Live data from Hacker News

Zen, a Arc-like open-source browser based on the Firefox engine

zen-browser.app

21–30 of 427 posts

Re: Zen, a Arc-like open-source browser based on the Firefox engine

#21

I use Sway (an i3 clone for Wayland), so these "split views" and "workspaces" are not appealing to me. Zen makes serious claims about performance and sandboxing, but do not forwardly present writings on how they do these things, leaving us with the impression there are some tweaks here and there but not much more.

I’ve been using the sway family of window managers for nearly 20 years! (First ion2, then ion3, then i3, and now sway.) In all this time I’ve briefly used native tabs but mostly now use windows without title bars or any other decorations in split mode all of the time. Most of the day I simply have a terminal running tmux on the first workspace with vim in the first tmux window, shells in the others, and a browser on the second sway workspace.

Would I benefit from using native windows in sway? It often feels like vim splitting, tmux splitting, Firefox tabs, and sway windows are all fighting with against other or at the very least not cooperating when they could be doing a better job if they all deferred to sway. I’m just not sure how to do that well with easy switching between windows and I don’t know if vim even supports it at all unless I use gvim?

Re: Zen, a Arc-like open-source browser based on the Firefox engine

#23
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably isn't notarized. Right-click the app and open, or use the terminal: xattr -d com.apple.quarantine /path/to/app edit: turns out they are describing this process here from a link on the macos download page: https://github.com/zen-browser/desktop/issues/53

The link is titled "Download Zen for macOS" which seems superfluous when the DMG starts downloading immediately, perhaps it needs a better title. Also while I understand some people have moral objections to the 100 dollar/euro registration fee, clearly a lot more than that has been spent in time to get the application to this stage, almost all apps for macOS distributing like this are notarized now, and with such a s…

To be fair, requiring the developer 100/eur per year in perpetuity to avoid a dialog literally telling the user to drag the app into the Trash feels a lot like extortion.

Re: Zen, a Arc-like open-source browser based on the Firefox engine

#24
I don't know why but websites always feel downgraded with Firefox and its descendants. Long load times, incomplete/failed loads, bad font rendering, buffering.. It feels evident that webmasters only care for compatibility with Chrome et al.

It felt that it was subsiding in between, but sites have again started breaking on it nowadays.

Re: Zen, a Arc-like open-source browser based on the Firefox engine

#25

I don't know why but websites always feel downgraded with Firefox and its descendants. Long load times, incomplete/failed loads, bad font rendering, buffering.. It feels evident that webmasters only care for compatibility with Chrome et al. It felt that it was subsiding in between, but sites have again started breaking on it nowadays.

I use Firefox a lot (and occasionally Chrome), and I haven't had any issues with Firefox. I've been pretty happy with it.

Re: Zen, a Arc-like open-source browser based on the Firefox engine

#26
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably isn't notarized. Right-click the app and open, or use the terminal: xattr -d com.apple.quarantine /path/to/app edit: turns out they are describing this process here from a link on the macos download page: https://github.com/zen-browser/desktop/issues/53

The link is titled "Download Zen for macOS" which seems superfluous when the DMG starts downloading immediately, perhaps it needs a better title. Also while I understand some people have moral objections to the 100 dollar/euro registration fee, clearly a lot more than that has been spent in time to get the application to this stage, almost all apps for macOS distributing like this are notarized now, and with such a s…

At this point the browser isn't even beta on a single platform, I don't think making it easy to install on macOS is really a pressing priority to expect developers to drop money on in hopes of growth quite yet.

Re: Zen, a Arc-like open-source browser based on the Firefox engine

#27

I don't know why but websites always feel downgraded with Firefox and its descendants. Long load times, incomplete/failed loads, bad font rendering, buffering.. It feels evident that webmasters only care for compatibility with Chrome et al. It felt that it was subsiding in between, but sites have again started breaking on it nowadays.

While I agree that develops really only care for Chromium compatability, I've not really noticed any issues with Firefox, except with Google sites every now and then (YouTube in particular).

Re: Zen, a Arc-like open-source browser based on the Firefox engine

#28

I don't know why but websites always feel downgraded with Firefox and its descendants. Long load times, incomplete/failed loads, bad font rendering, buffering.. It feels evident that webmasters only care for compatibility with Chrome et al. It felt that it was subsiding in between, but sites have again started breaking on it nowadays.

While I agree that develops really only care for Chromium compatability, I've not really noticed any issues with Firefox, except with Google sites every now and then (YouTube in particular).

Yes, Youtube is the main irritant for me as well.

Re: Zen, a Arc-like open-source browser based on the Firefox engine

#29
post #5

Vertical tabs and privacy focused implementation gives me a good combination between the Arc browsing experience and the privacy protections that Mullvad browser (or private mode Firefox) deliver.

I was very surprised with selection if the search engine after install. None of the browsers I tried do that. I quite like the vertical tabs also the browser is visually appealing

Re: Zen, a Arc-like open-source browser based on the Firefox engine

#30

I don't know why but websites always feel downgraded with Firefox and its descendants. Long load times, incomplete/failed loads, bad font rendering, buffering.. It feels evident that webmasters only care for compatibility with Chrome et al. It felt that it was subsiding in between, but sites have again started breaking on it nowadays.

Fonts do always look way better on Chrome. I can't explain it.
Post reply on HN