard Microsoft do in a long while. Why not use Webkit, Blink is a subset of Webkit either way, and backed by Google which is anti open web standards? Heck, or even use Gecko?
  • I refused to use Edge because they failed to support 3rd party security products like Norton. I've used Norton for decades and it's been a long long time since my systems have been infected by anything. I told Microsoft over and over that I would not use Edge until they supported Norton which they still don't fully support. I hope they don't pull this stunt again and keep trying to jam Defender down our throat. If they do I'll continue to use Foxfire. I don't trust Google and Chrome as all they do is pirate everyone's personnel information ignoring their privacy rights. We'll just have to wait and see what they come up with.
  • AFAIK Edge has Norton extensions now.
  • Here we go again. Microsoft always throwing in the towel. Smh
  • To their defense I think they have come up with quite a few niceties over the past few years. Their API-based net mgmt protocol is more open than anything before. Win 10 lets you run Linux in itself, though they only enabled it for 64 bit which is a pain. They have finally introduced memory compression and added virtual desktops. Azure is cutting its way through and so on. They did not throw in the towel, just the opposite. But they admit they cannot be the winner in everything for everyone all the time.
  • Here's what Microsoft should do. Drop the "Edge" brand. No one knows what it is. But everyone and their Grandma knows the name "Internet explorer". And Microsoft hasn't been developing internet explorer anymore.. soooo... Just call this new browser the "NEW" Internet explorer! Now you've got a modern browser with the weight of the "internet explorer" brand behind it. Wouldn't that just make too much sense?
  • I do not think IE is a strong brand. People know it and make fun of it. It had always been a joke, that is why Microsoft moved away from that name.
  • Personally I think that Microsoft could potentially just change the engine as the interface isn't actually that bad. As much as I love to use Edge, I'm reserving my judgement until the new browser is released.
  • For me, Edge failed at the GUI level. They only cared about a touch interface which drove me bonkers. I don't care to have so much space between menu items; especially when I'm using a mouse and keyboard. That was the dominant reason I didn't give Edge my mindshare, for what it's worth.
  • Rename it to Spartan. Seriously. Please. I want Spartan.
  • I simply don't see the point... They couldn't beat Google with an actual alternative; they sure as h*ll won't beat them on their own turf! Why even bother developing a browser that's doomed to be inferior and unloved? Better spend the time and money elsewhere...
  • If they start with Chromium, building a browser is fairly easy. Much easier than building and supporting their own engine.
  • YEAH!!! I'm excited to see this race! Smart move Microsoft.
  • I cant wait to see what you guys come up with!
  • Yeah because we need more Chromium and WebKit monopoly in the browser market. EdgeHTML was progressing perfectly. If anything they need to update the Edge app. But no. Giving up.
  • I use edge and it works great!!!
  • Same for me. It's my default browser and only use others (Firefox, IE) for specific sites that behave weirdly with Edge.
  • The main question I have right now, is whether they will use this solution on Windows 10 or is that potentially a solution meant to be used on Windows "Lite", Core OS or something like that?
  • Total clickbait title. You say yourself you don't know anything about Edge.
  • One of the big reasons I've stuck with Edge all these years is precisely because I don't want a Chromium-based browser. I don't want to use Google Safe Browsing, Blink, or any Google service. Now the best thing I can use is Pale Moon or Firefox with several features (like location services and GSB) carefully and meticulously disabled. I have to admit, I had a tantrum after reading this article that was so long and so bad that my Mom came in to check on me. I guess I can still be immature sometimes. Sigh. :/ I'm extremely tired of the market trying to force Google services down my throat against my will. Just because everyone else uses it doesn't mean I'm okay with being asked to use it. How am I supposed to boycott a company or their browser engine in a meaningful way if they can effectively force all their competitors to use that engine?
  • Actually, if you use Chromium (it's a packaged browser, not just an engine for Chrome), you don't get many Google services unless you go out of your way to install them (like getting a Google dev key and installing it to Chromium), because Chromium is open source.
  • For a long time, Windows survived with two strategic justifications: create a bridgehead for Windows Mobile, and create a Microsoft browser as a gatekeeper to valuable internet properties, such as search. With this move, Microsoft has abandoned any attempt at differentiation. Windows is now a dying cash cow, and an expensive one to fix based on recent dramas with upgrade.
  • Nadella hates the Windows OS so much.
