And… not many people use Opera. And, why should I trust a closed source browser over something that is fully open source? Your arguments still make no sense, because features are replaceable in better ways, and features are not aiding privacy or security or (partial) anonymity of people.
You do not have to trust anything, it is simply absurd that at this point you trust a product when it says FOSS, resulting in the concept of FOSS having nothing to do with this concept, to remember that to trust a product other factors are necessary.
As I said before, also the APIs and other apps to track the user of big companies are FOSS and included in many other FOSS to earn money.
Vivaldi is freeware proprietary, but only because the UI scripts are, which are 100% auditable and modifiable by the user, which is not possible in Chrome, EDGE and Opera, there the Chromium layer is not auditable at all and completely closed source, this is the difference.
Firefox is a good browser and FOSS, but it passes user data to Alphabet and NEST, i.e. Google, for funding. In its development the company is oriented more to its own interests than to those of the users, which is why many abandon Firefox, even 2 distros have done so, now using Vivaldi as the default browser (Manjaro and FerenOS) other distros also play with this possibility and most already have Vivaldi in their repositories and many users have already done so, in the Vivaldi community more than half of users use Linux, because they know that Vivaldi does not traffic with their data, it is even active in campaigns against these practices .
They appreciate that when a bug appears, that the devs even work on Sundays to offer an update that fixes it.
This is what deserves trust, that some companies like Renault and PoleStar even have, to use it as the preferred browser for their products.
It is more absurd that you have to trust closed source over FOSS, when said FOSS product has just about similarly as many eyes on it as Linux kernel. And then you keep justifying Vivaldi due to replaceable bloat features and then claim it is as good for privacy, when it clearly is not.
You used those random copypasta tech blogs as example, now you use this. Renault and PoleStar are not bastions of privacy, or do privacy advocacy. They are car making corporations for users that use iPhones with Snapchat and Instagram, not people who want privacy on the levels of Firefox on a debloated Android. They use things like Android Auto and Apple CarPlay, and have builtin GPS into cars and have nothing to do with privacy.
Before:
Above all, not to sell your data to third parties to earn money. as Firefox/Mozilla (FOSS) does (Alphabet.Inc and NEST, advertising companies of Google)
Now:
Firefox is a good browser and FOSS, but it passes user data to Alphabet and NEST, i.e. Google, for funding.
I notice you lied about this before, and are doing it again now. What is your source for this claim, which is openly known to be false?
Why do I see nothing here, then? And this does not answer the question, if Mozilla Firefox, the browser, is siphoning data off to Alphabet (Google) and NEST, which has been your implication throughout.
Above all, not to sell your data to third parties to earn money. as Firefox/Mozilla (FOSS) does (Alphabet.Inc and NEST, advertising companies of Google)
Firefox is a good browser and FOSS, but it passes user data to Alphabet and NEST, i.e. Google, for funding.
And… not many people use Opera. And, why should I trust a closed source browser over something that is fully open source? Your arguments still make no sense, because features are replaceable in better ways, and features are not aiding privacy or security or (partial) anonymity of people.
You do not have to trust anything, it is simply absurd that at this point you trust a product when it says FOSS, resulting in the concept of FOSS having nothing to do with this concept, to remember that to trust a product other factors are necessary. As I said before, also the APIs and other apps to track the user of big companies are FOSS and included in many other FOSS to earn money.
Vivaldi is freeware proprietary, but only because the UI scripts are, which are 100% auditable and modifiable by the user, which is not possible in Chrome, EDGE and Opera, there the Chromium layer is not auditable at all and completely closed source, this is the difference. Firefox is a good browser and FOSS, but it passes user data to Alphabet and NEST, i.e. Google, for funding. In its development the company is oriented more to its own interests than to those of the users, which is why many abandon Firefox, even 2 distros have done so, now using Vivaldi as the default browser (Manjaro and FerenOS) other distros also play with this possibility and most already have Vivaldi in their repositories and many users have already done so, in the Vivaldi community more than half of users use Linux, because they know that Vivaldi does not traffic with their data, it is even active in campaigns against these practices .
They appreciate that when a bug appears, that the devs even work on Sundays to offer an update that fixes it. This is what deserves trust, that some companies like Renault and PoleStar even have, to use it as the preferred browser for their products.
It is more absurd that you have to trust closed source over FOSS, when said FOSS product has just about similarly as many eyes on it as Linux kernel. And then you keep justifying Vivaldi due to replaceable bloat features and then claim it is as good for privacy, when it clearly is not.
You used those random copypasta tech blogs as example, now you use this. Renault and PoleStar are not bastions of privacy, or do privacy advocacy. They are car making corporations for users that use iPhones with Snapchat and Instagram, not people who want privacy on the levels of Firefox on a debloated Android. They use things like Android Auto and Apple CarPlay, and have builtin GPS into cars and have nothing to do with privacy.
I notice you lied about this before, and are doing it again now. What is your source for this claim, which is openly known to be false?
Why do I see nothing here, then? And this does not answer the question, if Mozilla Firefox, the browser, is siphoning data off to Alphabet (Google) and NEST, which has been your implication throughout.