3 ms·

I don't understand why you think this means that Google can easily kill all Chrome clones in one funny day.

dzhiurgis 7y ago
Blacklist their user agents/fingerprints from all Google services (usually by citing some security concern). Edit: sure, there's perhaps 1% of alt-browser users who actively avoid all Google's services, but rest actually depend on them...
- matthewmacleod 7y ago
  This could happen with literally any browser and has absolutely no relation to whether or not they are based on the chromium source.
simias 7y ago
They definitely can't reasonably do that but in the long run I don't think Brave has the resources to maintain a hard fork from Chromium. That's the main reason I don't really get the Brave hype when Firefox does the job just fine and is actually a fully independent codebase instead of a relatively shallow customization of Chromium. The only argument that keeps coming up is that Brave has a built-in adblocker but it's not like installing ublock origin is very challenging in Firefox (and on top of that your extensions are automatically synchronized if you use the Sync feature) and the relatively blurry monetization scheme of Brave makes me think that in the long run this built-in ad-blocker might prove a liability more than a strength. I'll take my ad-blocking independent, third-party and non-profit, thank you.
- basch 7y ago
  Brave, Opera, Vivaldi, Epic, Blisk, (and Edge?) can pool development resources. I dont think all the forks would have as much problem as people believe they would. A ton of webkit users switched to blink nearly overnight. I think the bigger issue is chrome implementing an new web feature that blink-fork2 and firefox dont agree with, that web devs start implementing anyway. Google controls web development more than they control browser development. Theres also the WideVine argument, but for me personally I dont see why i need my primary browser to also play netflix. Its not that hard to open a separate netflix app/browser. The amount of drm encapsulated video I watch in my browser is minimal to none.

Blacklist their user agents/fingerprints from all Google services (usually by citing some security concern). Edit: sure, there's perhaps 1% of alt-browser users who actively avoid all Google's services, but rest actually depend on them...

matthewmacleod 7y ago
This could happen with literally any browser and has absolutely no relation to whether or not they are based on the chromium source.

simias 7y ago

They definitely can't reasonably do that but in the long run I don't think Brave has the resources to maintain a hard fork from Chromium. That's the main reason I don't really get the Brave hype when Firefox does the job just fine and is actually a fully independent codebase instead of a relatively shallow customization of Chromium. The only argument that keeps coming up is that Brave has a built-in adblocker but it's not like installing ublock origin is very challenging in Firefox (and on top of that your extensions are automatically synchronized if you use the Sync feature) and the relatively blurry monetization scheme of Brave makes me think that in the long run this built-in ad-blocker might prove a liability more than a strength. I'll take my ad-blocking independent, third-party and non-profit, thank you.

basch 7y ago
Brave, Opera, Vivaldi, Epic, Blisk, (and Edge?) can pool development resources. I dont think all the forks would have as much problem as people believe they would. A ton of webkit users switched to blink nearly overnight. I think the bigger issue is chrome implementing an new web feature that blink-fork2 and firefox dont agree with, that web devs start implementing anyway. Google controls web development more than they control browser development. Theres also the WideVine argument, but for me personally I dont see why i need my primary browser to also play netflix. Its not that hard to open a separate netflix app/browser. The amount of drm encapsulated video I watch in my browser is minimal to none.