@baldur It would be anti-competitive if it were true. Why does everyone seem to take the anonymous allegation in a HN comment as an undeniable fact? I'm sure #YouTube didn't care how proud the #Edge team was about video decoding optimization of their proprietary engine with minuscule market share.
Disclaimer: Yes, I do hate #Microsoft with a passion a will never forgive them for the decades of *demonstrably* intentional anti-competitive behavior this comment now ironically blames #Google of.
@baldur BTW, they weren't even "advertising Chrome's dominance over Edge on video-watching battery life". They compared Chrome with it's own older version. It was Microsoft who created a campaign comparing Edge on their own OS on their own HW directly with Chrome on the same HW and OS.
@ondra The reason why I don't dismiss the comment is that I've heard and seen other examples where Google products deliberately choose development methods that are only supported natively in Chrome and have extremely poor performance in other browsers. Youtube is guilty of this in other cases where they chose to implement their new UI on web components v0 which were non-standard at the time and will never be implemented in other browsers and the polyfills are much much slower than native.
@ondra And AMP, how they use search result incentives to promote their own fork of HTML, is _extremely_ anti-competitive and, honestly, just as evil as anything Microsoft did to fork web standards during the IE era.
@ondra And Google products are _frequently_ Chrome-only even when there is no real technical reason for them to be.
@baldur Mostly agree, though this particular one is definitely just Microsoft employees being naive about Chrome team conspiring with YouTube to willfully worsen experience for small portion of their users while the real reason is something simple as: https://email@example.com/did-google-cripple-edges-youtube-performance-ce5169d3e5f4