Google Chrome’s plan to limit ad blocking extensions kicks off next week
Reminder to switch browsers if you haven't already!
- Google Chrome is starting to phase out older, more capable ad blocking extensions in favor of the more limited Manifest V3 system.
- The Manifest V3 system has been criticized by groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation for restricting the capabilities of web extensions.
- Google has made concessions to Manifest V3, but limitations on content filtering remain a source of skepticism and concern.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/05/google-starts-deprecating-older-more-capable-chrome-extensions-next-week/Open linkView original on programming.dev1066
Comments357
Long live Firefox.
hear ye
Pretty great outcome for firefox really.
I don't think firefox numbers will get a huge & immediate bump, but I think that over time it will support a reputation for firefox as being cool different and just plain better.
I can't imagine raw-dogging the internet without an ad blocker in 2024. I'm aware that most people aren't bothered by ads, but surely... surely some people might be interested in blocking them if they become aware that it's possible and easy.
After bingeing that show, I have a constant fear that he's been standing behind me the whole time, just waiting for me to catch a glimpse of him.
Been here since Kevin helped the project out?
I'm sorry. I've seen this so many times today and I can't stand it anymore.
I hate this article photo. What the fuck is that shit?? Gloveless fingers? Digit warmer? Turtlefinger sweater?
Finger sweatbands for epic googling activities
The 80s are back! Sweatbands for everyone!
Agreed, but also
How can you not kinda love it
i’m with you it’s really camp
Laughs in Firefox
How long until the majority of the Internet is inaccessible to non-Chromium browsers because the pages "don't support them"?
Honestly the way the internet is going do you need access to the majority of the internet? I feel like its pretty dead as it is now already.
Lemmy will still work because we mostly use Firefox, and i bet the same will hold true for many others.
Basically the moment mainstream internet becomes google only you will see nerds build new websites specifiably to cater to the non google crowd and i trust random internet nerds a hack of a lot more than a monopoly corporation.
BRING IT ON GOOGLE!, YOU CAN INITIATE THE PUSH TO CREATE A NEW BETTER INTERNET. ^Create demand for freedom trough your suppressive enforments^
If it don't work on Firefox I won't use it. There are better FOSS options anyways
I don't think that's going to be the case. People will find workarounds. The whole point of these alternative browsers is to use the web in whatever way the developers think their user base wants to use it. If the web is inaccessible to non-chromium browsers then people will spoof their browser to the site to look like a chromium browser.
Then I guess people will use the web less and less.
I remember the "works best on IE" warnings of old, looks like we might be heading back there.
This is getting more common. Whatever dev accepted that when sizing the story should hang their head in shame. “No, you don’t size for a poor solution, you size for a good solution and let the PMs chip at the things they understand, keeping some things sacrosanct”.
For this reason, we must still take a stand against this stuff.
They do some now, but user agent switcher gets me to all of those with no problem.
Laughs in Waterfox
Chrome is the new Internet Explorer.
You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.
Always has been.
I use Firefox everywhere which means I have ads blocking everywhere, including and especially on Android. All my tabs are synced and are easily transferred between devices.
While I dont use Firefox itself any more I am using librewolf on my PC, which sadly doesnt exist for phones yet. Also, GOS comes with its own privacy oriented chromium fork called vanadium, so I'm using that in the mean time.
I also use librewolf and have settled for iceraven on my phone. the list of installable extensions is much longer (even if not everything is working yet, depending on how far mozilla has come along) and it has about:config support, which gives me a pretty close approximation of my desktop browser.
I've found the Mull browser (which can be found through the DivestOS repository on F-Droid) works great as a privacy-focused firefox fork, similar to LibreWolf. I hear Fennic F-Droid is also a pretty good but less extreme alternative, but I'd imagine you don't care much about that if you use LibreWolf.
If we want to be honest, Firefox on Android has way worse performance than Chrome.
(But I still use it instead of Chrome)
I use both on a Pixel 7 Pro.
Can't confirm that.
I use it on a Pixel 5 and even there it is fluid while browsing. Only on Youtube there is the slightest stutter for HD Videos. Heavy sites like Discourse fora or Cryptpad or such work flawlessly.
TIL Cryptpad.fr is just one instance apparently
Yeah wow nice that’s fantastic
I use both on a Galaxy Fold 5 and can confirm Chromium based browsers are smoother. Although I still use Waterfox on my phone. I just keep a Chromium based browsers in case a website doesn't work when I visited it using Waterfox.
