Live data from Hacker News

Otter Browser

otter-browser.org

11–20 of 98 posts

Re: Otter Browser

#13
post #9
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> chromium Are there any Google risks for being chromium-based? Honest question here.

As noted in a sibling to your comment, there's a choice between WebKit and Blink (your build allowing). Here's QT's note addressing your concern in QtWebEngine: https://wiki.qt.io/QtWebEngine#Relationship_to_Chromium Auxiliary services that talk to Google platforms are stripped out

So, if Chromium turns into a bun fight with Google, the Open Source components would just fork?

Re: Otter Browser

#15
post #8

I'm not well versed enough in the Browser Wars to say one thing or another about except this: I like the name. It lends it self to saying "I use the Otter browser" which is not just a great pun but the pun on 'other' defines what Otter is, the "other" browser. The web needs independent browsers. We need to get rid of the idea that websites are designed to work on any one technology. They should work on any browser th…

> The web needs independent browsers...[websites] should work on any browser Unfortunately, independence ends with the choice between WebKit (QtWebKit) or Blink (QtWebEngine), albeit with a faithful Opera 12-like interface that's less resource hungry than Vivaldi. Otter is still in development and it shows in some rough spots and occasional crashes.

I'd love to go back to 1999 and see everyone's reaction when I tell them that almost everyone in the 2020s uses a browser derived from Konqueror, and that you have your choice of Konqueror derivatives from Apple, Google, or Microsoft. Whoever named it was more prescient than they realized.

Re: Otter Browser

#16
post #2

This seems actually viable. And those weekly updates let us know "It's Alive!!" not some zombie. I'm going to make an effort on using this. I'm currently using a Firefox fork but the maintenance is a little rough and I get conflicts with upstream sometimes that are hard (for me) to resolve.

Firefox doesn't even allow me use my own custom homepage from local file when I open new tab. First tab does allow that though. Talk about consistency.

They do not fix it for years now which for me means one thing: they do not understand how basic this functionality is and if so I think this 'mainstream' has lost it's sight.

For me as long as such idiocy exists in 'mainstream' I consider it doomed. Because if you do not fix such basic things the next question is: what else you did not fix ..

Another idiocy is that they push updates through your throat without option to stop checking for it or stopping dialog asking to update. It always appears when you do not want it to appear and breaks the flow of your work. I consider it a disrespect to a person who uses it. And again in my opinion as long as it exists I think it's doomed.

Re: Otter Browser

#17
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> chromium Are there any Google risks for being chromium-based? Honest question here.

I can't find a source, but I know Brave has had upstream Google issues in the past. Unfortunately, from what I've heard, Gecko is not very developer friendly, so Google is pretty much the only option.

I feel like Mozilla's decision not to prioritize support for embedding Gecko ended up being a strategic error in the long-term. Other browsers using Blink don't add directly to Chrome's market share but having it embedded everywhere means that its quirks don't end up being perceived as Chrome-specific. If five different browsers all behave the same way and the sixth one differs, then the sixth one ends up looking like the odd one out, even if the reason the other five behave the same is that they're all sharing code.

Re: Otter Browser

#18
post #8

I'm not well versed enough in the Browser Wars to say one thing or another about except this: I like the name. It lends it self to saying "I use the Otter browser" which is not just a great pun but the pun on 'other' defines what Otter is, the "other" browser. The web needs independent browsers. We need to get rid of the idea that websites are designed to work on any one technology. They should work on any browser th…

> The web needs independent browsers...[websites] should work on any browser Unfortunately, independence ends with the choice between WebKit (QtWebKit) or Blink (QtWebEngine), albeit with a faithful Opera 12-like interface that's less resource hungry than Vivaldi. Otter is still in development and it shows in some rough spots and occasional crashes.

There’s also the Gecko engine, Firefox does still exist.

Re: Otter Browser

#19
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The web needs independent browsers...[websites] should work on any browser Unfortunately, independence ends with the choice between WebKit (QtWebKit) or Blink (QtWebEngine), albeit with a faithful Opera 12-like interface that's less resource hungry than Vivaldi. Otter is still in development and it shows in some rough spots and occasional crashes.

I'd love to go back to 1999 and see everyone's reaction when I tell them that almost everyone in the 2020s uses a browser derived from Konqueror, and that you have your choice of Konqueror derivatives from Apple, Google, or Microsoft. Whoever named it was more prescient than they realized.

There’s an old turn of phrase, first comes the Navigator, then comes the Explorer, then…

Re: Otter Browser

#20
It's in the Homebrew repo, so installing is as easy as

  $ brew install otter-browser
What's also interesting, is that the tab-close button is on the left of the tab, like every other macOS application. Other browsers (Chrome, Firefox) put it stubbornly on the right.
Post reply on HN