this a rant of a rant

Well, shit.

It would not surprise me one bit if this were true. Not because I think Google is evil, but because all the companies fighting for space in our heads are competing against each other. That competition yields fantastic advances at times, but also incentivizes negative attacks on their competitors. It is neither illegal or even unethical if google did this, but it could certainly be lumped in with a ton of other things that have been labeled as "anticompetitive" by users (and even courts at times). So shame on google, but it's the kind of thing that part and parcel with a relatively free marketplace. The danger comes when this kind of thing wrecks the marketplace and trends towards monopoly. We will all suffer if Google or any other player stifles competition too much.

This is scary as hell, yes. Working on a solution to literally ban Google out of my network through firewall rules and it seems to be the right thing to do when you see shit like this :/

Haha, MS babies whining. These shitheads did ActiveX and Silverlight to the world in order to shut out other browsers, and now they are whining that a div is enough to trash their crappy optimisation code path. Pathetic losers.

@Fast-Nop In both cases, the users lose. So both should be criticized.

@monkeyboy Users don't lose in that MS is giving up on Edge, and web designers actually win.

I mean, google’s ecosystem works best if you stay within it. Color me shocked. Sucks to be MS but it’s not like they haven’t had tons of notice to put up or shut up.

@Fast-Nop What if Edge's technology is better? Extend to any product. What if Joe-Schmo's electric cars have twice the range of a Tesla, but Elon Musk had his corporate ninja operatives convince some government regulators to slow walk Joe's environmental impact study for his new plant until Joe's financial backers called it quits? How are we better off driving Teslas rather than Schmos?

@monkeyboy Edge's technology isn't better, e.g. HTML5 support is still worse in Edge than in Chrome. It's the typical MS crap of pre-installing shit with Windows and hoping that users are too lazy to change.

When was the last time MS actually had to compete and won by merit?

@Fast-Nop performance wise edge is way faster than chrome except on websites maintained by google where they do things like this just to block out competitors.

Same with the youtube app for windows phone. They collaborated, microsoft did the work and in the end they just block youtube access from windows phones for a few weeks...

You are wondering what is wrong with it? It is against the law to abuse power like this.

@Codex404 please re-read my comment. MS has a history of botching up standards and introducing proprietary technology just to block out competitors, and these people complain about a DIV? Seriously?!

@Fast-Nop re-read the comment that said both are bad practice and both should be criticized.
Edge is better in some ways like the feature that allows you to save tabs for later, and regardless of which browser runs more effiently or supports more edge cases (pun not intended), edge displays 99%* of websites just fine.
Stop defending the big companies; they'll get along just fine without your internet points.

* 69% of all statistics on the internet are made up

Think one step further.

The same thing happened already with Firefox - Chrome loading faster as they still supported an API used in YT that was marked obsolete / deprecated, If I remember correctly.

This is not about Edge.

This is about enforcing an monopol by developing their own products to be not usable by other products.

Net neutrality was shitty but that's just fucked up.

And If u hated Internet Explorer for endorsing own standards - guess what will happen next.

I really think that Firefox vs Chromium as the only two (Major) engines left is bad - there are more companies involved in designing the standards, yes, but I would be more satisfied if instead of specifications there would be one reference engineer designed together so that there is 'less room for shady Implementations'.

@svgPhoenix Any tech that MS has offered "for free" throughout the years has always been a trojan horse, so I don't trust them anymore. They simply suffer from failing to leverage their desktop monopoly and to stand up in a standard conforming fight.

As for Google, if a fucking DIV on YT is enough to spoil Edge's optimisation, maybe MS should stop whining and deliver better code instead, something these losers have completely unlearnt. And catch up to Chrome in terms of HTML5 support.

But since MS are fucked without monopoly abuse, these wankers now have given up. Edge isn't a loss for anyone. FF is a loss, but that's because they decided to arrogantly shit on their users' heads, not because of Google.

@Fast-Nop this is chrome

@Fast-Nop this is edge

It's a shame that there will be one less competitor in the web rendering engine space, regardless of the circumstances

@Fast-Nop oh and how is Microsoft's use of its monopoly on the desktop OS any worse than Google's use of its monopoly on the search engine?

@svgPhoenix I don't know what you are doing wrong on that website, but actually, Chrome gets 528 while Edge gets 492 as per http://html5test.com/results/... . Also, my current Vivaldi is based on Chromium 71 and manages to score 530.

And MS has never been a competitor since their IE monopoly crumbled. The shit that MS delivered with Windows has been a pure browser downloader for a long time now. It's just that MS has understood that they are too incompetent to actually BE a competitor.

@svgPhoenix Google's search engine "monopoly" is based on the simple fact that it actually WORKS, something I can't really say about Startpage and Duckduckgo, and Bing is a complete fucked up joke anyway.

Instead of turning Windows into a cloud shit spy tool, MS could have tried to actually make a search engine. And a browser. And a nice desktop OS. But they didn't put their resoucres to that ends, and now their bad decisions have consequences. Competitors going out of business because of bad decisions is normal part of the game.

@Fast-Nop don't tell me I'm doing something wrong when my results don't support your argument.
I'm on mobile right now, and I actually opened the testing page in both browsers rather than relying on the site's comparison chart. Didn't know it was there tbh but it seems like it's unreliable anyway.

Oh and if they're incompetent, then YOU build a new render engine from scratch.

Seriously dude, put down your ego, stop throwing around insults, and accept that what Google did to slow down Edge was questionable at best.

@svgPhoenix look, I don't happen to have a multi billion dollar company behind me like Nadella does, so that's somewhat of an issue for getting a competetive browser engine into the game.

What Google did was not questionable because they still kept to the standards - something that MS never did as long as they had something to say.

On top of that, the whole YT page issue is just a cheap pretext for MS to cancel the project. They just have understood that they aren't competetive and that they won't be competetive.

MS has followed the "don't innovate, but wait, copy and exterminate" approach for much too long. That lost them search engines, social networks and mobile.

@Fast-Nop ... You do understand that I'm not advocating for or against any company, right? I'm just saying that the whole div thing looks pretty shady from the outside.
You're turning it into MS vs Google and I'm getting bored of that bs.

@svgPhoenix maybe you somehow managed to repeatedly overlook my point that the DIV issue isn't shady because it's still standard conforming. In the age of epidemic divitis, complaining about one div more is just ridiculous.

@Fast-Nop you're right, I did miss that point between all the insults to MS

@Fast-Nop ehm no it is not standards to put a transparent container over a videoplayer. I am pretty sure it is against standards to do it.

@Codex404 A transparent DIV is just a normal HTML element. If you claim that a specific usage of such a regular element is in violation of a standard, then the burden of proof is on you to show the relevant part of the relevant standard.

I don't think it is specific to a div...

Rather, I guess, that some content overlays the video - which made Edge believe that the video is non important.... And as such - disabling hw accel.

A very wild guess maybe, but it makes sense to me....