It depends I think. I found Chrome to be a tiny bit faster but then ads bogged the page down so most of the time, Firefox is faster for me.
In some very rare cases when I need to disable ads blocking, Chrome is indeed faster but I'd rather abandon websites rather than disable ads blocking.
So if you love ads, Chrome is better. If you hate ads like I do, Firefox is miles ahead.
There are other ways to block ads. Adguard does a great job on Android. It establishes a local VPN, so it can do HTTP[S] content filtering in addition to DNS blocking.
Can't use my VPN and adguard at the same time iirc, unless android has two active VPN "slots" now. Can't bring a pihole with me 24/7 either as much as I would like to.
There's always nextdns.io that can be configured to use ad blocking filters on the dns level. You can set it up on your phone as well
Can I use it in conjunction with my normal VPN? AFAIK android has only one active VPN slot available at a time.
Yes because there is no need to setup another VPN. You only configure the DNS settings (Private DNS). I know that Mullvad on PC has an option to use custom DNS server
Ive been using Firefox on Android for years but it really needs some TLC. It doesn't support scaling to a tablet/desktop UI at all so it doesn't work well in DeX or anything larger than a phone. I also recently had to swap to Brave because I noticed Firefox was draining a lot of battery all of a sudden. There's some kind of leak or running process that isn't sleeping properly. In a few months I'll re-install and try again.
Firefox's marketshare is small enough relative to Chrome's that some websites might just block it at this point, if Chrome users mean ad revenue and Firefox users don't.
https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share
Firefox has 2.88% marketshare.
Chrome has 65.34% marketshare.
It's gonna be interesting to see what happens...
User agent switcher
Based and
incognitoprivate mode pilledIt doesn't necessary cost a meaningful amount to a site to allow Firefox users to view it; it does however cost to make it compatible with non-chromium browsers. For most viewing that's a non issue (I mean, most crms are going to work) but specific sites might stop working (YouTube already got caught throttling firefox, and tbf, streaming would cost more than reading an article or something).
Firefox blocks statcounter tracking by default. It's an inherently flawed metric, though Firefox is definitely in the minority still vs Chrome
The numbers may be indicative of the general trend, but every single privacy oriented browser and so forth is spoofing the user agent, pretending to be the most widespread and popular os and browser.
Which is why privacy checks on my Linux+librewolf PC return win10 with chrome.
My worry is what the EU changes might mean for the mobile web and beyond. With iOS's market share and only the same rendering engine Apple used in Safari being available, sites/apps had to support more than just Chrome. If forcing iOS users to Chrome is an option (either through pointing them to the browser or an app built with that rendering engine), then there's even less of an incentive to test with anything else. It's great that users get more choice but if providers use it as an opportunity to reduce support for other browsers then it might not be a great benefit after all.
Firefox and WebKit for all!
I did have some issues on firefox om some sites.
Never heard of it, I prefer LibreWolf
https://librewolf.net/#what-is-librewolf
but I'm gonna list some other popular forks
TOR Browser (anti-censorship enhanced fork, bundled with TOR network)
https://www.torproject.org/
GNUzilla IceCat (GNU version)
https://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/
Pale Moon (able to use old XUL based extensions)
https://www.palemoon.org/
Mullvad Browser (a security hardened fork, IIRC based on TOR, made by Mullvad VPN company)
https://mullvad.net/en/browser
ANDROID (Fennec/Fenix)
Fennec F-Droid (Fennec version available on F-Droid, clean of propietary blobs)
https://f-droid.org/packages/org.mozilla.fennec_fdroid/
https://gitlab.com/relan/fennecbuild
Mull (hardened fork of Fenix)
https://gitlab.com/divested-mobile/mull-fenix
IceRaven (yet another hardened fork of Fenix, able to install an extended list of extensions)
https://github.com/fork-maintainers/iceraven-browser
Well I will sound like an old bore but throughout the nearly 20 years Firefox is out I never looked at anything else. Seen the rise and fall of Internet Explorer seeing the rise and fall of chrome.
Even Firefox in its dreadfully slow era (2010-2016) it did not made me change. And let me be clear Firefox is far from perfect. But for my use cases (privacy and security balance over certain conveniences) I would not change for any commercially backed Browser.