  • That's ridiculous. Nadella doesn't hate Windows. Take a deep breath Puppy. Windows is the reason why Azure, Office 365, and Surface are all doing as well as they are. And Nadella knows that. This move is actually smart. MS may not even rename the browser for all we know. It still may be called Edge. All they are doing is changing the rendering engine. It will still have unique features that only "Edge" has... just like Torch... Opera... Comodo Dragon... Rocketmelt… and every other Chromium based browser have too. Nadella's move is actually brilliant. He needs to win back Enterprise IT shops that have "standardized" on Chrome because of its popularity with web developers, because it renders web pages in a manner they are used to. If Microsoft does this right, and there's no reason to believe they won't, IT shops will have every reason to stick with the browser that comes packaged with... Windows.
  • I'm in the weird position of using Chrome on my Surface and Edge on my android phone and tablet. If they're gonna change the rendering engine and keep everything else (name, reading list etc.) then cool. I doubt MS can be successful launching yet another browser.
  • It would be cool if it meant it supported Chrome Extensions but I doubt it will. People generally dislike the Edge UWP design language though. It doesn't look Desktop enough. But when Firefox struggles to compete with Chrome and Firefox has been around decades what chance does another new browser have?
  • I've been using Edge as my default browser since it was released. I don't know what I'm doing right, but all of the Edge issues has always seem fabricated by perception. I mean I never read anyone be specific other than "the favorite bar sucks", "its buggy", "its slow". Sure the browser crashes sometimes (not often) but so does chrome and all the other browser. I think when chrome crashes (not often) people shrug it off cuz its chrome, the best browser. when edge crashes (not often) people is reminded that MS sucks and chrome is superior. Its sad. Personally I don't care too much if it die or live but I will miss it. It has the best dark-mode hand down.
  • Try to start it up on a 6-7 years old netbook with 2GB memory. It is eating up all the resources, hangs and renders the computer unusable. Even killed my dual cores. Its memory usage is incredibly high and greedy. Firefox lives in 1/3 or 1/4 of the memory footprint of Edge plus runs much faster. I also did not find a way to monitor the tabs' memory usage, which is easy in both Mozilla and Chrome, not that it is really a need there in those solutions as they usually work better.
  • Let's be honest......edge only recently became usable with compelling reasons to switch(LastPass, battery, inking, fido2 security keys).....and, this is when MS throws in the towel?
  • Project Spartan had a fatal mistake: The brand. How is possible that MS edge has had the same logo than IE. Stupid decision
  • Edge is easily the best touch browser but I like Firefox too much to use it when I have a mouse or touchpad. Hopefully Firefox will add Edge's Swipe Left/Right to go Back/Forward. It's coming to Chrome for Android.
  • Congrats Microsoft! Just another message telling me "Move to Linux, if you wan to stay on the safe = Google crap free side". Wondering how far the Nadella's Windows developemt resource cutting goes. There is already no QA department, we can see the results on quality of latest Windows 10 updates. Now they are going to adopt another software crap from Google. For now, Firefox stays as the only safe option. Moreover it follows custom Clear Type font rendering both Edge and Chrome crap ignores.
  • Sad news. Used Edge starting from its first releases. And started to use it as default browser after EdgeHTML 13 (or even earlier). Hope they will add all features like sync, inking, reading etc. (But knowing MS approach we'll have half backed browser with much less features than Edge at beginning and will be great if they will catch up in functionality in 2 years).
    Sad news that they are going to Chromium (most likely both EdgeHTML and ChakraCore will be replaced) which isn't great thing for Web Standards and ECMAScript future as it is now closer to monopoly. Other problem - JS based UWP apps used EdgeHTML (can be replaced with SPA and UWP wrapper as Twitter does) and Office Add-Ins used it as well. Hope that there are clear path that will work from start and not in 5 years.
  • Hopefully they wont follow suit with Chromes retarded tab interface. Even at 5-10 tabs the tabs themselves shrink down to unusable sizes in chrome today.
  • I don't like it.
    Not only they won't have a complete control over their own web browser, but it is the one of many signes that Microsoft is giving up building quality first-party product in favor of popular and successful third-party products. We have seen many clues a lot of time. Microsoft giving up their own mobile operating system to use Android phones as their "Windows companion". Groove Music Pass being killed to be replaced by Spotify.
    Also, I pretty much dislike the Chromium engine since it will eat your resources whatever you use it and it destroys my battery life pretty easily.
    Besides, I don't understand how is a different browser engine will improve the situation. Only a handful of people will ever notice that Microsoft Edge is powered by some Googlified version of Internet Explorer. They should instead improve their own first-party products and never consider third-party solutions as an option.
  • "Besides, I don't understand how is a different browser engine will improve the situation" It is the long-term Nadella's strategy to kill the Windows OS at all. He can move more resources out of the Windows development again.
  • What are you talking about? Chromium is open source. Chrome is not. Chromium lacks all the Google tracking and Google account integration out of the box. That means Microsoft will have full, 100% control over their browser. They can fork the code and modify it to their heart's content. More importantly, it potentially gives non-Microsoft devs and advanced users more insight into what Microsoft is doing under the hood, if they choose to use Git or some other public version management tool.
