False. EDGE, Opera, Chrome, and also Firefox make money with surveillance advertising (yes, also Firefox/ Mozilla is sponsored by Google, selling data to Alphabet.Inc and Nest, apart using googleanalytics), Vivaldi don’t, it use sponsor links and search engines which give a comision if you use them, but you can also delete these if you like, also the desactivate the Chromium Google APIs, degoogle Vivaldi, simply in the privacy settings, if you want, Vivaldi is as private as the user wan’t it to be.
Brave make money redirecting searches to afiliate sponsors, among them Facebook. It is a cryptominer, apart have ads which you can’t delete.
Vivaldi is the only browser company, active in campaigns against the surveillance advertising, the compay us a Icelandic cooperative, own by it’s employees. Yes, it isn’t full OpenSource (5% of the source related to the UI), but full auditable and moddeable by the user for private use, they even show you how..
It’s not that simple, you can offer an OpenSource browser, but this in a browser that is almost an onlineOS, rather than just a simple browser like others, is somewhat more complicated. Apart from this Closed Source thing, it is not quite correct, only a small part of the script is proprietary soft but completely auditable and accessible and even modifiable for the user for personal use.
There has been an internal debate for quite some time on this point, to make Vivaldi OpenSource entirely, but this, at least for the moment, is not that desirable. If I did it now, Chrome and EDGE would not take a day to use these scripts, which would be the end of Vivaldi and others.
Google and MS already in the past tried to block Vivaldi from the market as an uncomfortable competitor, which led the team to decide, against their own interests and to avoid problems for the user, to remove Vivaldi from it’s UA string, which is why now it just shows up as Chrome. With this, the problems of being able to access pages that previously blocked it with a Pop Up were suddenly removed, claiming that Vivaldi was not compatible, which naturally was a lie and was based only on the name Vivaldi in the UA.
This is what happens in the world of browsers and global players Google, Microsoft who want to dominate the market and only allow others who are subordinate and let them track the user.
Why do you think there are already 2 Linux distros that have replaced Firefox and adopted Vivaldi as the default browser (Manjaro and FerenOS)? In others it is also already debated.
OpenSource is important and the best manner to develop new products, but this in a market with nearly 100 browsers, forks of only three diferent engines, some exotics apart, and other 70 discontinued or abandoned, make not so much sense, there prevail other values. Thrustworthy, security and privacy isn’t sinonym of OpenSource, the advantage of OpenSource is pure tecnically, no ther. Remember, all Apis from Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon and other big companies are OpenSource, Android is OpenSource, Kindle FireOS is OpenSource (a fork of Android), also a lot of other FOSS include this APIs. GitHub is paid proprietary of Microsoft, the biggest catalogue of OpenSource projects is from Google (Google Code) As user don’t trust who say FOSS = good, Proprietary soft = crap, because it isn’t so easy. For the normal user only import how the companie treats the user, the product do what the user want, it has a good support and a communit to help, all with a good privacy and security. All other maybe interesting for developers, who can read the source or modify it for own use, they can use the Chromium script y some more, which is OpenSource for own projects, or all the code for modding Vivaldi for the own use. Something what you can’t do with Chrome or Edge or the now Chinese Opera.
https://vivaldi.com/source/
I am clear that you are only asking without bad intentions and that is why I have answered you
Yes, there is 5% of the code that is proprietary, although fully auditable and even modifiable by the user, this is what differentiates Vivaldi from other closed source apps, where the proprietary part is completely closed and not accessible.
That is, although proprietary soft, you can be 100% sure of what you are using.
That is, although proprietary soft, you can be 100% sure of what you are using
sorry but unless they provide access to the complete proprietary source code in a form where you can actually compile it yourself and run it instead of their binaries, you are mistaken.
You can access and even modify these 5% related to the UI. There are a interview with Tetzcher and Manjaro, where this is explaint very well.
https://youtu.be/ivDiL9XeDw0
even if it was “source visible” non-free software, I wouldn’t use it, but, their EULA also says you can’t “reverse engineer, decompile, disassemble or otherwise attempt to derive the source code for the Software”. so, yeah, no thanks. 🤷
Vilvaldi is no more trustworthy than Edge or Opera. It’s not open sourced. Just use Firefox, Ungoogled-Chromium, or even Brave.