Moral of the story. It's better to donate to Mozilla and enjoy the freedom of your browser than giving yourself in on the erratic behavior of the big tech companies.
dont donate to moz lmfao if you look at the source code they collect absolutely everything, just use librewolf + betterfox.js/arkenfox.js
They collect everything? I'm on mint. I want extensions, and not have to run my browser like I need to tweak an OS. I just want it to work. What do I use?
https://spyware.neocities.org/articles/firefox
if user.js editing is too much of a pain then get plain librewolf, go to settings and enable history-saving:
search bar 'history' > scroll to 'history' > disable 'clear history when librewolf closes'.
supports extensions just fine too! :)
https://librewolf.net/installation/linux/ installation for mint
edit: why the downvotes? i cited a good source for my claims.
edit 2: hackernews post about plain firefox being spyware, mental outlaw's video on the topic and eric murphy's video on this.
oh, thanks for the information! it appears i was mistaken :}
The silver lining here is that you'd hope that more people will simply adopt Firefox. It's user share has been too low for too long given how great it is
They messed up 10 years ago when for some reason it took ages for Firefox to load compared to Chrome, and sadly it never really recovered the user base even though the performance is vastly improved.
To be fair, even in 2006 the Mozilla corporation was never going to outspend Firefox
Especially not given how much Mozilla wastes on executive compensation ;)
Their user share was pretty okay for a while, but bombed when Chrome first released because it was much more performant. Unfortunately, that stigma never quite fell off and they lost a huge opportunity to overtake the market.
How was it more performant? As I remember it, Chrome was loading websites not noticeably faster than Firefox, as website loading speed depended and still depends mainly on your internet connection and hardware anyway.
As I remember it, Chrome exploded because it was pushed onto users at every possible opportunity while Firefox depended (and still depends) on users actively looking for it.
Used Google or Google products? Get ads for Chrome. Wanted to download Google Earth? You had to activly uncheck a box such that Chrome wasn't going to be installed as well. Meanwhile no ads and not the same amount of exposure for Firefox.
That way they achieved a critical mass and snowballing did the rest. There were so many users using it that it was considered a good choice just because it was used by many people.
Regarding the performance aspect, if there even was a noticeable difference, it was worse than Firefox. Where else did the "Chrome eating RAM" memes come from?
I think you are misremembering. Chrome won at the start because it was fast as fuck and Firefox was not. Firefox caught back up in the 2016 time frame iirc and they've been back and forth ever since.
Ironically chrome was named so as a goal was to reduce the chrome of the UI and focus on the web content, something recent versions of chrome and Firefox have abandoned in favor of massive swaths of whitespace and giant chrome buttons (on Firefox you can enable "unsupported" compact mode to reclaim some of the space if you're on a laptop)
agreed. chrome was bare ones and super fast when it was released. over the last two years it's a fucking monster memory hog
I've been a loyal Firefox user for almost as long as Firefox has existed. So I'm probably a bit biased. However, when I used other browsers, and if it wes just to try them out, I didn't notice any benefits in terms of loading websites and executing their scripts. This includes Chrome. In benchmarks there are obviously differences visible, but to me as a user they didn't matter. I wasn't so short on time that I needed those microseconds. So I really don't get how performance could be an argument in this.
I was a Firefox user at the time, using adblockers, and the swap was a huge improvement to my browsing experience. I can’t even remember all the ways, since this was a decade ago. But at the time, Firefox was in a lul.
Things likely swapped pretty fast, but I wasn’t aware of it at the time because I was already using Chrome.
No ads swayed me, no Google specific sites, it wasn’t side loaded with anything.
The Chrome eating ram memes came much later, after the enshitification process reached the third step. You seem to be compressing the entirety of both browsers into a single moment, and that’s not really how time works.
I understand that you made such an experience, but I can't share it though. I've been a Firefox user for almost as long as Firefox exists, which is almost two decades. (I think I joined somewhere between 2005-2007). I've tried other browsers, sometimes I had to. However, I didn't notice any benefits compared to Firefox. Especially not in performance. Even though benchmarks have always shown clear differences, they weren't significant enough for me to consider switching, as the difference really didn't impact my browsing experience.
