Live data from Hacker News

Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

github.com

201–210 of 326 posts

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#201
post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Browser is such a security nightmare, how would one want to trust from a random vendor? What is it's selling point?

We're actually the largest tech company in South Korea, not a completely random vendor. We also own LINE messenger which is probably more known.

Tried it. It ignores my window manager's decorations and enforces its own, with no apparent way of changing that (unlike e.g. Chromium).

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#202
post #84

My preference for a well supported Chromium-based browser that's not Chrome would be to use one of the "Blink" based browsers: https://vivaldi.com https://brave.com https://www.opera.com Opera was purchased by a Chinese consortium, I'm not a fan of Brave's hijacking of ad spaces so my preference is currently vivaldi - which was founded by co-founder and former CEO of Opera and has been adding new innovative features…

I tried Vivaldi a while ago and, while I really liked it, it didn't justify not being open-source. I'm not one of the OSS elitists, but the browser, like the OS, is just one of those basic things that I want full control over.

I'm a huge fan of FOSS, but do you really think that you have full control over any modern piece of software? I think that underestimates how many people actually work on such a project and how many new updates we're getting on a daily basis. Nobody is more than %-wise controlling that stuff anymore. And this % is based on regular financial(!) investment in developer-hours but not in what software you use.

PS: I just fetched a project I'm actively working on. Last fetch was Friday afternoon or Saturday morning. >50 new commits fetched today. Until I'm finished reading and understanding all of them, there will be >500 more I suppose.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#203
post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It blocks ads by default and from all I've read replaces it with their own against publishers wishes: https://www.businessinsider.com/newspaper-publishers-send-ce... https://www.wired.com/2016/04/brave-software-publishers-resp... Where is the opt-in from the website who are getting their ads blocked/replaced?

Check out the browser. By default no ads are shown. Everything is opt-in at all levels. The idea is to remove the coercion from ads. Users will earn 70% of all gross ad revenue. The remaining 30% will be split between publisher and the browser. Users can get paid to tolerate ads, or they can choose to see no ads. If users see ads then users, the browser, and sites all earn money. If they don't then nobody earns money…

From the Business Insider article:

> With Brave, publishers get around 55% of revenues: 15% go to Brave, 15% go to the partner that serves the ads, and 10% to 15% goes back to the user

So they went from 55% for the publisher... to 15%?

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#204
post #84

My preference for a well supported Chromium-based browser that's not Chrome would be to use one of the "Blink" based browsers: https://vivaldi.com https://brave.com https://www.opera.com Opera was purchased by a Chinese consortium, I'm not a fan of Brave's hijacking of ad spaces so my preference is currently vivaldi - which was founded by co-founder and former CEO of Opera and has been adding new innovative features…

Brave by default is not hijacking ads, just block all and you can pay to the webs you visit with a cryptocurrency

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#205
post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the correction, either way, I view it as a problem that you can't (easily?) decouple in iOS. Some of these browsers listed have no mobile version, at least not ones fully baked. That alone forces people into the hands of the mobile defaults like Chrome and Safari.

> I view it as a problem What kind of problem? It makes web browsing stable as the internal engine is tested by Apple without third party bringing their own with updates at random moments and from web developer's perspective, they get a predictable result within iOS without effort and from those, I don't see a problem from users' perspective too. Maybe you work for Mozilla.

If you think Apple's software updates provide "predictable results" you can't have been paying attention for the past few years.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#206
post #176
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And in this forum, I would guess the OS being proprietary is a deal braker for many, including me.

That is a pure assumption. I don't use Linux for desktop.

Well that settles it, the "many" have spoken.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#207
post #84

My preference for a well supported Chromium-based browser that's not Chrome would be to use one of the "Blink" based browsers: https://vivaldi.com https://brave.com https://www.opera.com Opera was purchased by a Chinese consortium, I'm not a fan of Brave's hijacking of ad spaces so my preference is currently vivaldi - which was founded by co-founder and former CEO of Opera and has been adding new innovative features…

Just to add my company's browser too, http://whale.naver.com/ Chromium-based, actively developed, and has Android+iOS browsers. You can use chrome extensions with it too.

Nah.. Just another closed source browser for `vendor lock-in`. no thanks.

edit:word

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#208
post #84

My preference for a well supported Chromium-based browser that's not Chrome would be to use one of the "Blink" based browsers: https://vivaldi.com https://brave.com https://www.opera.com Opera was purchased by a Chinese consortium, I'm not a fan of Brave's hijacking of ad spaces so my preference is currently vivaldi - which was founded by co-founder and former CEO of Opera and has been adding new innovative features…

Another one: http://otter-browser.org/

Maybe a bit more "punk" (no company, OSS effort).

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is this downvoted so heavily? It's a legitimate opinion. I don't agree with it and you may not either, but it highlights the fact that for at least a portion of the user base the default browser may be an acceptable option.

I would appreciate it more if people mentioned why my comment doesn't contribute to the discussion, but I think it's more realistic to say that I've been downvoted simply because someone didn't like what I had to say.

I didn't downvote you, but perhaps people are thinking that attitudes like the one presented in your original comment are what lead to IE6 and the general state of the internet in the late 90s / early 2000s?

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#210
post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One issue here, is that none of these are good cross platformers for mobile. iOS and Android both force you to use their render engine afiak. That's why Edge uses Webkit on iOS and Blink on Android...yet Edge (proper) uses...the Edge engine. Mobile is so much of the world's web usage now...it's basically impossible to decouple them from their root OSes. Imagine if Windows in the 90s or 00s forced every competitor's b…

Only iOS forces you to use WebKit which is why it's used by Chrome/Edge/Opera. It's not impossible to decouple them, you're prohibited by the license from using an alternative browser engine. Android doesn't have any such restrictions so Firefox on Android are able to use their Gecko engine.

> you're prohibited by the license from using an alternative browser engine

Interesting. Isn't that what Microsoft was tried and convicted for in the 90s?

Post reply on HN