3 ms·
Why not use a Firefox fork like Waterfox? That fixes a number of the complaints people have with Firefox while not pushing us towards a browser engine monopoly
by ancarda 6y ago
Why not use a Firefox fork like Waterfox? That fixes a number of the complaints people have with Firefox while not pushing us towards a browser engine monopoly - which you do by using a Chromium based browser.
Besides, the Basic Attention Token crap in Brave is kinda shady.
- eingaeKaiy8ujie 6y agoWhat's wrong with Firefox?
- ancarda 6y agoNothing, so long as you're okay with telemetry, bundled junk like pocket, and the removal of the compact UI (see the thread from yesterday - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26464533 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26464533). Firefox's internals are great -- it's never been faster or as stable, and for that we made real sacrifices like losing XUL extensions but increasingly I don't understand Mozilla's decision making. EDIT: I understand many of the things I'm talking about can be fixed with about:config. I had a list of over 30 flags in my notes and it was becoming untenable to patch all my devices whenever a feature I needed was changed or removed. Whereas with Waterfox, I so far have only one about:config change: dom.security.https_only_mode = true
- hackerfromthefu 6y ago>> I don't understand Mozilla's decision making. Yeah lots of (usually subtle-ish) incongruous actions. Ignore the public messaging and work backwards from what they actually do to understand their real motivations. I've written some other comments with my analysis on it if you're interests you can check my comment history.
- sarcasmatwork 6y agoI have not heard about Waterfox, will give it a try. I've only been using Brave for the last ~2months.
- fsflover 6y ago> Waterfox Or IceCat. Or, even better, original Firefox.