Regarding the memes: That was just a random annectode which I found suitable here. I don't claim it has been that way since the beginning. (Can't relate to that anyway.) But given that it has been around for a while, I don't see how performance can be an argument in favour of Chrome in this.
I just remember Firefox around that time and for like over a decade just felt bloated and super slow in comparison. No idea if it’s better these days or what.
I'd say give it a try and see for yourself.
I can just recommend using Firefox for a multitude of reasons. However, I am biased as I have been using firefox for almost two decades and did not have many reasons to complain.
Its much better, and indistinguishable from a usage standpoint against chrome (I use Google garbage at work and they deliberately hamstring it in Firefox, so I use both browsers side by side)
Biggest Firefox win is containers and privacy. Chrome probably has better absolute security (based purely on the concept that non-private security is Google's whole schtick, not based on data) and in the last year it's gotten better memory management (via sleeping tabs) that Firefox just hasn't caught up with...but there's an addon for that ;)
I remember it as, Firefox was fast enough, but Chrome was shipping a weirdly quick JS engine and trying to convince people to put more stuff into JS because on Chrome that would be feasible. Nowdays if you go out without your turbo-JIT hand-optimized JS engine everyone laughs at you and it's Chrome's fault.
I think you're ignoring the functional aspect of the integration of Chrome into the Android platform. A lot of people's entire online life is stored within the walls of the Chrome ecosystem. And moving all of that to a completely different browser that is not fully integrated with Android is daunting to say the least.
What's the new chrome integration?
Didn't say new, I'm assuming they refer to the WebView that many apps use which is chromium based. However if you have a calyx- or graphene- compatible phone the WebView will be non-g chromium.
The situation is even more dire on iPhone.
For work, I use Chrome, but only because Firefox's profile management is (more or less) nonexistent. Once they have that, which I understand isn't too far out, I'm ditching Chrome entirely.
Have you thought about installing a Firefox fork? On my Work PC I use Firefox for work and Floorp for personal browsing.
What's this, you say? Floorp? Sounds like you're setting me up for a Futurama joke, or something.
I'll see what's up, as long as it doesn't require admin rights.
Unfortunately, I think that while ad blockers won't work as well, they will still work good enough that most won't bother making the switch.
https://blog.getadblock.com/how-adblock-is-getting-ready-for-manifest-v3-6cf21a7884f6
https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/
https://adguard.com/en/blog/adguard-mv3.html
https://www.reddit.com/r/uBlockOrigin/comments/1067als/comment/j3h00xj/
The main issue I see is the slow update of filters (which require an extension update). This might make YouTube win the cat and mouse game. Where YouTube updates(ed?) their blocking detection multiple time a day.
Good thing I exclusively use Firefox.
Fortunately I at least have Firefox on Linux. But then when I need to use Windows for something… well look at that, also Firefox!
won't stop pihole
It's still DNS level only, right? That wouldn't stop YouTube ads, or remove annoyances.
Love my PiHole but you’re hella correct
You can block ads from being served to you.
But the flip side is that the website developer can make a website that won't function if it can't load the ads being served.
And most users are gonna want a functional website.
Somebody's going to need to write a web site with a very, very compelling function to make me give enough of a shit to not just click away if it is deliberately coded to not work with Firefox/adblockers. Like, gives me a million dollars per page load functionality.
Man for real.
And they never will.
You sweet summer child.
How long do you think Chrome will let DoH be opt-in?
You sweet summer child
How are they going to get past my firewall rules?
Nerd fight! Nerd fight! Nerd fight! Show 'em your bionicles collection!
By using the same hostnames that you need for wanted content.
By refusing to load
Personally, I'd like to see them force in-browser DoH down my throat with my computer powered off. They'll never see it coming.
It's not up to Chrome.
The day they do their own DoH in-browser it is definitely up to them. It's already opt-in if you want to see how well your pi-hole won't work with it enabled.
Next step is to do DoH by default, and finally making it compulsory.
Chrome already does have DoH enabled by default from what I can tell.
https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/10468685
They can do it all they want but it won't work...
If I "opt in" it falls back to non doh immediately because using doh on my network is not up to Chrome.
use-application-dns.net + nxdomain for any known doh provider
I don't use pihole but doh blocking works great on my network. It should work on a pihole tho it's pretty basic stuff.
If you can't resolve the domain you can't validate the TLS certificate.
