I see furryfox, I vote up.
It doesn’t have to be Chromium, but asserting that Firefox is the only browser that respects your privacy is just untrue. Edit: I use FF and Brave for different browsing, as some websites just don’t like FF.
I’ve been using Firefox full-time since I switched to it 3 years ago and I haven’t seen a single website that doesn’t work with Firefox
I’ve found a few. I can’t think of examples, but I keep switching back to chromium
I’ve seen a few companies paying employees six figures a month for doing nothing too, but I can think of a single name though. That’s gotta be real right?
What!? I’m talking about Firefox being unresponsive with some websites.
what website? I’ve been daily driving Firefox for both work and home use since 3 years ago, the only time it doesn’t load a site properly is when I lose internet connection
I’ve found a couple, and the issue seems to stem from some type of cert from goDaddy specifically.
what are you talking about, I went to that site, clicked on everything, and nothing doesn’t load, everything works fine
I don’t specifically mean the goDaddy site, I mean some sites that have gotten there certs from goDaddy won’t work. It will give an ssl error. I believe it is their wildcard cert specifically.
Brave literally just got called put for selling copyrighted data for AI scraping.
Can you link a source for that?
That’s the first article I found on Google, there’s plenty more probably more reputable sources.
Use Vivaldi browser. Fucking fast, cross platform and lots of features
Not user data, though. Data scraped for use in their search engine, i.e. web pages.
Brave is a poor example of a privacy oriented browser. Its a very good example of a browser lying to you about your privacy
I’ll keep avoiding firefox as long as they keep pushing weird decision with each update, the latest one being forcing “pocket recommendation” on the new tab page, even if the built-in (that is, you can’t remove it) pocket extension is disabled. Sure, I can go look for the new advanced parameter to disable every time, but why pull this shit in the first place.
What are those? I have never seen pocket recommendation.
It seems they’re rolling this up by regions, for whatever reasons. And they’re proud of it too. https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/view-articles-recommended-pocket-firefox-new-tab-homepage
Cant you say that about chrome pushing weird decisions like manifest v3.
You can, but there’s a big difference : the average user (=the vast majority of people) will not see the difference. In some tech circles, or if you’re actively looking for it, you’ll know that it happens, and what it might (or might not) do, but 90% of people will not see a change. User interface remain the same, features remains the same, and extensions that could adapt will already have done so.
Firefox choices, for better or for worse, are very visible. The pocket extension was bundled in it, making it so that everyone have it show up one day. It being named after a (formerly) third-party service is not a good look. Then the new-tab page suggestions, which I can only see as an intrusive way to push content onto me (something I actively try to avoid, the samy way many “social network” keep pushing what their algorithms think is good for you). Add to that some decisions about actively ignoring user settings (and page content) about PDF handling, subsequently breaking tons of SPA because “they know better” (there was a long discussion, and the change was half-reverted once big enough sites showed issues).
The list could go on, ranging from “interesting” UI choices to bundling more and more advertisement for their own service, only to backpedal later with “oh, we didn’t think it would annoy people to do the exact thing you’re running from other browsers for”.
Chrome changes might be insidious, but they have limited impact to the actual users. Mozilla keeps changing Firefox in very glaring ways and not always with a sound reasons, user-wise. One could argue that these changes are all minor, but they do act as a deterrent for people that really can’t handle changes (remember, for most people changing the icon on a button is enough to make a feature “disappear” for them).
I’d argue crippling what ublock origin is caple of doing is very crippling to the end user experience. Accepting a cippled ublock is similar to accepting the change when adblock plus white listed some ads.
Again, factor in the number of people knowingly using ublock, and actively looking into what changed vs. what still works fine for now. Manifest v3 have no reach beyond techies, and as such is “accepted” by default. Remember that most people are totally fine with these changes because the larger picture is not shown to them.
It’s Internet Explorer - Google edition.
such a base
Appearently brave is the most privacy focused browser. At least according to this paper from 3y ago.
https://www.scss.tcd.ie/Doug.Leith/pubs/browser_privacy.pdf
Edit: guys I know that Brave is not the best browser and I wouldn’t recommend it, but I haven’t seen studies or in depth articles about technical details of privacy concerns.
And I’m not being sarcastic, I wanna see them so I can make a more informed opinion.
So chromium. Brave is based on chromium.
No. There are tracking protection extensions in Brave that aren’t in base Chromium.
I don’t support Brave or Chromium but we need to be accurate about praises and criticisms of them.
The main point people need to understand is that Chromium based browsers are heavily nerfing the ability for users to use ad-blockers. This isn’t much of an issue in the case of Brave where the ad-blocking is built into the browser itself.
And personally, I would rather have some healthy privacy based competition between browsers. Having both Librewolf (Firefox) and Brave browser (chromium) lets us have options to switch between.
It also creates additional work on the advertising side in this cat and mouse game.
Brave does not aim to block all ads, only “unacceptable” ones.
What are you talking about? I use brave and haven’t seen a single ad in ages.
