Firefox developer Mozilla recently released a 66-page research report ( PDF download address ) on why browsers are essential to the Internet and how operating systems hinder their development.
Mozilla says the report has two goals:
- First, an introduction to Mozilla's research on user-browser interactions (including recent surveys and years of understanding)
- Second, emphasize the status of browser engines and independent browsers in the operating system
The first part of the research report is about operating systems, browsers, browser engines and how users behave. The second part highlights that the "architecture of choice" created by operating system developers deprives users of choice and control over their browsers.
Mozilla pointed out in the report that "giants" including Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple and Microsoft have built their own "Walled Garden" (Walled Garden) in various ways to guide users to use the default browser of their respective platforms. These behaviors include restricting the discovery of standalone apps, bundling your own browser with the operating system and setting it as the default on the home screen or shortcut bar , increasing the complexity of changing the default browser, and conspicuously directing users to set their own browser as the default Wait.
Clearly, most users don't actively change these default browsers (especially since these operating systems don't make it easy to change default browsers), so they don't want to take extra action to find or discover alternatives to lesser-known browsers.
Mozilla also mentioned that Microsoft's increasingly aggressive approach on Windows is aimed at reversing users' decisions to use non-Microsoft software , such as reversing the default browser choice back to Microsoft Edge.
This report lists multiple problems in the current browser market:
- Limited or frustrating choices : OS developers make it difficult or impossible for users to switch browsers, ultimately eliminating the ability to choose for themselves. It also hinders existing competitors, preventing new products from entering the market and providing more choice.
- Lower quality : If users pay zero monetary price (as is the case with browsers), developers may be expected to compete on quality. But without effective competition from independent browsers, users may receive a lower-quality product.
- Lower Innovation : Quality is associated with innovation. Users miss out on developments (such as improved features and functionality). A reduced likelihood of disruptive innovation may be accompanied by a reduction in user choice.
- Poor Privacy : Products that may leave consumers with forced data sharing, data misuse, or other privacy compromises. These results may suggest that ineffective competition leads to poor quality.
- Unfair terms : Without proper options, users may be forced to accept terms that are exploitative or unfair.
Mozilla warns that competition in the browser market is critical to ensuring innovation and user choice. More broadly, the dynamism of the open web should be protected from attempts by commercial giants to block it. Otherwise users not only lose the ability to determine their own online experience, but also get less innovative and lower quality products. Rather than having to fight the operating system to maintain their software preferences, its spokesman said, users should have the right to control their online experience and choose the software they want to use — including software that differs from those offered by OS developers.