Using Gecko (or Webkit) would have added extra risk for Brave. When you're starting a company, especially a browser company that's going to take on Google at so

Using Gecko (or Webkit) would have added extra risk for Brave. When you're starting a company, especially a browser company that's going to take on Google at some level, you need to minimize all unnecessary risks. I don't blame Brendan for doing that. Plus, when Brendan started Brave, Firefox was further behind in performance and architecture than it is now. Plus, Brendan's departure from Mozilla was somewhat messy and I don't blame him for not wanting to keep a Mozilla dependency. > Having 2+ splits web developers in what they choose to support. Having one engine, Chromium, would mean Google gets a completely free hand to make almost all decisions about how the Web works. Also, Web sites would have no chance of noticing they depend on Chromium bugs --- very bad for the future of the Web (and for Chromium). Now, Webkit is also a very viable engine. The problem with relying on Apple is that they have a powerful disincentive to let the Web platform be a viable competitor to iOS. This is why Mozilla matters.