  • Just because they're working to add ARM support to Chromium, it doesn't mean Microsoft is replacing Edge. Chromium is used by Electron, and Electron is used by many applications like Visual Studio Code and Slack to name a few. I have a Windows On Arm laptop and would love to use Visual Studio Code natively instead of via x86 emulation. It seems Microsoft can't work on any open source project without people jumping to wild conclusions.
  • They wouldn't be reporting this if it was just a wild conclusion.
  • I guess you have a stronger opinion of what passes for tech journalism nowadays.
  • This isn't a crazy idea. It makes sense for Microsoft to discontinue their failed browser engine. No reason to continue sinking resources into it when a free and superior option is available.
  • Hey now. This site reported that Surface Phone was real, too ;)
  • It was real until they canceled it. That was also widely reported.
  • Well, how weird. So now Edge is to be a reskinned Chrome/Chromium clone? What's the point when we can already download and use full Chrome? And then comes the big question... what next? If the browser can go, anything can go. Is this the continuation of the move away from Windows and providing software to customers? Will we see a reskinning of the Chromebook desktop to replace the old Windows desktop next? Or will the Microsoft Store just merge with Google Play? Feels like MS is continuing its move away from consumers and dropping software for the cloud.
  • For a while Edge seemed to be getting better, then it started having the same problems that it seemingly had corrected. I'm using OS 1809 Version 17763. Because about 2 out of 5 websites I need don't render correctly, I need to try another browser, be it I.E. 11 or Chrome. For me. it's gotten so bad, that I moved my Chrome Canary icon from the desktop to the taskbar! So IMHO given that extensions aren't there for I.E., this only makes sense. I don't think it will hurt MSFT either. I do think though that they should come up with a new and different icon and say good-bye to the "e"
  • I do believe they go all in. On the Halo.... This is Microsoft strongest browser ever we call it the Spartan.
  • I think they could replace it with a 'G' with this new browser.
  • Well, that makes my request to Autodesk for Microsoft Edge support kind of pointless now. -_- https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/vault-products/troubleshooting/ca...
  • I hope for two things. 1, they update the UI with more fluent design on the new browser as it's still pretty lacking on that front. And 2, please MS give it a nice and cool new name. Microsoft Edge? Seriously WTF?
  • Agreed. But Microsoft usually doesn't do cool very well. They'll probably call it Microsoft... Browser.
  • Edge already works well when browsing the web, it is my default browser on all my personal computers. Oh well, does not mean I am going to suddenly start using Chrome though, no thanks.
  • Switching to Firefox?
  • Don't you have a stew to attend do?
  • A lot of people at work seem to like Firefox. I guess they're trying to walk the fence between one Evil Empire and the other Evil Empire. Myself, I use Chrome, because even though they've fallen to The Dark Side I still remember when they weren't. Evil, I mean. 'Course, I *also* remember when MS was the upstart, taking on the Evil-Empire-formerly-known-as-IBM. Ah, great days - GREAT days..!
  • I always wondered why Edge is great on my phone and so iffy on my surface and laptop. I was always shocked that in 2018 Edge was still having issues with some websites (like IKEA- just recently). Good deal that the desktop version is going away with hopefully something a lot better.
  • What's the point of a new browser when everybody's using Chrome. We have a million choices for good browsers! Go spend your money on bringing a rentable Xbox game library to Windows which will allow consumers to play anything for a few dollars for a few days. Is cloud computing more expensive than a store front? Some of us want to play but don't have time or money so it makes sense to rent the game and a cloud based Xbox system for a few nights on our days off. It's just most games require a month with nothing to do for you to play the whole story. Even if that idea doesn't work it's better than having another browser people aren't going to care about. Please try to understand the bigger picture, browsers aren't something that the common folk invest a deep learning into. It makes more sense to bring new ideas to the table before putting an official Windows browsing solution on our PCs. Better screen casting, offline cross device compatibility, perhaps an offline (adhoc) remote desktop client, an infrared/usb device that could wake your computer from your phone, anything that brings people to their computers could be initiated from their phone, an esim or esim service on the Microsoft store by partnering with AT&T, we now have all these apps on our PCs and no Windows phones... you guys have to quit wasting your time making browsers and pointless gimmicks that don't work. I only use my PC for gaming and modding my phone. You should be working on a USB drive that could plug in the TV so when there's 5G televisions with esim you can use the USB key to log into Windows on the cloud automatically through your TVs 5g without any other hardware needed other than a mouse and keyboard.
  • This AND the Centaurus announcement within 24 hrs?! This week's podcast is going to be a doozy!