If I ever accidentally open the wrong browser, I can tell immediately.There is a way to “opt-in” to view ads from their own pool of ads in exchange for crypto… But that’s automatically disabled, and there’s a toggle to hide all of the crypto stuff anyway.
I’m having deja vu. I’ve gotten this confused before and looked it up before and they don’t. I’m misremembering something from some forum post they made but I also couldn’t find that forum post last time. Regardless, their official FAQ says they don’t. I’ve deleted the comment above now.
I think you were mixing it up with Google Chrome.
Google made an announcement sometime back that they wanted to improve the standards for advertising, and if there were any ads that didn’t meet those standards they would have Chrome automatically block it.
duckduckgo browser is promising and not built on chromium
I hate PDFs of papers. I want to read like this
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8Not
1 3
2 4
5 7
6 8Not sure if you’re making a joke or if you’re just unaware about the recent news, but it’s amusing either way.
Nothings safe anymore. Everything’s a lie.
This isn’t really a “privacy concern” from a user standpoint. It isn’t user data they’re selling, it’s data they’ve scraped from websites for use in machine learning. It’s more of a legal grey area in the same way that OpenAI is being sued for their use of data in training ChatGPT.
Netscape Navigator?
After the quantum update i switched to firefox, as now in performance it is almost on par with chrome or sometimes better.
removed by mod
To my knowledge the Chrome is the worse memory hog
Worse than Chrome? By how much? I use both browsers on multiple devices on multiple OSes and neither of them are even remotely lightweight.
chrome uses less base ram but more ram per tab i think
I think it’s basically a wash. Anyone that says that one is particularly better or worse than the other is not being honest.
Chrome? Sure.
Vivaldi uses about half the RAM of FF when I have equivalent tabs open and running/idling.
Of course I have to have an ad blocker installed on FF whereas Vivaldi just does it natively, so that might be causing the difference in memory.
Here come all the anti chromium bois with "tHeReS nO wAy vivALdi bLoCkS aDs aS gOoD as u BlOcK oRiGin!‘’
To that I say… Have you ever fucking tried it? Lol I’ve tried both side by side, don’t argue unless you’ve actually done so as well. V’s ad blocking didn’t break when Manifest V3 dropped and until it stops being as good or better than UBO I’m just gonna keep using it. When that day happens, well like I said I’ve already got FF up and running anyways.
deleted by creator
What major standard features is Firefox missing these days? Their terrible take on PWAs is disappointing, but the only things Firefox seems to be missing are things some other browser vendor just decided to build one day (Chrome’s filesystem API, Apple’s WebGPU, etc.).
Even with Mozilla doing everything in their power to make Firefox worse in attempt to squeeze money out of the browser so they don’t have to dock the CEO’s bonuses, they’re still the least bad functional browser.
Side panel, workspaces, tab-stacking, just to name a few.
Those aren’t web APIs for a web designer to use.
Anyway, Firefox does have two functional side panels, though. It also has various ways to manage tabs through official and unofficial addons, which I much prefer myself. The ability to use different profiles in the same window by assigning each tab to a container is something I can’t live without anymore.
“What major standard features is Firefox missing these days?”
This was your question, nowhere did you say anything about web API’s. You stupid or just forget which comment I was responding to?
Sure FF has extensions that “kinda do the same thing” except they’re shit and bloat the browser beyond what it already is compared to Vivaldi.
Perhaps you didn’t see the (deleted) comment I was responding to, but they were speaking from the position of a web developer, not from the perspective of a normal user:
I’m a software engineer, and when I build web apps, Firefox now stands in the way of me being able to use new standard features (without polyfills). Meaning, if I want to support the 2-5% of users that may use Firefox, I have to explicitly go out of my way to either make my site less efficient for everyone, or build a special version just for Frefox because it’s so behind, like we used to with IE, making Firefox the new IE (except nobody is really using it). And of course, you can only polyfill so much. Some things are utterly impossible, such as the various PWA features that Mozilla refuses to support, or many new CSS features coming out.
To name a big one: the CSS :has() pseudo-class.
How is this still not enabled by default?
There are still a bug or two that need to be solved before it’s enabled by default. I’m sure contributions would be welcome!
Yeah, I’m also a web developer and this person is completely up their own ass. We’ve all struggled with browsers that lag behind standards (internet explorer) or implement them in weird ways (safari). But Mozilla has never even come close to being a problem like the others.
Also I doubt they are using the newest of new web standards that would actually need to be poly filled and even then with modern JS build tooling poly filling isn’t difficult or abnormal. Oh, the bundle for your crappy SPA might be a few kb bigger but that isn’t gonna make a difference.
Of course your job would be even easier if there was only one engine left. Comparing it to what we had in the IE era though is completely bonkers.
I have 15 extensions running on my 8GB work laptop and there is little to no difference from my 16GB PC battle station at home. And I have like 4 more apps run alongside 10 tabs of FF at work, way more than what I would ever open at home
For some reason, upload speeds to YouTube are atrocious. And if you read through the ticket about this issue, it’s not Google slowing it down artificially, but an actual Firefox issue. I have to resort to using Vivaldi as my dedicated upload browser.
