9 ms·

Brave 0.55 released

92 points by joshschreuder 8y ago

tschwimmer 8y ago
Can someone outline the justification for the switch to Chromium and the difference between Chromium and Muon, which seems to be based on Chromium anyway?
- stock_toaster 8y ago
  I think Muon is/was a fork of Electron? So maybe they are just using Chromium more directly now?
- quantummkv 8y ago
  Muon was a fork of electron, which included many patches for features required for a variety of desktop apps. The amount of packages ensures that it takes time to upgrade to new chromium releases (regression testing with the patches). Since brave is just a browser, it does not need all of those extra patches and features. So it is simpler and easier to just roll with chromium directly.
  - drb91 8y ago
    Why was the fork necessary? Is the electron project hostile to changes?
    - quantummkv 8y ago
      Nah. Electron does not prioritize chromium version updates over everything else. They generally do so at their own pace, instead focusing more on other features and bug fixing. It works fine for their intended userbase. For a browser that might be an issue due to exploits and vulnerabilities.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
- eivarv 8y ago
  I can't find the Github-issue atm, but I'm guessing it was motivated by security (there's been a bunch of RCE-exploits in Electron), technical debt, and performance (Muon was an Electron-fork, and Electron is more than just Chromium).
onyva 8y ago
I love the irony in “You are not a product“ from a commercial product (open source, I know) designed to monetize surfing (aka pay-to-surf), as if this is what the internet is about. I think we should resist such an effort and stick with projects (not companies) that want to keep the internet as it was meant to be, ie Mozilla Firefox. No problem with monetization but I want a browser that puts me first, not a middleman that tries to profit from the trend to subvert the open culture of the internet, pretending they put my privacy first. It’s an excuse, not the main purpose of this browser.
- akerro 8y ago
  Because Mozilla is totally not a corporation. Brave makes usage of BAT and their ads optional and disabled by default.
  - onyva 8y ago
    We've discussed this Mozilla is a "corporation" many times before, here and elsewhere. https://blog.mozilla.org/press/2005/08/mozilla-foundation-forms-new-organization-to-further-the-creation-of-free-open-source-internet-software-including-the-award-winning-mozilla-firefox-browser/ https://blog.mozilla.org/press/2005/08/mozilla-foundation-fo...
    - akerro 8y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation
      - ngokevin 8y ago
        I agree Mozilla is a corporation, despite its marketing and brand efforts, everything else is very corporate. It started out as a foundation with corporation-as-necessity, but no longer the case. They are able to distance themselves from ad money through Google, but it's the same. If they could make more profit and growth, they would choose to do so. A small example has twice been ads in the browser (now using local targeting), and if it was 100% a non-profit foundation goodie-goodie, would probably go with a default search engine like Duck Duck Go, but survival as a corporation prohibits otherwise. And I think that's totally okay, but I don't think we can pretend they aren't a corporation.
gattilorenz 8y ago
The "download for Android" button leads to the Apple Store. That was... interesting. https://brave.com/download/ https://brave.com/download/
- ghayes 8y ago
  The link for Android leads here: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.brave.browser&hl=en https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.brave.brow... Maybe it was a rendering issue?
hackathonguy 8y ago
Anyone using Brave? Would love to hear your impressions.
- newscracker 8y ago
  I’ve used it somewhat occasionally, and to me it seemed like Chrome as far as memory usage and sluggishness with multiple tabs and windows are concerned. But I like the fact that it comes with a built-in ad blocker, and avoids contacting Google (unlike Chrome). This announcement says it should perform better, and that’s something I’d like to try out and see. If you were frustrated by the recent “signing in” changes and the backtracking of that in Chrome, you should try Firefox and Brave.
- buro9 8y ago
  It's my default Android browser because you can set it to block scripts and adverts by default and yet the option to trivially allow scripts in a site is a single click away. It's so good at this I've uninstalled multiple apps (especially news and weather ones) and have started saving links to web pages instead and the whole experience is better (because blocking adverts and tracking in apps is a real pain).
  - therealmarv 8y ago
    can you use it also as webview browser?
    - buro9 8y ago
      I do not believe that you can do that, but I've largely stopped using apps that contain adverts so to me this is not an angle I worry about so much (plus I use NetGuard so in app tracking I was already limiting).
- maxencecornet 8y ago
  It's my default browser, apart from a few quircks, I love the speed of it, especially on my older android phone I still switch to chrome when I'm working, because the developer tools are better in chrome (debugger, integration of lighthouse ect..)
petre 8y ago
I've used the mobile version for a while, but switched back to Opera after Google Ads showed up on a web page in a popover, despite having been blocked. It was already Chromium-based. Opera doesn't have the flip-switch menu Brave has to switch off certain features, including Javascript (very helpful for disabling most those annoying cookie and GDPR consent popovers) but their ad blocker is quite effective.
