6 ms·

I don't get the extensions part. All of them apart from the containers (that's a browser or more like engine specific behavior) are available for Chrome so they

I don't get the extensions part. All of them apart from the containers (that's a browser or more like engine specific behavior) are available for Chrome so they are not FF-only. Most of them are "over the top" if you start with uBlock Origin too. Like you don't need multiple extensions to do the same thing > most of the time that leads to broken sites. uBlock Origin on its own is incredibly powerful. Last but not least HTTPS Everywhere is also obsolete because you can force any browsers now to open sites with HTTPS only, you don't need it that anymore. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/09/https-actually-everywhere https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/09/https-actually-everywh... And no offense if TechRadar is writing articles like this... they should open their own site without any of the extensions and watch the ads, popups, autoplay videos and such. Maybe they will notice the problem doesn't start with the browser of your choice.

MegaDeKay 4y ago
The article specifically talks "of Google breaking those AdBlock extensions in 2023 with a massive update, which is rather terrifying, to say the least." What is referenced here is Manifest V3. Gorhill, uBlock Origin developer, agrees that this will significantly limit uBlock Origin on Chrome. https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/issues/338#issuecomment-456134855 https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/issues/338#iss...
- thrown1aways 4y ago
  >The article specifically talks of Google breaking those AdBlock extensions I bet there will be a Chromium for without that + Brave is already working on it. Power of open source I guess?
  - GekkePrutser 4y ago
    Every feature removed by Google will have to be maintained by the open source community instead. That's going to be a workload that I'm not sure who is going to pick up. After all Chromium right now is maintained by Google. There's some forks like degoogled chromium but they are mainly focused on removing features, not rebuilding ones that have been deprecated. Brave is an option but I don't really like where they're heading with their crypto tokens.
    - tomComb 4y ago
      Oh, no, Microsoft, Brave, and all the other companies that repackage Chrome will have to actually contribute to the base (or a fork). /s
    - thegabez 4y ago
      The crypto aspect is opt-in
      - GekkePrutser 4y ago
        I know but it's a core integrated part of the product. If you don't care about that, firefox with uBO is really much better IMO.
      - swat535 4y ago
        Only for now, they will bait and switch soon enough. We have seen this happen too many times.
- GekkePrutser 4y ago
  Yeah you can bet that Google will do anything they can to stop adblockers once their FLoC replacement is online. After all, in their view they have solved the "privacy problem". Chrome is only going downhill from now. So is Edge, Microsoft has already at the stage where they don't prioritise user experience and appeal anymore and are priorising monetisation. Like with the "buy now and pay later" scams they're including. It's IE4 all over again, once they arrive at the desired marketshare the user is just a dumb sheep to them again. Unfortunately Mozilla is far from perfect, they're becoming too corporate and weaseling in monetisation schemes totally in conflict with their goals. But they're still a world better.
  - Hnrobert42 4y ago
    Can you elaborate on the Mozilla corporate weasel part? As far as I can tell, they are just a) poorly managed and b) desperately trying to diversify revenue away from search prioritization contracts.
    - GekkePrutser 4y ago
      True but they are looking in all the wrong places. Including pocket "featured headlines", vpn services that are just a resell, just lowhanging fruit that does nothing but annoy the users that still care about them. Meanwhile they try to make the browser as mainstream friendly, not understanding that the mainstream has long given up on them and they only have the last remaining bastion of hardcore privacy users left. Whose user patterns they're not seeing because they focus too much on telemetry. I think since they became Mozilla Inc they started thinking like big tech and are slowly becoming just like it. But because their foundation origins the declining marketshare is not ringing their alarm bells like they, in a real company, would. If they really wanted to diversify and get me to pay for something, they have to do more than just resell mullvad. I'm a mullvad user but I much rather pay for that directly as it gives me a lot more features. I love mullvad but I want to use it in more than just a browser. What I'd want to see and would pay for: - A service like Apple's iCloud Private Relay that really makes browsing more anonymous (rather than a basic VPN which they offer now, that's too little too late). - Paid Sync storage (with full E2E so I have no reason to self-host) - An archiving service of webpages (also E2E). Because onenote sucks more and more Basically things other than 'quick wins' but that need some serious vision and development. Right now they're thinking way too much like a lazy CEO, doing a quick tie-in with another service hoping for some takeup or some cheap marketing benefit. If they want to diversify and get people to pay they really have to offer some real benefits that are a gap in the market. Those exist but they need some more work than just a quick joint marketing effort.
foepys 4y ago
uBlock Origin is already working better on Firefox than chrome since Google is crippling features. See "uBlock Origin works best on Firefox" in the official GitHub repo's wiki: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-best-on-Firefox https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...
t6jvcereio 4y ago
You're fixating on the details too much, but if you wanna fixate on details, you can't install unlock origin in chrome Android. The big picture however, is that Firefox works for you, chrome works for Google.
pessimizer 4y ago
They're also more frequently updated on Chrome, and smell less like malware. The Firefox addon directory is a hellhole. The only place where Chrome fails on this is on uBlock, but that's completely intentional because they're an ad company.