  • It's never too late to do the right thing! Bravo Microsoft!!
  • NO! Why go after Google.....EVRYTHING LIVES ON GOOGLE?? Can People DON'T MAKE THEIR OWN STUFF?? **** Google!
  • Why waste money on items that make no money and deliver no additional value to a company's strategic vision. The problem many people have here is they still think Microsoft should follow Balmer's failed strategy that was killing MS financially. The new Microsoft is focused on supporting their enterprise software efforts. The financial results are clear and the current state of MS stock supports the new strategy.
  • If MS encourage that style of thinking, they may find their customers start to wonder why they buy MS products at all. Dangerous can of worms to open there, MS.
  • A few years ago, I wrote a comment that MS would stop developping Edge and take Chrome-like browser. A Windows Central writer replied to me that it would never happen. Yes, it's happening.
  • I wished for the same thing! This is the most awesome decision I've heard from Microsoft in years!
  • I wanted to write something but it's not like Microsoft would read it anyways. I have known for awhile now that I can't trust Microsoft to keep their word but it still bothers me when I hear news like this. Why didn't just separate Edge from the OS so they could more quickly update it and stabilize it if it was it was such a problem?
    Why give up on setting your own standards?
  • You can thrown me in to the mix of people that don't have any issues with Edge. I've been using it from the beginning, it had some issues then, but now it works for every site I go to. I'm also a web developer and love Edge because everything renders perfectly. I've always had to use hacks to get some things to run correctly on Chrome. It's a shame that they are switching engines but, as long as it continues to work the way it does now, I'll deal with it. It's frustrating, because Microsoft makes new and exciting things that are much better than the "old standards" and then just continues to give up on them. Windows Phone, Groove, and now Edge.
  • There are still many things IE doesn't match other browsers on....particularly bad in SVG rendering.
  • Nice for web developers, too: one less rendering engine to test against, or more realistically in a lot of cases, to be ignored in testing until somebody reports that it doesn't work in Edge. Personally, it means little to me. I use Chrome not because of a better rendering engine but because of several good extensions and multiple profile support (I have a work profile and a personal profile: different accounts, different bookmarks, etc).
  • Edge already supports multiple rendering engines (it always has.)
    To switch it over to use Chromium is relatively easy, and would solve lots of rendering issues with sites optimized for Chrome, thus attracting developers used to working with that engine.
    This make sense as Edge's current rendering engine; EdgeHTML is pretty broken and clunky, but don't expect MS to drop the Edge name. They will just swap out the rendering engine for Chromium and move on.
  • THAT'S the easiest way! Because 90% use Chromium-based web standards. WHY works Firefox as well on ALL SITES but EDGE NOT?? -_- Do we need GOOGLE to life?? or can We build our engine!
  • I think if they could make it a seamless transition to the new browser, with little to no input from the user, that would be ideal. Edge needs to stay, regardless if it has not historically worked as well as other browsers. Edge is now a staple of Windows 10, and relaunching a new browser would only lose MS mindshare. It could be a case of people thinking that MS is going back to it's product abandoning ways (ala Groove Music Pass and Windows 10 Mobile). Swap out the current EdgeHTML-based Edge browser with the Chromium-based Edge browser, keep EVERYTHING else the same (down to the UI elements), and the bulk of users will be none-the-wiser. All of a sudden the built in Edge browser just starts working way better than before, and people would be less motivated to download a different browser.
  • Eh, I don't really care since I use Firefox. I tried Edge when it first came out but since you couldn't use any extensions/plugins at that time it was a no fly. Chrome is ok I guess. We use it at work because we use the google tools as opposed to Microsofts Office suite. Firefox just has the plugins and features I like (bookmark/history side bar, menus, drag and drop configuration of buttons).
  • I highly doubt MSFT will do away with EdgeHTML when it can combine both -- it's own engine and the Chromium Blink engine to get more market share.. The user can switch between IE, Edge, and 'Chrome' mode... ie. compatibility mode. Nuking Edge HTML doesnt make sense to me, well see
  • They HAD DROP IE! but nooooo time for that -_- REALLEY STUPID STUPID. 90% USE CHROME NOBODY NOBODY HAS IE11 NEEDED! But Microsoft Needs Chromium to get users! Realley realley WTF
  • "I have no issues using Edge." - Andrew G1. That probably won't change if there's some "new" Edge based upon Chromium.
  • Personally I hate JavaScript coding... but I have to admit apps written for chromium beat UWP even through JavaScript sucks as a language and html sucks as well... it’s all just messy crap code...but it looks good when you render... in contrast UWP looks good in code but bad when you render it...
  • It makes sense, Microsoft typescript team and google web component people are joined at the hips..
  • UWP keeps giving us awesome gems, isn't it?