newscracker 8y ago
I didn’t understand what this meant until I dug up more information, especially since I thought Brave was already based on Chromium. Turns out that so far only the browser engine was Chromium based. Now its user interface is also transitioning from an in-house open source framework called Muon [1] to Chromium. This is what an announcement more than six months ago (from March 2018) [2] says: > Brave for Windows, macOS, and Linux currently use the Chromium rendering engine, but (unlike Brave for Android) it uses a custom HTML and JavaScript user interface. Technical readers will know that we call the runtime for this user interface Muon, which is a more secure fork of Electron, and which therefore combines Chromium and Node.js to enable applications built using JavaScript and HTML user interfaces and Node modules for the application logic. After getting rid of Chrome recently (not that I was using it much before), I’ve been using Firefox (my favorite browser), Safari and sometimes Brave. [1]: https://github.com/brave/muon https://github.com/brave/muon [2]: https://brave.com/development-plans-for-upcoming-release/ https://brave.com/development-plans-for-upcoming-release/
- debaserab2 8y ago
  > Technical readers will know that we call the runtime for this user interface Muon, which is a more secure fork of Electron Ew...
nextlevelwizard 8y ago
So what is the benefit over just using Chromium?
- SmellyGeekBoy 8y ago
  You can look at Brave ads instead of other ads!
- drb91 8y ago
  You can pay content providers with cash via Brave rather than ad views.
  - tikwidd 8y ago
    Why do we need a whole new browser for this?
    - mtgx 8y ago
      Ideally it would be a completely interoperable system/protocol - so nothing like say Paypal or Google Contributor that competitors would resist adopting anyways. Plus, the adoption from a single provider for payment services wouldn't be nearly as high as a protocol + hundreds of providers.
    - Yoric 8y ago
      We don't, but getting there on the web at scale is a long battle. The W3C has been working on WebPayments [1] for several years. Once it lands on most browsers, it should enable websites to offer a choice between ads and micropayments. But there are lots of problems to solve first, ranging from finding the right APIs and UXs to make sure that users won't end up paying by accident, or that children won't pay with their parent's browser without their agreement, to the fact that people don't use the same mechanisms for paying al over the world, to security issues, etc. [1] https://www.w3.org/Payments/WG/ https://www.w3.org/Payments/WG/
user812 8y ago
I will probably start using or at least trying it again when they publish version 1. For now, it's just not remotely comparable to Firefox et al. when it comes to customization, control and stability. It's basically a chrome copy plus future abilities (for now). So Chrome is a better choice until now for me.
netgusto 8y ago
Yes! And now the dev tools can be docked to the edge of the webpage (they were floating in their own window before this update). For anyone (like me) wishing to have a default browser per use case (surf, work, dev, hangout, etc.), have a look at this project (dynamic default browser switch, based on URL): https://github.com/netgusto/bowser https://github.com/netgusto/bowser Disclaimer: It's a pet project of mine.
enitihas 8y ago
I have been using brave on android and really enjoy the experience. It is very similar to chrome and thus gives most of the advantages of chrome (opening browser after a long time feels very snappy, swipe to switch tabs). It also has convenient options to block ads and js placed very prominently at the url bar. It also has features like HTTPS everywhere and fingerprinting protection(haven't tried this one yet). Firefox on Android supports desktop extensions like uBlock origin, and I tried making it my default for some time, but brave is simply much more usable. The two shortcomings for Android firefox for me have been (a) No swipe to switch tabs, (b) Loading new pages is noticeable slower than Chrome/Brave.
- HappySweeney 8y ago
  What about power usage? One of the things that drove me from Chrome to Firefox on Android was the insane power draw from Chrome.
  - enitihas 8y ago
    Power consumed is high. Brave consistently shows up as the highest cpu using app. Is firefox better on battery? If so, I will give it another try, as that is a very worthwhile trade-off.
jakeogh 8y ago
I wanted to compile it myself a few months ago... gave up after about 15min of looking. I _know_ I missed some obvious repo/instructions somewhere.
- Yoric 8y ago
  Last year, on my pretty kick-ass laptop, Chromium used to take ~12 hours to build, so don't hold your breath :)
bassman9000 8y ago
I'm surprised no one mentioned Vivaldi yet. I was a strong advocate of Brave, till I tested the former. I don't think I'm coming back.
pharouk90 8y ago
Brave web experience is amazing, I turn off ads. I read everything in peace. The loading time is promising of course. Now, I set it to default browser in all my devices.
timwis 8y ago
I'm nervous about switching browsers because if I have to switch back then I have to deal with importing all my bookmarks back. Does anyone have a good way of syncing bookmarks between all my browsers? The only thing I've seen is a quasi bookmark service that uses bookmarklets.
victoray 8y ago
I love the Brave mobile.

