Mozilla is in bed with Google. I use brave because:
* it has reasonable way of funding, crypto may suck, but it is believable they will not sell my data
* anonymous bookmark sync with multiple profiles. With Chrome and Firefox I have to sign up for each sync.
* Chrome based debug tools
* It is usable without any plugins. In some environments I do not want to install some questionable plugins, that may change ownership anytime! (It is already named "Ublock Origin", ownership already changed )
* Proprietary Video Codecs support out of the box on Linux. Some distros do not have it, and I do not want to enable community repos.
I honestly assume that 80% of what I've seen pushing Brave against all basic common sense is astroturfing.
Just use Firefox! Why would anyone ever choose Brave when it is proprietary and better free alternatives exist? This company's track record of disrespecting their users and sketchy monetization is so blatant, and its creator is a homophobic tool who is responsible for all of us writing Javascript instead of Scheme.
I don’t think Mozilla should have Brave per se, but it shows some of the work they could have done.
If they had to literally skin chrome to do then I guess they could. But they should be capable of so much more.
Specially Brave is faster to launch and uses less resources than Firefox and had privacy and ad blocking features turned on by default. I particularly like the little bug that shows you how much bloat it’s blocked.
This being HN, I'm really surprised no one has mentioned Brave. Brave is what Firefox was a few years ago (and what firefox claims to be but isn't) in terms of privacy and comes pre-loaded with an ad-blocker that uses the same list as ublock. It's also faster and less of a memory hog. I switched from firefox as main driver and haven't looked back. It is chromium based but I don't see this as a drawback. But this is 2023 and using a single browser is an artificial limitation (and makes no sense if you're a web developer) so I don't know why people make it sound like it has to be one or the other. It's not exactly like choosing an IDE. I pretty much use every browser except Edge.
You realize Firefox only exists because it serves Google's interests right?
And while Brave might be based on Chromium, it is distinct, and has a native adblocker that is compatible with the same lists as ublock origin. So I would go with Brave
I never really understood brave. It's basically chromium with some google tracking removed and with some inbuilt "extension".
You get the same with firefox plus ublock origin, while supporting a more open web by not using the monopolistic chrome engine.
Also, I doubt brave could fork the project for a long period after the adblocking becomes impossible with chromium
Brave has some "blockchain" based features, to appeal to those who are drawn to that hype. They make money by selling ads, either for crypto-related companies or else using a crypto-based mechanism.
Absolutely all of this is either opt-in, or else trivial to opt-out from with a few clicks.
Mozilla is an entity that essentially exists at the whim of Google. Funded by Google to sit in the corner and be semi-relevant at best, so that Google can stave off anti-trust attacks on Chromium. It earns a half-billion dollars per year in revenue, and essentially pisses away most of that on MBA nonsense that has nothing to do with maintaining a web browser.
You don't have to care about or pay attention to any of that to use Firefox.
Neither of these two organizations are indisputably "perfect". If you are the type of person for whom your web browser choice is a component of your personal "identity", then attaching either of these logos to your own personal brand can be problematic.
However, wrapping up your personal brand identity in web browser selection is ridiculous. All of the above is essentially irrelevant nonsense. Meanwhile, back in the land of objective reality... the world has standardized on Chromium for better or worse, and so Brave has a bigger plugin ecosystem and far fewer if any compatibility issues with any website.
Brave is also based on Chromium, which defeats the entire purpose of the suggestion. Using Brave over Firefox only gives Google more power to dictate web standards.
* it has reasonable way of funding, crypto may suck, but it is believable they will not sell my data
* anonymous bookmark sync with multiple profiles. With Chrome and Firefox I have to sign up for each sync.
* Chrome based debug tools
* It is usable without any plugins. In some environments I do not want to install some questionable plugins, that may change ownership anytime! (It is already named "Ublock Origin", ownership already changed )
* Proprietary Video Codecs support out of the box on Linux. Some distros do not have it, and I do not want to enable community repos.
reply