"You know the app you use to connect to the internet? Would you like to be able to choose which app to use?"

"Cool, I'll mark you as yes, just like everyone else"

Probably some selection bias there

it's the blue e, right?

Yes, the percentage is high. Most people would be annoyed to have another selection screen in the setup process.

But I do think I saw more people using non-Google search engines since Google was forced to provide a search engine selection screen in the setup process.

If you ever see a headline that says "x% of people believe/want/feel y", it's nonsense. You can manufacture a crooked methodology to get x% of people to say anything.

"Can I have a minute of your time? There has been evidence that people who use alternative browsers are more likely to commit acts of terrorism and human trafficking. Would you be in favour of more support for alternative browsers, or would you rather have higher quality public schools?"

And just like magic, you can now write a headline that only 2% of people want a browser choice screen.

The study is also about Android. But the main reason I crossposted here is because I was curious what the opinion of this community about browser screens in the setup process is.

Our research involved 12,000 people in Germany, Spain and Poland setting up a highly realistic virtual Windows or Android device.

https://research.mozilla.org/browser-competition/choicescreen/

Edit: I believe that this study is also applicable to desktop Linux users, since those are generally more tech-savy.

If you are already using Linux, probably a pretty low percentage. Though I assume the older people who's children or grandchildren changed the OS on their PC/laptop to a distro that tries to mimic windows would find it complex.

Out of curiosity, what distro comes with Pale Moon as the default browser?

I use regular firefox and cromite on android

The dominance of Internet Explorer had longstanding negative effect on the web. Even today there're industrial and internal banking applications that only run on IE, and nothing else. With Chromium being increasingly the only supported browser we soon won't have a choice which browser to use for certain websites anymore (e.g. Firefox).

IE's decline came to be because it was slow and didn't progress for many years, unlike Firefox at the time. With Google being interested in the continued development of the web this won't happen. Google pushes detrimental standards like "Web Environment Integrity API" today, they tried it with FLoC a while back. If Google succeeds in making the web more closed, another browser won't have a chance to catch up.

At this point we have only 3 mostly feature complete browser engines (Chromium's, Safari's and Firefox's). With Firefox declining it might soon only be 2 that work on all websites. It isn't good for an open standar if there're only few implementations.

based void linux enjoyer