92 points by joshschreuder 8y ago

Can someone outline the justification for the switch to Chromium and the difference between Chromium and Muon, which seems to be based on Chromium anyway?

stock_toaster 8y ago
I think Muon is/was a fork of Electron? So maybe they are just using Chromium more directly now?
quantummkv 8y ago
Muon was a fork of electron, which included many patches for features required for a variety of desktop apps. The amount of packages ensures that it takes time to upgrade to new chromium releases (regression testing with the patches). Since brave is just a browser, it does not need all of those extra patches and features. So it is simpler and easier to just roll with chromium directly.
- drb91 8y ago
  Why was the fork necessary? Is the electron project hostile to changes?
  - quantummkv 8y ago
    Nah. Electron does not prioritize chromium version updates over everything else. They generally do so at their own pace, instead focusing more on other features and bug fixing. It works fine for their intended userbase. For a browser that might be an issue due to exploits and vulnerabilities.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
eivarv 8y ago
I can't find the Github-issue atm, but I'm guessing it was motivated by security (there's been a bunch of RCE-exploits in Electron), technical debt, and performance (Muon was an Electron-fork, and Electron is more than just Chromium).

onyva 8y ago

I love the irony in “You are not a product“ from a commercial product (open source, I know) designed to monetize surfing (aka pay-to-surf), as if this is what the internet is about. I think we should resist such an effort and stick with projects (not companies) that want to keep the internet as it was meant to be, ie Mozilla Firefox. No problem with monetization but I want a browser that puts me first, not a middleman that tries to profit from the trend to subvert the open culture of the internet, pretending they put my privacy first. It’s an excuse, not the main purpose of this browser.

akerro 8y ago
Because Mozilla is totally not a corporation. Brave makes usage of BAT and their ads optional and disabled by default.
- onyva 8y ago
  We've discussed this Mozilla is a "corporation" many times before, here and elsewhere. https://blog.mozilla.org/press/2005/08/mozilla-foundation-forms-new-organization-to-further-the-creation-of-free-open-source-internet-software-including-the-award-winning-mozilla-firefox-browser/ https://blog.mozilla.org/press/2005/08/mozilla-foundation-fo...
  - akerro 8y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation
    - ngokevin 8y ago
      I agree Mozilla is a corporation, despite its marketing and brand efforts, everything else is very corporate. It started out as a foundation with corporation-as-necessity, but no longer the case. They are able to distance themselves from ad money through Google, but it's the same. If they could make more profit and growth, they would choose to do so. A small example has twice been ads in the browser (now using local targeting), and if it was 100% a non-profit foundation goodie-goodie, would probably go with a default search engine like Duck Duck Go, but survival as a corporation prohibits otherwise. And I think that's totally okay, but I don't think we can pretend they aren't a corporation.

gattilorenz 8y ago

The "download for Android" button leads to the Apple Store. That was... interesting. https://brave.com/download/ https://brave.com/download/

ghayes 8y ago
The link for Android leads here: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.brave.browser&hl=en https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.brave.brow... Maybe it was a rendering issue?

hackathonguy 8y ago

Anyone using Brave? Would love to hear your impressions.

newscracker 8y ago
I’ve used it somewhat occasionally, and to me it seemed like Chrome as far as memory usage and sluggishness with multiple tabs and windows are concerned. But I like the fact that it comes with a built-in ad blocker, and avoids contacting Google (unlike Chrome). This announcement says it should perform better, and that’s something I’d like to try out and see. If you were frustrated by the recent “signing in” changes and the backtracking of that in Chrome, you should try Firefox and Brave.
buro9 8y ago
It's my default Android browser because you can set it to block scripts and adverts by default and yet the option to trivially allow scripts in a site is a single click away. It's so good at this I've uninstalled multiple apps (especially news and weather ones) and have started saving links to web pages instead and the whole experience is better (because blocking adverts and tracking in apps is a real pain).
- therealmarv 8y ago
  can you use it also as webview browser?
  - buro9 8y ago
    I do not believe that you can do that, but I've largely stopped using apps that contain adverts so to me this is not an angle I worry about so much (plus I use NetGuard so in app tracking I was already limiting).
maxencecornet 8y ago
It's my default browser, apart from a few quircks, I love the speed of it, especially on my older android phone I still switch to chrome when I'm working, because the developer tools are better in chrome (debugger, integration of lighthouse ect..)

petre 8y ago

I've used the mobile version for a while, but switched back to Opera after Google Ads showed up on a web page in a popover, despite having been blocked. It was already Chromium-based. Opera doesn't have the flip-switch menu Brave has to switch off certain features, including Javascript (very helpful for disabling most those annoying cookie and GDPR consent popovers) but their ad blocker is quite effective.