Switched to Firefox at work today. Looks like I still need Chrome to do the VPN handshake, but the more of us there are, the more pressure we have on IT!
If you still need Chrome, consider Ungoogled Chromium!
Is that project going to maintain Manifest V2 support?
I don't have official information, but I doubt it. They tend to stick as closely to the Chromium experience as possible, with the exception of the ungoogled part, of course. Maintaining Manifest V2 support would also just be a massive amount of work, for which they likely don't have the manpower.
I have no idea. I'd guess not, as it's not a strong fork like other Chromium-based browsers. Its main selling point is that it's nearly identical to Chrome, but with a lot of the Google garbage stripped out. I don't use it as a daily driver, but only when I need something Chromium-based like the use case mentioned by @[email protected]. It's very likely to work wherever Chrome does.
I'm still confounded by workplaces that run the old nineties way of VPN handshake by browser. Clunky, clumsy just straight up bad digital workplace setup.
There is no reason to not do it the modern way where all the handshaking and connecting is done under the hood, hidden from the user. At the most you as a user should only see the tiny little systray icon switch how it looks.
It's weird that I've been on firefox for the vast majority of my life and I always had this perception that "everyone" was using it. Here in lemmy you hear about it all the time, my friends use it, I see it on my newsfeeds etc
But when you check the market share it around 2.8% while chrome is 65.1% https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share
I say this a lot but get Firefox.
I've been way more than a decade (closer to two decades) uninterruptedly using Firefox. I've never used chrome as a my main browser, ever.
But still, I'll be naive if I didn't recognize that this kind of shit will affect me even if it's just indirectly.
Next year they'll surely will be forcing many webs only working in "manifest V3 compliant browsers". I'm sure of that.
The problem is that Firefox has like a crumb of the market and it's held by a lifeline given by Google itself
There is no guarantee Firefox would survive the long term ... Heck it would die short after Google decides to cut them off
Back in the Dim Times (1990s), before ad-blockers appeared, there was a program called WebWasher. It's basically a proxy server you run on your own computer and it contained all the ad filters. You just configured your browsers network setting to point to WebWasher and it would handle all the ad filtering.
So even if companies completely remove extension support from their browsers, we'll still have an alternative. :)
That man-in-the-middle principle doesn't work with TLS.
But ads are still often delivered by content delivery which is blockable by domain, hence the reason piholes work. Not that in-stream ads aren't the future, perhaps, but life finds a way.
What you're describing is not a man-in-the-middle proxy, but a simple DNS block. That's a very crude approach to blocking ads and notoriously doesn't work for YouTube and Google ads because they're served from the same domain.
I run a pihole myself but there's still a huge difference between browsing with pihole only and pihole+ublock. It's certainly not the answer to the Manifest V3 shenanigans.
however its relatively rare that an ad company provides a bunch of services I want to use. The only exception i can think of is google.
obvs its hard to avoid gmaps because the alternatives are beyond godawful (no, openstreetmaps, i didn't want to go to the coffee shop of the same name in connecticut, I wanted to go to the one 3 km away), but for youtube I use a python tool called youtube-local which is very very effective, strong rec. Im sure google will defeat them eventually, but so far all of the incremental "block a little of this, block a little of that" stuff the g-man has been doing has been bypassed within a few days. Viewtube is also pretty easy to self-host, but they never quite figured out how to make the UI work.
Still not unheard of today if you're using a VPN. For example, if you're using Mozilla VPN (Mulvad), in the DNS settings it gives you choices between regular DNS, DNS + ad blocking, or DNS + ad blocking + tracker blocking.
I did not know about WebWasher, that's very interesting.
Hey that's awesome! Thanks for sharing
Firefox is looking to implement Manifest V3 to keep extension feature parity with Chromium, but their version will not ban the one API that adblockers use. So Firefox will eventually be V3 compliant
Maybe it's my tinfoil hat but if any part of this is related to
theirgoogle's pursuit of ad revenue, I don't imagine a v3 compliant Firefox will work with adblock for long.At the very least they would probably make using it a huge headache
edit to make it clear who I was referring to
Firefox has ad revenue?
I'm realizing that was unclear.
I meant google's maifest v3, not firefox's implementation of it.
Ah, appreciate the clarification. I'd also just woken up and hopped on Lemmy, so maybe partially my fault 😋
I switched to chrome because they were the first to have each tab be it's own process so one bad site/connection did crash the whole program. Also the cloud based password saving across devices was super convenient.
