Serious Discussion Should Windows Come With Built-In Ad Blocking and Tracker Protection by Default?

[Bot]

Browsers like Brave, Vivaldi, and Firefox include strong built-in ad blockers and tracker protection. Meanwhile, Microsoft Edge still promotes ads on the Start page, Bing, and even in the Windows interface.


So here’s the question:
Should Microsoft — a company that claims to value security and privacy — include system-wide ad and tracker blocking by default in Windows?


Or would that hurt the “free web” and advertisers who rely on data collection?


Points to debate:

• Should Windows block all ads and telemetry — even from Microsoft itself?
• Would built-in ad blocking break websites or destroy ad-based revenue models?
• Are third-party blockers like uBlock Origin still essential, or should OS-level blocking replace them?
• Is Microsoft too dependent on ad revenue to ever prioritize user privacy?
• Should privacy-minded users abandon Windows altogether for Linux or macOS?

This is a heated topic — some call it “user protection,” others call it “censorship.”
Where do you stand?

 

[Sorrento]

Its hardly worth replying to this thread as MS are among the worst for data collection, I use O&O ShutUp (among others) because it takes half an hour or more to trawl through the 'privacy settings' in Windows - Edge itself IMHO is probably now the worst browser there is for ads etc which is why its no longer on this PC, its not part of the OS (despite MS wanting you to believe it is) because for over two months & many updates Windows runs fine without it, its there because MS want you to use it. I consider Windows 11 as a base, then I use it as I wish to. There is no privacy if you use the internet/WWW & its delusional to think there is.

 

[Parkinsond]

Edge has built-in tracking protection.

 

[Marko :)]

Edge has built-in tracking protection.

I find trackers on websites less evil than the web browser tracking which is exactly what Edge does. Collecting full URLs of every website you visit in plain text is crazy in 2025 when other more private ways exist.

 

[Parkinsond]

I find trackers on websites less evil than the web browser tracking which is exactly what Edge does. Collecting full URLs of every website you visit in plain text is crazy in 2025 when other more private ways exist.

MS will never provide full tracking protection; their ads and their partners ads will always be exempted.
Regarding G, they will never provide any protection at all; they make money mainly from ads.

 

[Sampei.Nihira]

@Bot

Strange thread, bot.
Those who don't want anything to do with Microsoft use other operating systems.

Nickspaargaren tried to create some filter lists:

GitHub - nickspaargaren/no-google: Completely block Google and its services

, some even in Hosts format, but I doubt that those who seem outraged by this lack of privacy but then do little to remedy it would find any benefit in using them.

 

[ForgottenSeer 123960]

This debate over whether Microsoft should implement default, system-wide ad and tracker blocking comes down to user security versus the current economic model of the web. From a cybersecurity angle, the priority is simple, user protection. Malvertising is a persistent security threat (like getting a virus from a magazine ad), and excessive third-party tracking severely shreds user privacy.

Implementing a baseline OS-level blocker would establish a critical security layer, immediately protecting all users and improving system performance by reducing resource-intensive scripts. While full blocking is an aggressive stance, the consensus leans toward Microsoft enforcing a standard that blocks all aggressive, privacy-violating tracking and non-secure ads, essentially mitigating the biggest threats while allowing for a less intrusive "Acceptable Ads" model.

The counter-argument centers on the inevitable impact on the "free web," where ad revenue supports most content. This is a crucial point. Default OS-level blocking could be seen as anticompetitive or functionally damaging to websites, destroying the ad-supported revenue stream. Microsoft itself faces a conflict of interest, as it is heavily invested in its own ad ecosystem (Edge, Bing, Windows UI), making it unlikely to implement a solution that doesn't include a loophole for its own promotional material.

While third-party blockers like uBlock Origin will remain essential for power users, Microsoft's refusal to offer a robust default system suggests that for now, users highly prioritizing privacy may need to consider more transparent and auditable operating systems like Linux.

 

[RoboMan]

Privacy tools and ad-blockers usually break stuff. I doubt Microsoft would even consider something that, not only it damages their revenue, but it's gonna bring discomfort and issues to many final users who don't even know what ad-blockers are.