Mozilla-backed report says Windows 11 steers users to Edge with “harmful interference”

Mozilla’s commissioned “Over the Edge 2.0” report lands a blunt claim on Microsoft: Windows 11, it says, still does not allow users to download, set as the default, or keep using alternative browsers without “harmful interference.” And it is not just a vague accusation. The report points to specific behaviors, ranging from “misleading” download and banner patterns to settings interactions involving Copilot.

The report’s core conclusion is centered on user choice. It describes design choices that, according to its authors, “sent users into the arms of Edge,” then contrasts how those choices show up differently depending on the region. Germany is used as a stand-in for the European Economic Area (EEA), and the report also examines Microsoft’s approach in the UK, India, and the US. The message for executives is straightforward: even if some patterns are toned down in Europe, the system as described is still designed to make non-Edge browsers harder to adopt or keep.

So what does that look like in practice, per the report? It cites examples like an “All you need is right here” banner in Bing when attempting to download alternative browsers, pre-pinning of Edge to the Windows taskbar, and “misleading” wording that the report says could trick users into setting Edge as the default. It also brings AI into the story. The report’s authors found that Copilot ignores the default browser when opening links, and that Copilot data-sharing toggles are preselected to ON in the US and India.

The regional differences matter because they connect the findings to the regulatory reality Microsoft operates under. The report notes that where Microsoft has been forced to make changes in the EEA, it has done so. For example, the “All you need is right here” banner does not appear in the EEA, but it does in the UK, the US, and India. Likewise, there is described to be no injected Edge banner on the Chrome download page, and Windows Search does not automatically use Edge instead of the default browser.

In other words, the report frames this as a shifting compliance game rather than a full reset. Microsoft is depicted as adjusting user-facing tactics when scrutiny is higher, while preserving other levers globally. That is precisely the kind of pattern regulators tend to treat as “continue to steer users,” not “we fixed the problem.” It also explains why competing browser makers are reacting sharply.

The Browser Choice Alliance applauded the report and criticized the tactics it documents. In its statement, the alliance says the researchers’ findings in “Over the Edge 2.0” show Microsoft continuing to use manipulative tactics to push users toward Edge, limiting users’ ability to choose and run their preferred browser. It also calls the deployments “harmful patterns” on Windows 11 at a global scale and urges Microsoft to stop using the Windows ecosystem to steer users toward its own browser in ways that restrict user choice, undermine web freedom, and unfairly tilt the playing field away from fair competition and innovation.

Vivaldi also chimed in. Bruce Lawson, Vivaldi’s Technical Communications Officer, told The Register that Mozilla’s independent researchers confirm what Vivaldi has been telling regulators for years, arguing that Microsoft is reluctant to compete on the merits of its own browser and instead uses abuses of Windows dominance to manipulate users. Lawson added that the threat of scrutiny in the EU means it is “not quite so bad” there, but still not a level playing field. He urged regulators in the UK, Australia, and Japan to step in to make markets fair. He also said Vivaldi would be “happy to co-pilot the code changes needed.” He then included a remark that references concern based on how those projects turn out, using a line about how “well” those projects turn out.

Microsoft was approached for comment and did not respond.

For executives, the strategic kicker is that this is not just a regulatory story. It is also a market story, and the report itself connects incentives to outcomes. The alleged nudging is said to not be translating into a runaway Edge victory, at least in the numbers cited. Statcounter data is referenced: Edge’s market share is described as hovering at just over 10 percent, down from 13 percent in June 2025. Mozilla Firefox, meanwhile, is described as growing its share to 6.44 percent from 5.84 percent a year ago. Mozilla’s spokesperson also made a point that when looking specifically at Edge market share on Windows, the researchers note Edge was the only browser to gain share on Windows over the last two years. That led the report’s authors to say, on page 10, that they “hypothesise that previous harmful patterns have played a role in this growth.”

Put all of that together, and the second-order implications are bigger than “browser choice.” If regulators and browser competitors can document not only default-setting behavior but also taskbar pre-pinning, download-page banner tactics, Windows search behavior, and Copilot interactions, then the scope of any remedy could expand beyond a single setting. It could become an ecosystem compliance checklist across UX surfaces. And because the report emphasizes global scale with region-specific differences, boards and platform teams should treat this as a recurring governance issue, not a one-off headline.

Meanwhile, even if Edge’s share gains are modest in the snapshot cited, the reputational risk is immediate. A report like this fuels ongoing scrutiny and invites enforcement that targets patterns, not just outcomes. For leaders across consumer software and platform businesses, the lesson is sharp: when a dominant OS vendor controls the decision points, “choice” is often determined by interface mechanics, defaults, and the first mile of discovery. Regulators and competitors will now have a more detailed map of those mechanics, and the next round of scrutiny is likely to ask one question repeatedly: did the system steer users, even when the user thought they were just clicking normally?