Firefox does both now too, has better ad blocking, and is a little less invasive and bloaty. A lot less invasive if you know how to set it up, which I don't.
But yeah, Firefox is my guy again
Same here. Made the switch back to Firefox a year ago when I saw the writing on the wall about where Google wanted to take Chrome with Manifest V3.
Now we gotta have websites developing for all web browsers instead of Google Chrome like it's Internet Explorer 2.0.
There are effectively only two web browsers: Chrome and Firefox. Literally everything else, aside from some really niche things that can't render modern webpages, is a fork of one of those two that uses the same rendering engine.
Not to toot the kagi Horn, but they are talking about releasing thier webkit based Orion Browser on Linux. Ive been following that one closely since it has firefox extension support.
I mean, if folks really want something like that, I'd say they shouldn't have let KDE's KHTML (which is what WebKit was forked from) die. But as I've said elsewhere in this thread, KHTML→WebKit→Blink are related and thus fail to combat Google's web hegemony the way that Gecko (Firefox) does.
I've become very skeptical of anything Kagi, wishing they'd just focused on making one thing good instead of getting distracted by mediocre AI and a browser they can't realistically support while their search is still subpar. Illusions of grandeur.
Iirc the browser is older than their search engine. If anything that is their og product
Subpar Search?
Yeah, wtf is he/she talking about there :)
What about Apple's WebKit? Does it count?
You mean KHMTL, born in KDE's Konqueror. That spawned WebKit (Safari), that spawned Blink (Chrome, Edge, Opera, etc). The whole thing then finally came full-circle when Konqueror dropped KHTML due to lack of development, now you have the choice between WebKit and Blink (via Qt WebEngine).
Then there's Gecko (Firefox) and Servo which had a near-death experience after Mozilla integrated half of it into Gecko but by now development is alive and kicking again. Oh and then there's lynx, using libwww, tracing its lineage back straight to Tim Berners Lee.
No, they don't mean KHTML. KHTML is an ancestor of WebKit and Blink, but WebKit forked from it over 2 decades ago. They meant WebKit.
They also didn't mean lynx and yet I mentioned it. How come? Might the distinct possibility exist that I used the opportunity to draw a wider picture, and "you mean X" has to be understood as internet brain-rot rhetorics, not literally?
Just a suggestion.
Nope, it doesn't count. The only reason Safari/WebKit isn’t considered a fork of Chrome/Blink is that Chrome/Blink is a fork of Safari/WebKit instead.
I'm sure they've diverged enough for it to be pretty significant compared to the Chromium browsers
So it wasn’t, like, forked hard enough that now after the years it counts as a different browser? Expect it to render pages ‘n’ stuff pretty much like Chrome?
I admit, I haven't really looked into it. It's possible Apple implemented new HTML/CSS/JS standards independently, but it's also possible that Apple continued to backport Google's changes. Unless they had a business goal of being independent (or NIH syndrome) I would guess that they'd do mostly the latter, but you'd have to go read the code to know for sure.
They are definitely still more related to each other than either is to Gecko (which is to say, not related at all), though.
They've been separate for over a decade, and even before that they were heavily customizing it. They're cousins, but absolutely not close enough at this point to be considered the same.
haha Safari would like a word.
What word? I spoke the truth: there are only two rendering engines. The only reason Safari/WebKit isn't considered a fork of Chrome/Blink is that Chrome/Blink is a fork of Safari/WebKit instead.
I deleted my original comment before you replied because I am not really in the mood to defend this but the OP was talking about the pain of developing for different browsers and I don't care what is a fork of what, this is a fact: Chrome, Firefox and Safari all render differently and have to be catered to individually.
Also, Safari, between desktop and mobile, has 30% of the market to Firefox's 8%.
I don't LIKE it, but there are "effectively" three, not two, rendering engines.
It's about browser architecture and not silly names ("Safari", "Firefox", "Chrome"). The point is that there are only two actual variants.
Not when you have to make a web app render identically in them, which is what the OP was about.
No, you still have three rendering engines. WebKit and Blink are different. Since the second is an (old) fork of the other one, they are similar but far from being the same. They are pages that work in one but not the other, even if you change the user agent.
That's...not true at all.
And safari, although it's a cousin/uncle to Chrome at this point.