newscracker 8y ago

I didn’t understand what this meant until I dug up more information, especially since I thought Brave was already based on Chromium. Turns out that so far only the browser engine was Chromium based. Now its user interface is also transitioning from an in-house open source framework called Muon [1] to Chromium. This is what an announcement more than six months ago (from March 2018) [2] says: > Brave for Windows, macOS, and Linux currently use the Chromium rendering engine, but (unlike Brave for Android) it uses a custom HTML and JavaScript user interface. Technical readers will know that we call the runtime for this user interface Muon, which is a more secure fork of Electron, and which therefore combines Chromium and Node.js to enable applications built using JavaScript and HTML user interfaces and Node modules for the application logic. After getting rid of Chrome recently (not that I was using it much before), I’ve been using Firefox (my favorite browser), Safari and sometimes Brave. [1]: https://github.com/brave/muon https://github.com/brave/muon [2]: https://brave.com/development-plans-for-upcoming-release/ https://brave.com/development-plans-for-upcoming-release/

debaserab2 8y ago
> Technical readers will know that we call the runtime for this user interface Muon, which is a more secure fork of Electron Ew...

nextlevelwizard 8y ago

So what is the benefit over just using Chromium?

SmellyGeekBoy 8y ago
You can look at Brave ads instead of other ads!
drb91 8y ago
You can pay content providers with cash via Brave rather than ad views.
- tikwidd 8y ago
  Why do we need a whole new browser for this?
  - mtgx 8y ago
    Ideally it would be a completely interoperable system/protocol - so nothing like say Paypal or Google Contributor that competitors would resist adopting anyways. Plus, the adoption from a single provider for payment services wouldn't be nearly as high as a protocol + hundreds of providers.
  - Yoric 8y ago
    We don't, but getting there on the web at scale is a long battle. The W3C has been working on WebPayments [1] for several years. Once it lands on most browsers, it should enable websites to offer a choice between ads and micropayments. But there are lots of problems to solve first, ranging from finding the right APIs and UXs to make sure that users won't end up paying by accident, or that children won't pay with their parent's browser without their agreement, to the fact that people don't use the same mechanisms for paying al over the world, to security issues, etc. [1] https://www.w3.org/Payments/WG/ https://www.w3.org/Payments/WG/

user812 8y ago

I will probably start using or at least trying it again when they publish version 1. For now, it's just not remotely comparable to Firefox et al. when it comes to customization, control and stability. It's basically a chrome copy plus future abilities (for now). So Chrome is a better choice until now for me.

netgusto 8y ago

Yes! And now the dev tools can be docked to the edge of the webpage (they were floating in their own window before this update). For anyone (like me) wishing to have a default browser per use case (surf, work, dev, hangout, etc.), have a look at this project (dynamic default browser switch, based on URL): https://github.com/netgusto/bowser https://github.com/netgusto/bowser Disclaimer: It's a pet project of mine.

enitihas 8y ago

I have been using brave on android and really enjoy the experience. It is very similar to chrome and thus gives most of the advantages of chrome (opening browser after a long time feels very snappy, swipe to switch tabs). It also has convenient options to block ads and js placed very prominently at the url bar. It also has features like HTTPS everywhere and fingerprinting protection(haven't tried this one yet). Firefox on Android supports desktop extensions like uBlock origin, and I tried making it my default for some time, but brave is simply much more usable. The two shortcomings for Android firefox for me have been (a) No swipe to switch tabs, (b) Loading new pages is noticeable slower than Chrome/Brave.

HappySweeney 8y ago
What about power usage? One of the things that drove me from Chrome to Firefox on Android was the insane power draw from Chrome.
- enitihas 8y ago
  Power consumed is high. Brave consistently shows up as the highest cpu using app. Is firefox better on battery? If so, I will give it another try, as that is a very worthwhile trade-off.

jakeogh 8y ago

I wanted to compile it myself a few months ago... gave up after about 15min of looking. I _know_ I missed some obvious repo/instructions somewhere.

Yoric 8y ago
Last year, on my pretty kick-ass laptop, Chromium used to take ~12 hours to build, so don't hold your breath :)

bassman9000 8y ago

I'm surprised no one mentioned Vivaldi yet. I was a strong advocate of Brave, till I tested the former. I don't think I'm coming back.

pharouk90 8y ago

Brave web experience is amazing, I turn off ads. I read everything in peace. The loading time is promising of course. Now, I set it to default browser in all my devices.

timwis 8y ago

I'm nervous about switching browsers because if I have to switch back then I have to deal with importing all my bookmarks back. Does anyone have a good way of syncing bookmarks between all my browsers? The only thing I've seen is a quasi bookmark service that uses bookmarklets.

victoray 8y ago

I love the Brave mobile.