MegaDeKay 4y ago

The article specifically talks "of Google breaking those AdBlock extensions in 2023 with a massive update, which is rather terrifying, to say the least." What is referenced here is Manifest V3. Gorhill, uBlock Origin developer, agrees that this will significantly limit uBlock Origin on Chrome. https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/issues/338#issuecomment-456134855 https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/issues/338#iss...

thrown1aways 4y ago
>The article specifically talks of Google breaking those AdBlock extensions I bet there will be a Chromium for without that + Brave is already working on it. Power of open source I guess?
- GekkePrutser 4y ago
  Every feature removed by Google will have to be maintained by the open source community instead. That's going to be a workload that I'm not sure who is going to pick up. After all Chromium right now is maintained by Google. There's some forks like degoogled chromium but they are mainly focused on removing features, not rebuilding ones that have been deprecated. Brave is an option but I don't really like where they're heading with their crypto tokens.
  - tomComb 4y ago
    Oh, no, Microsoft, Brave, and all the other companies that repackage Chrome will have to actually contribute to the base (or a fork). /s
  - thegabez 4y ago
    The crypto aspect is opt-in
    - GekkePrutser 4y ago
      I know but it's a core integrated part of the product. If you don't care about that, firefox with uBO is really much better IMO.
    - swat535 4y ago
      Only for now, they will bait and switch soon enough. We have seen this happen too many times.
GekkePrutser 4y ago
Yeah you can bet that Google will do anything they can to stop adblockers once their FLoC replacement is online. After all, in their view they have solved the "privacy problem". Chrome is only going downhill from now. So is Edge, Microsoft has already at the stage where they don't prioritise user experience and appeal anymore and are priorising monetisation. Like with the "buy now and pay later" scams they're including. It's IE4 all over again, once they arrive at the desired marketshare the user is just a dumb sheep to them again. Unfortunately Mozilla is far from perfect, they're becoming too corporate and weaseling in monetisation schemes totally in conflict with their goals. But they're still a world better.
- Hnrobert42 4y ago
  Can you elaborate on the Mozilla corporate weasel part? As far as I can tell, they are just a) poorly managed and b) desperately trying to diversify revenue away from search prioritization contracts.
  - GekkePrutser 4y ago
    True but they are looking in all the wrong places. Including pocket "featured headlines", vpn services that are just a resell, just lowhanging fruit that does nothing but annoy the users that still care about them. Meanwhile they try to make the browser as mainstream friendly, not understanding that the mainstream has long given up on them and they only have the last remaining bastion of hardcore privacy users left. Whose user patterns they're not seeing because they focus too much on telemetry. I think since they became Mozilla Inc they started thinking like big tech and are slowly becoming just like it. But because their foundation origins the declining marketshare is not ringing their alarm bells like they, in a real company, would. If they really wanted to diversify and get me to pay for something, they have to do more than just resell mullvad. I'm a mullvad user but I much rather pay for that directly as it gives me a lot more features. I love mullvad but I want to use it in more than just a browser. What I'd want to see and would pay for: - A service like Apple's iCloud Private Relay that really makes browsing more anonymous (rather than a basic VPN which they offer now, that's too little too late). - Paid Sync storage (with full E2E so I have no reason to self-host) - An archiving service of webpages (also E2E). Because onenote sucks more and more Basically things other than 'quick wins' but that need some serious vision and development. Right now they're thinking way too much like a lazy CEO, doing a quick tie-in with another service hoping for some takeup or some cheap marketing benefit. If they want to diversify and get people to pay they really have to offer some real benefits that are a gap in the market. Those exist but they need some more work than just a quick joint marketing effort.

foepys 4y ago

uBlock Origin is already working better on Firefox than chrome since Google is crippling features. See "uBlock Origin works best on Firefox" in the official GitHub repo's wiki: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-best-on-Firefox https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...

t6jvcereio 4y ago

You're fixating on the details too much, but if you wanna fixate on details, you can't install unlock origin in chrome Android. The big picture however, is that Firefox works for you, chrome works for Google.

pessimizer 4y ago

They're also more frequently updated on Chrome, and smell less like malware. The Firefox addon directory is a hellhole. The only place where Chrome fails on this is on uBlock, but that's completely intentional because they're an ad company.