  • What kind of sneaky snake oil will they bake in? I don't trust it even a little...
  • That's to bad, in 10 or 20 more years maybe edge could have caught up to Internet Explorer or Firefox in market share. Maybe they will swap the linux kernel in next.
  • Curious to know if this work will eventually waterfall down to Outlook's rendering engine. I assume not, with the compatibility concerns between Outlook/Word to blame and why they chose the Word rendering for Outlook in the first place. But considering that most office suites nowadays require a cloud-version as well...wouldn't it kind of make sense to rebuild desktop Word with Chromium/Blink so their browser-based Office apps aren't a massive fork, but more tightly intertwined? I feel like that could be a win for Microsoft in the end if they were able to do it without huge performance drops, but a MASSIVE win for the email marketing industry (not that they ever cared about that though). I know nothing of desktop development though.
  • To be honest, Edge is not bad. But I think MS doesn't have any reason to develop it. When Nadella killed Windows Phone, Edge and UWP also died.
  • I keep reading the comments and to see if I can figure out why Microsoft would give up on setting their own web standards. Through all the comments I have read, I see comments from web developers with a mix of praise and disbelief in this decision from Microsoft. The developers that say they don't like Edge because it wouldn't render easily also said they wouldn't fix their webpage rendering issues because it was too troublesome. It seems like they are the ones who didn't care nor did they try to help build up the new EdgeHTML standards. This in turn led the people to just switch browsers and further gave Chrome more market share.
    Sooo...it looks like not enough developers gave Edge the proper support it needed to become a web standard and now Microsoft is giving up on it because of this reason. (to me it seems that way) I do believe that Microsoft should have decouple the Edge browser from the OS to more easily fix issues and more quickly update it. Regardless, it look like it was the lack of developer support that has led to this decision. To the others who say it was easy and simple to develop for it, thank you for your work. I'm certain this is not possible but it sure would have been great if these developers guided the others, through the community forums, and helped fix their webpages to work properly on Edge. I don't know what the future Edge browser will be but if it's like many comments say, it will be a resource hog and slower than the current version. Good-bye fast browsing, inking, epub and everything else Edge was trying to accomplish. You died before you were even given a chance to change the world. T-T
  • WTF!! WHAT A BULLSHIT! ITS THE FAULT FROM THE USERS!!! THEY DONT WANNA SWITCH! IF THIS MAKE DIFFERENCE!!?? wtf BIGGEST FAIL FROM MICROSOFT! **** YOU ALL!
  • Three and a half years in and Edge on Desktop still doesn't have a History search feature, yet the Android version had it day 1 when the beta was available. You can't even copy image URLs, either. Hell it took an outpouring of requests just to get MS to decide to let users choose where to store downloaded files.
    They'd be better off releasing IE 12 at this point. At least IE was feature-complete and didn't come off like an undergraduate design project the way Edge does.
  • I hope this works out. I haven't had any problem with websites not loading on Edge, but if its a problem for other people than they should do something. Hope Microsoft can make this work.
  • Here's my perspective as a developer of a legacy web based application in a corporate environment. Edge has failed to gain traction because they didn't just call it Internet Explorer 12. As someone that has been building websites off and on since the late 90s I share all the hatred for Internet Explorer t. The lack of standards compliance and requirement for maintaining multiple hacks to keep everything working was always a pain. Whether it was IE5,6,7, or 8 there was always something that didn't work right. Nowadays having fast paced browser development cycles which include the latest specifications means that Edge is still behind on some things I want to implement. It's not terrible though. Up until this past year we have maintained legacy code to handle IE6 rendering. Why? Because Internet Explorer 11 is still included in Windows 10. Custom corporate web applications (at least in my environment) have been required to support Internet Explorer because it used to be the only option. Using "Compatibility Mode" allowed applications to run in every version of Internet Explorer without changes. Every corporate user is conditioned not only to use Internet Explorer, but in many cases to enable compatibility mode. This continues despite the fact that people have been exposed to Edge at home and it is installed on our corporate PCs. Internet Explorer is synonymous with the internet in these circumstances. People expect it to just work because it always has. It's taken lots of developer hours to ensure that compatibility, but end users don't care. I know that Microsoft wanted to ditch the stigma of Internet Explorer by creating a new brand. It makes sense for people who know and care about browsers. It doesn't matter for those who are using corporate computers that are configured and maintained by a team of administrators or for those who are accessing internal coroporate web applications. We just recently pushed an update that eliminates a large amount of legacy code and uses some newer features. The amount of pushback received from Internet Explorer users when one of our compatibility shims didn't load correctly would probably surprise you. Heck, just the list of emails from users who, for some godawful reason, had compatibility mode enabled filled my entire display. After repairing the failure in order to correctly support IE11 we sent out an email. All we did was inform people that "Compatibility Mode" is not supported and that Microsoft Edge is the actively developed browser from Microsoft with Internet Explorer only receiving security updates. The blowback from my supervisor was swift and intense. While some short explanation of the situation defused the situation it was very unexpected. If Microsoft had branded Edge as Internet Explorer 12 and then used the IE11 engine as a compatibility library that could be loaded to sandbox any site requiring legacy rendering then the uptick in "Edge" usage would be significant. I could impliment features based on relatively current standards without having to prop it up with conditional shims and polyfils. Changing the rendering engine for Edge doesn't fix the main problem with Edge. It might fix some problems, but not the biggest one. Going a step further; If they create new branding for a Chromium based browser it is going to cause even more problems and fragmentation than the currently broken paradigm.
