3 ms·
Well, no one (sane) has any illusions left about chrome. But FF was supposed to remain the shiny counterexample (despite acting also shady since years).
by lukan 2y ago
Well, no one (sane) has any illusions left about chrome.
But FF was supposed to remain the shiny counterexample (despite acting also shady since years).
- sebazzz 2y agoIt is still the least worse option. These posts like OP is just throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
- cassianoleal 2y agoOP's premise is that "Firefox is gone" and "Chrome is the only option". That suggests Chrome is better than current Firefox. Personally, even though my trust in Firefox (and especially Mozilla) has been eroding rapidly in recent years, it's still so much greater than what I have for Google and Chrome that it's not even a choice. Therefore, I agree with GP that this rhetoric is exhausting. Bringing up the issues with FF and Mozilla is important and deserves attention. This kind of misleading FUD is not and does not.
- beehivebasic 2y ago> OP's premise is that "Firefox is gone" and "Chrome is the only option". That suggests Chrome is better than current Firefox. To be fair, OP asked if "Chrome-ish" is the only option, i.e. Chromium-based browsers - not Chrome itself. Even so, I don't think the implication is that Chromium is better than Firefox, but that without Firefox only Chromium-based browsers remain. "If I don't want to use Firefox, is it really only Chrome-clones available?"
- torstenvl 2y agoChrome is better than current Firefox. Chrome does not require users to grant Google a license to the information they enter online.