85
Take a look at these alternative browsers to Google Chrome & let us know which is your favorite! π π
(files.mastodon.social)
Take a look at these alternative browsers to Google Chrome & let us know which is your favorite! π π
If you're looking for a new browser find out more π https://tuta.com/blog/best-private-browsers
@firefox @duckduckgo @puffin @Waterfox @ecosia @palemoon @zenbrowser @mullvadnet @torproject @Waterfox @Freenet @librewolf
When Google will discontinue Chromium as an opensource project (notice that I didn't say if), all those browsers will survive for half a year and then die due to lack of compliance and security updates. Chromium is incredibly complicated, web protocols are even more complicated, none of that is good, and people are rapidly losing the ability to maintain complicated projects due to LLM-induced mass psychoses.
The fact that the engine can in theory be forked now doesn't add much.
For you? Depend on your budget and how many people you employ.
@Nalivai
No not for me, and you know that.
You're arguing that you mustn't rely on another one's rendering engine, so you're basically saying that they must build a new one themselves. Right?
But that goes against your argument that you can't maintain a rendering engine, because that's too much work.
So again. What would *you* (not me) do if you were in control of building a browser? What's your advice.
I'm saying, both basically and extensively, that if you're using Chromium as your engine, you don't get to then turn around and tell that your product is a solution to a corporate world and you're the alternative of evil Google, or whatever the basic spiel of all this endless ad posts here.
Building an engine is complicated, forking and continuing Google product is more complicated, I get it. Chromium-based products can be good, and I bet most of them are better than Chrome (but then again, hitting your pinky toe at night when you go to pee is also better than Chrome, so low bar). But "the alternative to Google tyranny" they aren't. You need to at least fork the engine, support it independently, and substantially alter it, even to be considered one.
So again. My solution as a browser builder is to ask "how much money I have, and how much people I employ", and additionally, what's my actual point of doing it, what am I trying to achieve.
Gecko would die the minute mozilla said they weren't going to maintain it.
No one is going to pick it up.
I kind of assumed you would reply with a lack of understanding of the resources it takes to maintain those engines and keep them complaint with web standards.
It's still a problem. I didnt say we had other options right now. But pretending it's not a problem isn't going to fix it. Do you really want to rely on those companies for your browser engines? Mozilla is at least an alternative to Google, but a tenuous one. And Microsoft taking over development of either of those isn't an improvement.
You forgot
I think 'we' as people who value controlling the software we view the world through should advocate and help fund more alternatives. And that starts by raising awareness. I don't think fighting with people who point out the issue is a constructive use of anyone's time.
It's like you never heard of Google and their practices.
If that happen, they fail dramatically, because they already demonstrated how good are they at making a browser, so good they threw away everything the second chromium got on their horizon. And since maintaining other people's convoluted bullshit is more complicated than your own, their chances will be even lower.