Not that I use it, but still.
firefox extensions are the best patches i have for enshittification
They expect most users to not care, and sadly they're right.
I think people just genuinely don't know that firefox (and I suppose Safari) is the only true alternative browser i.e. Not based on chromium.
I do my best to transition people I know across, but people are retty comfortable on chrome. If ad blockers stop working, I think there will be people who care just enough to switch.
Safari is only "not based on Chromium" in the sense that the heredity goes in the other direction (Chromium is based on it).
Firefox is the only browser that maintains a rendering engine codebase fully separate from Chrome. That's why using Firefox, and evangelizing it to help keep up its marketshare, is so vitally important for the health of the web.
Huh, I didn't know that about Safari/Chromium. Absolutely agree that having a Google-controlled browser monopoly would be catastrophic.
Used Firefox on and off since it came around, not a fan. But if chromium blocks ad-blockers, I'm switching instantly. I doubt many people know or care enough to switch.
I've been on Firefox almost exclusively for about a decade and I can't really tell the difference between them honestly in terms of performance of normal web browsing.
I'm having some weird graphical issues with my NAS frontend Web portal display on Firefox atm though, so keep chromium installed for that.
I honestly don't understand why anyone would refuse to switch from away Chrome. It's not like the other browsers lack functionality or are slow. The only problem they might encounter is some rare incompatibility which is the result of Firefox (and its forks) small market share and web devs not caring enough.
I've never used Chrome as my primary browser and I don't think I missed anything. I started using Opera years before Chrome was even a thing (back when everyone was using IE) and then when the old Opera died, I didn't think even for a second about switching to Chrome and went straight to Firefox. Which could at least be highly customized to bring some Opera exclusive features (eg. mouse gestures, tab grouping) back.
I think, they just stopped caring about users instead. They've got enough market share. Might as well internet-explorer it for a while.
80% of people I know does not use an ad block, even the ones more tech savvy. I have no clue how brainwashed they are for eating ad garbage all day long.
To be fair, let's be glad that 80% of people don't use an ad block. If it were the opposite and 80% did use ad block, web services would be much more aggressive in combating ad blockers and many more of them would end up pay-walled (although it seems we're heading there anyway).
On one hand, I feel kinda bad that my ad-free experience is only supported thanks to those who do undergo the torture of ads, on the other hand, the companies have only themselves to blame. If web ads were decent, only limited to sides and headers or even between paragraphs of web pages and didn't cover the content you're trying to view, didn't try to trick you into thinking it's part of the content, didn't lead to malicious websites, didn't autoplay videos with sound or didn't put unskippable ads before and inside videos, I would have never felt the need to install an ad block.
If that happens en masse, which is extremely unlikely, Google can just pull its funding for Mozilla and cripple them
The entire sector is fucked because of lack of regulation
I am the only person at my work that even knows what an ad blocker is. My boss, director of IT, doesn't use one. Uses chrome with no extensions like everyone else.
Can't wait for nothing to change 'cause 90% of chrome users don't use add-ons.
How horrifying
I can't remember a time when I didn't use Firefox. Actually back in highschool I used IE around 2002ish but only because I didn't know any better back then.
google chrome will go the way of netscape navigator and internet explorer. might take a while and a antitrust case or two, but we will get there... again.
At least the EU is trying to cut its tentacles a bit.
Firefox Forever!!
Is that only for Chrome or all Chromium-based browsers?
First one, then the others eventually.
Just use Firefox :)
I've used Firefox since before it was called Firefox, but just last week I hit two instances where stuff I required for work required Chrome :(
Does it "require" Chrome, or does it require a Chrome user agent? I also have one of those sites for my job, but changing the user agent for that site in FFx works flawlessly.
I've got an office that prioritizes Edge for internal apps. I've been watching the Clippy-esque intrusive Microsoft options filling up my screen space like a late-90s Yahoo toolbar.
Stuff you need for work don't usually need any ad blocking to start with so that would be good enough.
Still feels bad that I need it to be installed, and more stuff in the future could require it. They were major sites that my business works with and does not own
They don’t get money from installs. Just ads and google products usage.
If anything, only using it for sites that won't generate ad revenue costs them money.
It's not that simple.
I need very niche Chromium-based extensions for my work. They don't yet exist on Firefox. Nor any replacements to my knowledge.