  • Microsoft once again giving up on consumers. Pathetic!!
  • https://www.downloadshareitfree.com/
    Interesting content. I have a lot of science that I find this web…
  • Edge is great on mobile but slow on desktop
  • https://css-tricks.com/the-ecological-impact-of-browser-diversity/
  • This is very welcome news for any website developer who has spent days on those little issues where things look fine on every browser except IE...
  • Right there with you (mostly). I spend most of my day making code work in Chrome which almost naturally works in Firefox too. But Edge; nah it usually requires additional tweaks. Thankfully, I don't have to worry about IE.
  • This actually makes me sad. Edge has gotten to where it actually works for everything I do, and now I'll have to get used to something else, and learn the new ins and outs of that browser? I may just have to go to Firefox.
    #NeverChrome
  • Edge, Chrome, Anaheim, Chromium or any other variation -- Firefox remains my daily driver...started using it when it first came out... continue to use it now...and will use it until its development stops which I'm hopeful never happens!
  • This will be good. Keep the UI/shell but no longer have to jump to Firefox for those pages that just don't work.
  • They need to do a total re-brand while they're at it, because Edge has exactly the same negative vibe with the general public that Internet Explorer had. You knew even back then it was a bad start when Redmond couldn't tear themselves away from the blue 'e' because it meant the Internet for your average Grandmother. Time to start fresh (again) , break with the past, and do it right this time.
  • FFS Microsoft, what on Earth possessed you to think that changing Edge's rendering engine will fix anything? The problem(s) with Edge isn't about EdgeHTML. Since I choose not to use Chrome, I can only presume that a large part of Chrome's popularity is more to do with general user experience issues, like features, add-on capabilities, etc. Most browser users don't know what rendering engine their favorite browser uses and don't care, so what is going to be the marketing spin on the next Microsoft browser? Internet Explorer gained a poor reputation for, amongst other things, its abysmal standards support. Edge was created to replace Internet Explorer and a point was made of ensuring that Edge had much better standards support compared with Internet Explorer. Guess what? Internet Explorer is still nearly twice as popular as Edge, so the idea that creating a new browser will fix all the problems is nonsense. Tell me again what creating yet another browser is going to solve?
  • They aren't creating a browser. They are merely skinning one. Will be much less work to maintain and they won't have to worry about useage as much.
  • What about the leftover edge I cant delete? Or the situations (apps, programs, scripts, etc that deliberately call Edge instead of the default browser? I am still moving everything I can on my many (old) home computers to Linux. After 30 years on Windows/Microshaft, I cant take any more irritations. Especially forcing me to upgrade and soon to pay for it every year. I would keep XP running but so many things now wont work I have to go to Win7. I have 3 laptops that came with Win10 and not sure I can manage Linux swap over with all the proprietary drivers for laptops. I have no experience with Linux drivers and not much with the system beyond the UI built in (and a ton of them to chose from!). Leaning to Debian as I have several Raspberry Pi's to play with and a Raspian Live DVD to bootstrap myself a little.
  • Geez, some people need to Lighten Up, Francis. This is not the end of the world. This is not Microsoft "surrendering to Google". This is a practical business decision. Why continue to invest in your own problematic (to put it kindly) code when there is a perfectly good open source option available? An option that, BTW, you are already using elsewhere? Edge on Android is using Chromium, and by all reports works better than Edge on Windows 10. This may not necessarily help Edge's usage stats on Windows 10. But if the default browser actually works for all web sites, then there might be less incentive to install Chrome. Or maybe not. Either way, the default browser will now at least be useable. "I mainly use Edge, but I keep Chrome/Firefox/whatever around for the sites Edge can't handle" is hardly a ringing endorsement for Edge.
  • MSFT has become the most ignorant technology company on the planet in my 54 years on this planet! And yes I do realize that MSFT is not as old as I am! If they really believe that using different technology in order to get more of the brand share, then they're just plain ignorant. Sounds to me like they're throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
  • When the baby is dead and the bath water is dirty, both need to be thrown out.