False. EDGE, Opera, Chrome, and also Firefox make money with surveillance advertising (yes, also Firefox/ Mozilla is sponsored by Google, selling data to Alphabet.Inc and Nest, apart using googleanalytics), Vivaldi don’t, it use sponsor links and search engines which give a comision if you use them, but you can also delete these if you like, also the desactivate the Chromium Google APIs, degoogle Vivaldi, simply in the privacy settings, if you want, Vivaldi is as private as the user wan’t it to be.
Brave make money redirecting searches to afiliate sponsors, among them Facebook. It is a cryptominer, apart have ads which you can’t delete.
Vivaldi is the only browser company, active in campaigns against the surveillance advertising, the compay us a Icelandic cooperative, own by it’s employees. Yes, it isn’t full OpenSource (5% of the source related to the UI), but full auditable and moddeable by the user for private use, they even show you how..
deleted by creator
It’s not that simple, you can offer an OpenSource browser, but this in a browser that is almost an onlineOS, rather than just a simple browser like others, is somewhat more complicated. Apart from this Closed Source thing, it is not quite correct, only a small part of the script is proprietary soft but completely auditable and accessible and even modifiable for the user for personal use.
There has been an internal debate for quite some time on this point, to make Vivaldi OpenSource entirely, but this, at least for the moment, is not that desirable. If I did it now, Chrome and EDGE would not take a day to use these scripts, which would be the end of Vivaldi and others.
Google and MS already in the past tried to block Vivaldi from the market as an uncomfortable competitor, which led the team to decide, against their own interests and to avoid problems for the user, to remove Vivaldi from it’s UA string, which is why now it just shows up as Chrome. With this, the problems of being able to access pages that previously blocked it with a Pop Up were suddenly removed, claiming that Vivaldi was not compatible, which naturally was a lie and was based only on the name Vivaldi in the UA.
This is what happens in the world of browsers and global players Google, Microsoft who want to dominate the market and only allow others who are subordinate and let them track the user. Why do you think there are already 2 Linux distros that have replaced Firefox and adopted Vivaldi as the default browser (Manjaro and FerenOS)? In others it is also already debated.
OpenSource is important and the best manner to develop new products, but this in a market with nearly 100 browsers, forks of only three diferent engines, some exotics apart, and other 70 discontinued or abandoned, make not so much sense, there prevail other values. Thrustworthy, security and privacy isn’t sinonym of OpenSource, the advantage of OpenSource is pure tecnically, no ther. Remember, all Apis from Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon and other big companies are OpenSource, Android is OpenSource, Kindle FireOS is OpenSource (a fork of Android), also a lot of other FOSS include this APIs. GitHub is paid proprietary of Microsoft, the biggest catalogue of OpenSource projects is from Google (Google Code) As user don’t trust who say FOSS = good, Proprietary soft = crap, because it isn’t so easy. For the normal user only import how the companie treats the user, the product do what the user want, it has a good support and a communit to help, all with a good privacy and security. All other maybe interesting for developers, who can read the source or modify it for own use, they can use the Chromium script y some more, which is OpenSource for own projects, or all the code for modding Vivaldi for the own use. Something what you can’t do with Chrome or Edge or the now Chinese Opera. https://vivaldi.com/source/
deleted by creator
I am clear that you are only asking without bad intentions and that is why I have answered you Yes, there is 5% of the code that is proprietary, although fully auditable and even modifiable by the user, this is what differentiates Vivaldi from other closed source apps, where the proprietary part is completely closed and not accessible. That is, although proprietary soft, you can be 100% sure of what you are using.
deleted by creator
sorry but unless they provide access to the complete proprietary source code in a form where you can actually compile it yourself and run it instead of their binaries, you are mistaken.
You can access and even modify these 5% related to the UI. There are a interview with Tetzcher and Manjaro, where this is explaint very well. https://youtu.be/ivDiL9XeDw0
even if it was “source visible” non-free software, I wouldn’t use it, but, their EULA also says you can’t “reverse engineer, decompile, disassemble or otherwise attempt to derive the source code for the Software”. so, yeah, no thanks. 🤷