Yes but in this specific case Google is more wrong. MS implemented a security feature where user applications aren't allowed to change the default browser. You can disagree with it and it's sketchy as hell but it's there and supposedly to prevent the bundled-with-java problem.
Breaking it is basically guaranteed to lead to plugging the hole and blacklisting the misbehaving app is easier than getting out the real fix. You can be all like "rebel chrome
is taking on big operating system" and that's fine and makes total sense but "how dare MS enforce their own rule" is a weird take. You can't be like "hey, they weren't supposed to do it back" when you intentionally abuse your elevated privs to bypass security measures.
This kind of sounds true in a vacuum. Unfortunately we're not talking about a security thing in a vacuum. We're talking about 2 browsers, both of which are just making the user experience horrible in slightly different ways. Therefore all users are losers in this pre-school food fight.
Breaking it is basically guaranteed to lead to plugging the hole and blacklisting the misbehaving app is easier than getting out the real fix. You can be all like "rebel chrome is taking on big operating system" and that's fine and makes total sense but "how dare MS enforce their own rule" is a weird take. You can't be like "hey, they weren't supposed to do it back" when you intentionally abuse your elevated privs to bypass security measures.