  • I really don't see how chrome is so good as a browser V. edge
  • Wow. MS is showing they have the sense to follow the horse out of the burning barn. For years their browsers have been second-tier. I expect a lot of good people put a lot of effort into those MS browsers and are rightfully proud of what they developed - but as we've seen in many products, the market has spoken, and in the case of browsers the market has said "Chrome". This is just acknowledging the situation on the ground - or, on the net - or, whatever. :-)
  • Exactly. It’s just a business decision. There is no need to be emotionally attached to this. It’s just a friggin browser.
  • Edge's biggest problem is it couldn't match Chrome (Canary) and Firefox (Nightly)'s daily release cadence. This made its pace of change glacial compared to those 2. Had they gone with nightly builds, they'd have revved up excitement and adoption, especially among Windows Insiders. Oh well. Props to Nadella for not throwing good money after bad on lame duck products. Partner with your best competitor and keep on trucking. Also, this is simultaneously good and horrible news for Firefox users. On the one hand, it means pretty much all web development will focus on WebKit and its derivations (of which Blink is one.) OTOH it also means a lot of content will be sniffable by Firefox because it was never tested in that browser, so hey.
  • The web needed another browser maker to keep Chrome honest. I've been using Edge since the beginning and found it fine on the SP4 and two home built gaming rigs. I love the idea of Firefox and want to throw my use behind it except that Edge's touch interface with gestures is natively supported and far superior. Whatever MS does they need to build a 1st rate touch experience. Really wish they went with gecko though...
  • There are other browsers. IE and Edge combined are less than 5%. Exactly how is that keeping Chrome “honest”? Meanwhile, Safari and Firefox combined are 20%. Those are the competition for Chrome.
  • Chromium is open source. Not exactly sure what there is to "keep honest" about it.
  • Way overdue, maybe they can finally strip out all of the edgehtml code in Windows 10 and finally make the browser separate from the OS. Will take another look when this is all said and done since abandoning edge due the fact it can't sync on domain joined PCs yet chrome always could.
  • Here's a brain twister for you:
    I've had issues with every browser that I've tried, but the number and frequency of said issues seems to be entireley the reverse of everyone else.
    In order, from most issues to least issues:
    Google Chrome
    Firefox
    Chromium
    Opera
    Dolphin
    Vivaldi
    Tor
    Edge
    Internet Explorer Yes, you read that right. Internet Explorer has been more stable and reliable (for me) than any other browser. And Chrome has been the worst. Wrap your head around that. Currently, Edge is my primary browser on all platforms (minus Apple; I don't use their stuff), and IMO, it's not just fine, it's great. But that's just my opinion/experience.
  • why chromium? the whole tech world is messed up. then made microsoft mess up.
    microsoft edge is one of most fast, secure, stable browser. I used it since it came out. I tried different web browsers found microsft edge is most stable, it never crash or freeze once. The only problem with edge is cannot save as different file format, only print to PDF, 'save HTML in edge' extension can make save to HTML . I compare web browsers: firefox save webpage,HTML only, .html,open in all browsers everything missing,images not display.
    save all files,.html, open in chrome, open in opera, everything missing, images no display opera save webpage,HTML only, .html,
    open in firefox, everyhing missingm images no display
    open in chrome everthing missing, imapges not display,
    open in microsoft edge, everything missing, impages no display
    save as PFD, open in microsoft edge chrome
    save webpages, single file .mhtm, open in opera, everthing display,
    webpage,HTML only, .html, open in opera, open in firefox, everything missing, images not display, open in microsoft edge,eveything missing Now found save in extension .mhtm cover page in whole. This is used in default save in internet explore and was very useful. internet explorer is using trident engine. in the compare, chrome saving to sing file and saved in .mhtm, sane as save file for internet explorer. chromium engine only save in single page html, but saved file lots of stuff missing and images cannot display. if microsoft make a new give up edge and make a new chromium browser, that mean it simply just make back up of chrome or just take out edge from windows, use chrome, then microsoft becoming part of google company. I suggest microsoft keep edge brower but add file extension to it.
  • I'm disappointed Edge is going away, but MS seems to want to do things in this sort of half-hearted way that incurs zero risk. Edge could have been great if MS fixed font rendering, and really cracked open things for simplified plugin development, but they chose not to. On the other hand I'm happy because as a multi platform user (PC + MacBook) I couldn't sync Edge to my Mac. When Edge switches to Blink, this will hopefully finally be a reality for MS fans who like Apple hardware, but hate Apple software.
  • so you think that this new Blink based browser will be available on MacOS?
