5 ms·

What about chromium browser? Google's tracking features are disabled there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromium_(web_browser)#Differences_from_Google_Chrome

by eggie 10y ago

What about chromium browser? Google's tracking features are disabled there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromium_(web_browser)#Differences_from_Google_Chrome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromium_(web_browser)#Differe... The author might argue that this is weak resistance because it's just adding fuel to Google's fire. They have co-opted the open source community by building their tools this way. I prefer this to the nearest alternative, which is a company that pushes closed software on the world. IMO, the best alternative is a fully open ecosystem in which the players are very small relative to the overall size of the markets in which they operate. Such things don't last long on their own. We need to decide to support them as a community or they will be overwhelmed.

cantagi 10y ago
Not all the tracking is disabled unfortunately. You might be interested in Inox - https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/inox https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/inox
Freak_NL 10y ago
Chromium is a better choice from a privacy standpoint, certainly. It unfortunately doesn't help prevent the vendor lock-in situation. The ideal equilibrium for the open web right now would be 33% each for evergreen Chrome (or other Webkit/Blink browsers), Edge, and Firefox. Bleeding edge prove-of-concepts aside; developing a website or web application that works in all modern browsers has never been so developer-friendly with all the wonderful tools and mature frameworks we have (e.g., Babel), and is trivial with just HTML and CSS. It's a shame to see a class of developers emerge that target Chrome exclusively.
- bigbugbag 10y ago
  Wow! your ideal equilibrium is really scary. It leaves no room for a lot of the existing browsers and features two that I do not want to use ever and one that I use reluctantly because it lives on google advertisement money. So your ideal open web is 66% google and 33% microsoft which seems pretty closed up for something open.
  - Freak_NL 10y ago
    A third of the total market share for Chrome, Edge, and Firefox respectively.
necessity 10y ago
Use Wireshark, Chromium still talks to Google even if you disable all configs it allows you to disable. Firefox is the only one you can configure to not talk to it's servers (Mozilla's).

by eggie 10y ago

cantagi 10y ago

Not all the tracking is disabled unfortunately. You might be interested in Inox - https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/inox https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/inox

Freak_NL 10y ago

Chromium is a better choice from a privacy standpoint, certainly. It unfortunately doesn't help prevent the vendor lock-in situation. The ideal equilibrium for the open web right now would be 33% each for evergreen Chrome (or other Webkit/Blink browsers), Edge, and Firefox. Bleeding edge prove-of-concepts aside; developing a website or web application that works in all modern browsers has never been so developer-friendly with all the wonderful tools and mature frameworks we have (e.g., Babel), and is trivial with just HTML and CSS. It's a shame to see a class of developers emerge that target Chrome exclusively.

bigbugbag 10y ago
Wow! your ideal equilibrium is really scary. It leaves no room for a lot of the existing browsers and features two that I do not want to use ever and one that I use reluctantly because it lives on google advertisement money. So your ideal open web is 66% google and 33% microsoft which seems pretty closed up for something open.
- Freak_NL 10y ago
  A third of the total market share for Chrome, Edge, and Firefox respectively.

necessity 10y ago

Use Wireshark, Chromium still talks to Google even if you disable all configs it allows you to disable. Firefox is the only one you can configure to not talk to it's servers (Mozilla's).