That, and they have a weird drive to make their UI shittier and shittier. Introducing tons of whitespace, turning tabs into buttons, removing compact layout…
All of them are memory hungry, the point is how dynamic they are in their “hunger” and “excretion”.
Does the 34 and 20 represent the number of tabs? If so, this is not a fair comparison, what with FF having 50% more open. But even if that number doesn’t represent tabs, I am sure there can be websites that would put them much closer in performance.
Right now I have Chrome on my work machine. It has a 14 (again, not sure if those are active tabs or not) and it is eating 1.17 GB on my work machine. On my home FF (24) is eating 1.60 GB of RAM. FF is clearly using more RAM in each case, but it isn’t slowing my desktop down any more than Chrome is on my work machine. I’d like for it to improve, but rather use something other than Google’s tools on every single machine I use, I guess.
The number in parentheses is the number of processes that the application is performing. Win’s task manager groups these under the parent app so you don’t have to scroll through every “sub” in order to end a task. if you hit the “>” to the left of the app it will give you the expanded view and you will see the list.
Does the 34 and 20 represent the number of tabs?
Yes, more or less. I think some other extensions can take up processes too.
I actually have enough RAM and I’m glad that the RAM is being used to load all the stuff instead of the pagefile. It’s my fault that I’m not closing stuff, not the browser’s for not guessing what I’m going to re-load.
If you ask people, I think they’ll just say that their main browser is like that. And that’ll apply to all of them, so it’s a user problem.
I remember these talks from a very long time ago. Very long time, when Opera had its own engine and before. I think the gaps have shrunk a lot, especially now that Internet Exploder is gone.
I’ve been maining Firefox for over a year now and this has been the case for me as well - it’s such a resource hog. Which is fine, I’ve dealt with it, but I wish it didn’t use so much battery life.
For daily usage, and as long as you use uBlock Origin, Firefox has been perfect for me for the past 10 years. I don’t understand those who complain about it.
A lot of fanboys are just gonna irrationally hate competitors. Star Wars vs. Star Trek and all that.
I think a lot of people turned away from Firefox after that Mr Robot promotional ‘stunt’ they pulled.
Brave? 😅
Chromium. It also has done some shady shit in the past with crypto
miningand refferal links.If you hate Brave that’s fine, but at least be honest. It never had any mining whatsoever. It has a feature that let’s you earn crypto through ads that is turned off by default. That’s it. You never have to deal with it if you don’t want to.
I’ll give you the referral link issue though.
I just threw on table what I knew without any experience with Brave… I removed the mining from it so it’s somewhat more accurate. I still find it concerning that it’s a feature to begin with, but that’s with me :)
I know it’s Chromium, that’s why I said it.
I didn’t know they have done shady crypto stuff, I started using Brave because I needed to use Chromium in school (frontend dev) but I didn’t want Crome or Edge… So Brave made sense to use.Fair enough. I’m sure there are better Chromium based browsers when it comes to that though. I haven’t looked into these though, so I can’t name them :p
Me neither
What has it done with mining? I know about the referral links.
As a comment above mentioned, it has a feature to get cryto through ads that is disabled by default, but you can opt-in if you like. I personally find it concerning that it’s a feature to begin with
So is it mining them or not? Because rewards doesn’t imply mining necessarily.
I don’t think so.
smartest emojiposter
Brave is on of the few Chrome based browsers that security types will back. but still has its own issues.
C r y p t o
Tbh seems good enough for me, when I turn that stuff off
I did turn it all off and have been using it for a long time. I don’t feel like using Firefox, so it’s gotta be chromium and I didn’t like Vivaldi’s UI. So by elimination I ended up at Brave.
Can you opt out of it changing your links to their affiliates
All the crypto features are now opt in iirc
Ungoogled Chromium exists but it just feels 1/10 of what Firefox is capable of doing.
Now I’m getting curious about the vivaldi browser. It’s chromium based (apart from firefox, what isn’t) but seems pretty security/privacy aware.
I committed to opera a long time ago and now I’m too many saved passwords deep on shit websites I’ve not visited in 4 years to make the change.
Let me help you and from there, you can import all your passwords into Keepass or KeepassXC
Nice one, cheers for that! I’ve been using bitwarden, so I’ll see if I can port them to that
You’re welcome!
Not gonna try and force you or anything, but if you want to move over to firefox try this: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/import-data-another-browser
Also, be sure to turn off telemetry in firefox. It’s not as safe as people say, but it’s pretty good
That’s brilliant, cheers for the heads up
No way to export that stuff to Firefox or a Firefox derivate?
I was in the same boat many years ago with Chrome until I discovered how to migrate the passwords to Bitwarden.
My man, Opera has been sold to a Chinese company years ago. It’s probably the least trustworthy major browser by a large margin.
I wouldn’t trust it with my pornhub account if I had one for some reason.
Chromium could be spying on you, as it communicates with google servers. You should use ungoogled-chromium, and hope they did a good job…
spoiler
or just use Firefox