  • I thought Edge on Android is already running on Chromium. So why would they even have to develop a new version of Edge for Chromium?
  • :)))) as expected from Microshaft.
  • What happened to your other account did you get banned? :)))
  • This too will fail because they will release it when it's about half done but still missing key fundamental features like extensions, favorites, Ability to clear history, etc. etc. Instantly losing interest and mind share. Seems Intel isn't the only one sleeping with the pooch. The further they go down the rabbit hole the weirder it gets.
  • I think this makes sense. They're not even remotely making inroads in the browser market, and apart from Bing/AI/Search it's no longer related to their core business. Why not let someone else do the heavy lifting? I've been an Edge user since it was released and slowly moved everything over and stopped even installing Chrome. Alas, the day before this news came out, I reinstalled Windows (latest public release) and (1) the old Edge bug of various text input boxes not working properly (eg Facebook!) had returned and (2) all my bookmarks were gone, despite supposedly being synced to multiple devices. So with this news I'm done. I did like the general Edge layout though (bookmark panel to right etc) and fortunately have found Vivaldi! Dark theme and some tweaking and it's a lot like Edge except compatible with Chrome extensions and some great other features. Think I'll stay hear until we see what Microsoft brings to the table. I'm not however going to desperately hang on to a dying platform like I did for W10Mobile.
  • Thank goodness. Edge has consistently been so unstable.
  • Does this mean better integration with VS Code (based on Electron/Chromium last I checked)? Hmmmmmm.
  • If this move also has the effect of allowing Torch, Opera, Comodo Dragon, and other Chromium based browsers to the MS Store, then for even that reason alone, this is an epic move on Nadella’s part.
  • If this has the effect of bringing Torch, Opera, Comodo Dragon and other Chromium based alternatives to the MS Store then for that reason alone this is an epic move on Nadella’s part.
  • After letting this cook in my head for awhile, I've come to the conclusion the underlying reason is that this is really about progressive web apps, web assembly, devs, Office, and ROI PWAs: For PWAs to survive, nevermind thrive, on Windows they must work as well or better as on every other platform that has already settled on Chromium/Blink--and without special coding. Web assembly: Web assembly is coming, and Microsoft is a huge backer of that. But for web assembly to work and be successful, code compiled to web assembly absolutely must work identically on all browsers that support it, again, without special coding by developers to support Microsoft platforms. Devs: Devs hate special coding for something that should just work. Anyone who was around during the browser wars remembers how much fun that was. They had to write and maintain way too much JavaScript code so that their sites work on all the major browsers. We have it much better now, but it's still way too easy to find a website works great on a Chromium/Blink-based browser and not so well on Edge. More and more devs are refusing to play that game. Office: Microsoft has been fully into browser-based versions of one of their biggest cash cows for some time now. It wouldn't surprise me if the web Office teams are reaching their limit on being able to support workarounds to make the Office apps work identically on Chromium/Blink-based browsers and Edge. ROI: Ultimately, given the above, the ROI is decreasing for ongoing development and maintenance of Edge as it is now is decreasing rapidly. Edge isn't an island unto itself. Rather it affects the ROI of Microsoft's far more profitable products.
  • Microsoft "retrenching" another product? Color me shocked
  • Chrome is the new IE.
  • Isn't the easy answer here just let people use whatever browser they want and stop making a web browser? Why continue to pour money in to making another browser with a blue E icon that no one is going to use, when there is a bazillion chrome clones out there already? I'd say fine if you want to optimize your OS to work better with a chrome clone, but why do you need a MS branded web browser? No one is going to use it.
  • the alternative being...? the OS needs a native browser and unless Microsoft wants to pull an ubuntu and just package firefox or something with the OS... it doesn't sound like their style
  • If this move brings Torch... Opera... Comodo Dragon... and other "alternative to Chrome" Chromium browsers to the MS Store then, for that reason alone, this is a good move.
  • I have been using edge for over a year now, and can't say I've had that many debilitating issues... Even though I'm bittersweet about the death of yet another browser rendering engine under the all consuming monolith of chromium/Blink, this is a big win for a single web rendering standard. Plus, this means an end to the restriction of edgehtml web rendering only in the windows store, meaning google no longer has an excuse not to put chrome on there.
  • Yall edge users you know what this means: right click menus finally having copy image address
  • It would be interesting to verify the advertised statistical claims about Edge's speed and performance. I have had evidence of tremendous slowness and lockups on my lower end computers where usually Chrome has been faster and Mozilla has been way faster. The only reason I was using it is claims about its hw accel actually working on streaming videos, though never investigated that in depth.
  • Satya Nadella can just copy and paste. Like so many other failures he have caused over the years this is next
  • This is just proof that Microsoft is over the Edge.