But that’s not the real issue. The issue is that any Chromium-based browser – open source or not – helps Google maintain hegemony over web standards. Even if makers of other Chromium-based browsers try to maintain a fork of the rendering engine, they’ll be perpetually playing catch-up removing user-hostile misfeatures because Google controls the upstream branch.
Google still has control over Chromium. Manifest v3 is a Chromium thing, not a Chrome thing. All forks of Chromium will get it and none of the browsers using Chromium as a base has moved to fork and maintain their own version of Chromium.
This means that Google effectively has a monopoly over all browsers that aren’t WebKit or Gecko based, which is a tiny portion of all browsers. Leading to Google deciding how people access the internet. It’s already worrying that Google is the internet for a lot of people, the fact that they can do more or less anything with Chromium means that they can do whatever they want with the web standard.
That should be a major concern for everyone. Chromium needs to be taken away from Google.
I’m too lazy to cite my sources atm, so apologies in advance.
But their deal with Google to keep Google as the default browser, they’re integration (and information sharing) with Pocket, and a large portion of the data collection the browser does by default frustrates me. Sure it’s all better than Chrome, but better doesn’t mean good, ya know?
I personally prefer to use Firefox based browsers (Mull, LibreWolf, etc), but tend to avoid “real” Firefox where I can.
I do have some work sites that insist on my usage of Chrome, but Brave is my solution for that. Speaking of that, does anyone know how good they (Brave) is about sticking to their privacy promises?
The google thing has been litigated a thousand times yet keeps getting repeated. Look it up, there are tons of articles explaining the relationship. It is not as cloak and dagger/nefarious as some imply.
Brave is objectively worse than FF except at doing chromium things, which yes sometimes some of us need. I use both but FF is my daily driver.
I recommend brave to “novices” because it’s a great foot in the door for the newly privacy-conscious, but it is not a long term solution and the head is a little sketchy.
I worry even Firefox is losing its principles on the matter.
Then use a firefox fork that’s more in line with your beliefs. It’s a pro of open source
chromium is open source too.
But Chrome, the actual application you download (as well as several forks), is closed source.
Agreed. I just wanted to point out that you can have open source with a chromium based browser
But that’s not the real issue. The issue is that any Chromium-based browser – open source or not – helps Google maintain hegemony over web standards. Even if makers of other Chromium-based browsers try to maintain a fork of the rendering engine, they’ll be perpetually playing catch-up removing user-hostile misfeatures because Google controls the upstream branch.
Google still has control over Chromium. Manifest v3 is a Chromium thing, not a Chrome thing. All forks of Chromium will get it and none of the browsers using Chromium as a base has moved to fork and maintain their own version of Chromium.
This means that Google effectively has a monopoly over all browsers that aren’t WebKit or Gecko based, which is a tiny portion of all browsers. Leading to Google deciding how people access the internet. It’s already worrying that Google is the internet for a lot of people, the fact that they can do more or less anything with Chromium means that they can do whatever they want with the web standard.
That should be a major concern for everyone. Chromium needs to be taken away from Google.
I don’t get this part. Are all engines other than those 2, based on Chromium?
Perhaps you are forgetting Ze great Konqueror ?
Because it has always been KHTML.
There’s a meme for that. Check it out
I think Konquerer is no longer actively maintained.
Fun fact (which you may already know) the two most popular browser engines today are based on KHTML)
Yeah I think so.
Their quest for a revenue stream is leading them down a dark path imo.
I mean I get that they need money. I don’t really have a solution. I just feel very uneasy about where this is headed.
Why
I’m too lazy to cite my sources atm, so apologies in advance.
But their deal with Google to keep Google as the default browser, they’re integration (and information sharing) with Pocket, and a large portion of the data collection the browser does by default frustrates me. Sure it’s all better than Chrome, but better doesn’t mean good, ya know?
I personally prefer to use Firefox based browsers (Mull, LibreWolf, etc), but tend to avoid “real” Firefox where I can.
I do have some work sites that insist on my usage of Chrome, but Brave is my solution for that. Speaking of that, does anyone know how good they (Brave) is about sticking to their privacy promises?
The google thing has been litigated a thousand times yet keeps getting repeated. Look it up, there are tons of articles explaining the relationship. It is not as cloak and dagger/nefarious as some imply.
Brave is objectively worse than FF except at doing chromium things, which yes sometimes some of us need. I use both but FF is my daily driver.
I recommend brave to “novices” because it’s a great foot in the door for the newly privacy-conscious, but it is not a long term solution and the head is a little sketchy.
Both are ultimately preferable to chrome.
I feel this.