3 ms·

> Everything else is a Chrome derivative What about the Firefox forks? They aren't as popular as Chrome's (by nature of Firefox not being as popular as Chrome)

> Everything else is a Chrome derivative What about the Firefox forks? They aren't as popular as Chrome's (by nature of Firefox not being as popular as Chrome), but they're out there; Waterfox, Librewolf, and Mercury come to mind.

lolinder 2y ago
Fair. I was thinking only of the big players. Waterfox was sold 5 years ago to an ad company [0], and the developer's response on that thread was... not ideal. From what I understand they separated from them a few years later, but the developer's response to complaints about the sale ("I’ve never tried to have it as a privacy product specifically ... all the outrage towards me for that has been, at least towards me, a little unfair.") don't lead to a lot of confidence even under a new business model. And this is suggestive of the problem I see in general with the smaller players: their bus factor is too small and the number of people who have to be involved in a bad decision is too low. Switching to a small fork like these ones doesn't mean I can stop worrying about what my browser might do, it just changes the types of things I have to worry about. I still need layers of protection just like I do with Firefox or Chrome. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22338321 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22338321
- verandaguy 2y ago
  That's a good point, I hadn't known about the Waterfox drama. I do still use Firefox, but I'd been eyeing Mercury, myself. Anyway -- your other point about bus factors is also fair, but I think it's made a bit moot by the big players (evidently, Mozilla included) making bad decisions in spite of (or because of?) their size. Perhaps the future involves people being more lean about which browsers they're tied to, and making the jump more often. Guess we'll see.
  - lolinder 2y ago
    > it's made a bit moot by the big players (evidently, Mozilla included) making bad decisions in spite of (or because of?) their size. True—I'm more counting on big players moving slowly and with lots of eyes on them. Mozilla's descent has been one that I've been following for years now, and I don't expect to be surprised by a sudden rug pull the way that a smaller player can do.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- dhosek 2y ago
  Safari isn’t a Chrome fork, although they do have the same roots. Other than my work machine where I use Chrome because it’s the company standard and I find that not going of the main path is usually past, I use Safari for everything and I find it’s generally faster and less of a battery hog.
  - lolinder 2y ago
    I'm not on MacOS or iPhone, Safari isn't an option.

lolinder 2y ago

Fair. I was thinking only of the big players. Waterfox was sold 5 years ago to an ad company [0], and the developer's response on that thread was... not ideal. From what I understand they separated from them a few years later, but the developer's response to complaints about the sale ("I’ve never tried to have it as a privacy product specifically ... all the outrage towards me for that has been, at least towards me, a little unfair.") don't lead to a lot of confidence even under a new business model. And this is suggestive of the problem I see in general with the smaller players: their bus factor is too small and the number of people who have to be involved in a bad decision is too low. Switching to a small fork like these ones doesn't mean I can stop worrying about what my browser might do, it just changes the types of things I have to worry about. I still need layers of protection just like I do with Firefox or Chrome. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22338321 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22338321

verandaguy 2y ago
That's a good point, I hadn't known about the Waterfox drama. I do still use Firefox, but I'd been eyeing Mercury, myself. Anyway -- your other point about bus factors is also fair, but I think it's made a bit moot by the big players (evidently, Mozilla included) making bad decisions in spite of (or because of?) their size. Perhaps the future involves people being more lean about which browsers they're tied to, and making the jump more often. Guess we'll see.
- lolinder 2y ago
  > it's made a bit moot by the big players (evidently, Mozilla included) making bad decisions in spite of (or because of?) their size. True—I'm more counting on big players moving slowly and with lots of eyes on them. Mozilla's descent has been one that I've been following for years now, and I don't expect to be surprised by a sudden rug pull the way that a smaller player can do.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
dhosek 2y ago
Safari isn’t a Chrome fork, although they do have the same roots. Other than my work machine where I use Chrome because it’s the company standard and I find that not going of the main path is usually past, I use Safari for everything and I find it’s generally faster and less of a battery hog.
- lolinder 2y ago
  I'm not on MacOS or iPhone, Safari isn't an option.