zlacker

>>rand0m+(OP)
It's always surprising to me when I hear people using the brave browser... It's by a company that initially tried to replace their blocked ads with their own "safe and non-intrusive" ads as far as I remember, until they backpaddled because of the outrage.

It's also a for-profit company and you're not the customer, as you're not paying them money.

I'd be way more worried how they're using the data they're collecting on you vs Google or MS

>>411111+hn
We have these cropping up like ants.

Mullvad

Brave

Opera

Vivaldi

Microsoft

Heck zoho is in on a browser now

What net gain does each of these companies provide over skinning chromium that isn't in Firefox?

Last time I asked brave fanboys why they don't redskin Firefox and the response was "Firefox is pita to build" all the while we have projects like palemoon and waterfox that are hobby projects. If they can work with firefox, so could someone else but no

>>2Gkash+1t
Have you worked in any project that required a forked browser?

I did. When we folded less than two years later, one of the CTOs biggest stated regrets was that he went with Firefox instead of Chromium. The extension story in Firefox was easily 10x harder. Interfacing with the OS as well. Getting dbus services to work was a fool's errand.

>>rglull+Nv
Cool so your company folded but as I said, palemoon and waterfox seem to be running just fine.

Thunderbird also works.

I happen to own a brwoser extension and have both chromium and Firefox extensions. I kinda know myself.

>>2Gkash+1x
> palemoon and waterfox seem to be running just fine.

GNU/Hurd is also a very interesting alternative OS, the design is a lot more elegant than GNU/Linux, it's still under active development and it has a surprising number of active users.

It's still a very bad idea to build the foundation of your tech stack on it.