They aren't ad-related, but I don't know what's going to happen to them.
I, too, am forced to use Chrome for parts of my work.
I just run Chrome for that set of tasks. Then quit, or tab to Firefox for regular browsing.
This is SOP when dealing with uglies like google, microsoft, amazon, adobe, or meta: do the toxic thing or software they require, as sandboxed as reasonable, then get back to daily life and more knowable risks.
Same. I got a cheap Chromebook and a no-contract flip phone and only use google on that.
Currently, I use Brave. Not Chrome.
I have all the benefits of Chromium-based without the Google's spyware.
I don't see myself going back and forth between 2 web browsers. I prefer choosing one that fills everything that I need, sticking with it and moving on with my life.
But since Chromium is mostly backed by Google, I don't know the long-term implications of using Chromium based.
Yeah, but that's just it, there is no one thing that fulfils all your needs if you are forced to use a particular tool, but it lacks privacy or freedom or other features.
I use chrome because I have to and also am curious and I need to know about how Google runs its shit. I run Firefox because of various features it has that are good for web development. I run Safari because it is fast and relatively private outside of the Apple ecosystem And has some great developer tools.
The effort of one keyboard twitch to move from one browser to the other is not really any amount of friction for me. It's easier than switching from one tab to another inside the same browser, so I don't get your fixation on a single tool.
And as a PS, I won't touch Brave with a 10 foot pole anymore because of their Fuckery with crypto.
Brave isn't perfect but seems to be my best option so far.
Most of the time, you can disable the 'unpleasant' stuff.
But no web browser is perfect.
Maybe Ungoogled Chromium could be good as well. But requires more tweaking and setting out of the box.
I’ll stick with Safari thank you very much. I don’t trust Firefox any more than I do Chrome. They have too much of a history of shady stuff.
OK, they asked about Chromium, though.
Switching from Chrome to Firefox is like jumping out of the frying pan into the fire.
Not even remotely
Different incentives. Apple makes privacy a selling point, and I’m the one paying. Who’s paying for Chrome and Firefox?
Happy to be corrected, but as I have understood it in the past, all of them.
Both.
Yup. All the big guys will enshittify.
Luckily, there's Linux and you can use Brave or Firefox.
Isn't Brave Chromium based?
Brave is Chromium based.
Meanwhile, Firefox.
Last fuck up I installed Firefox. I left chrome in place. It's finally time to remove chrome.
They already don't let you add ublock origin to chrome on mobile. I had to teach my elderly mother to use Waterfox with the extension, but as a plus side she can now turn on desktop-site and and turn the screen off without interrupting her hokey crystal meditation flute music [3 hours].
netscape was the standard back then when expolorer was crap.....fast forward today,firefox(netscape's successor) is still the standard when other browsers are still crap.
edit: spelling firefox and netscape....god damn butter fingers...
it's all inevitable. client signatures, the end of privacy, jerking off on my way home from the office. there is no God
To my shame, I'm still deeply ingrained in the Google ecosystem. I settled on it like 8-10 years ago and I'm not sure how to dig myself out of this pit. More than Chrome, I heavily use Docs, Sheets, Drive, Wallet, YouTube, Gmail, I even have a Pixel (I hate how bloated Samsung is).
I've used Firefox a little for work because of the nice containers feature. Is Google Drive bad too? It's so easy to share things, I torrent a lot of books and I've shared with a bunch of friends, idk if there's an alternative that others could easily use.
Don't fret, I think a lot of us are on a long-term journey to de-Google. I've actually found that changing browsers is one of the easiest things to do, especially with the ability to import your bookmarks and such. With Firefox Sync, you pretty much have the same functionality as you would with your Google account signed into Chrome.
Gmail is probably the hardest one to kick. I'm fine with paying for an email service if it's functional and doesn't siphon my personal data, but finding a quality trustworthy provider and then migrating 20 years of data to it seems so overwhelming.
Why do you need to migrate 20 years of data? Do you actually look at anything more than a month or two old?
That said, Protonmail has "Easy Switch" to copy emails and whatnot.
The harder part for me is Drive, since there just isn't a competitor that's anywhere near as good in terms of overall experience. I'm going to try out OnlyOffice, but I know there are a few features I just won't have anymore.
I do occasionally need something from 10 or even 15 years ago, needing the exact date I sold a property or started a new project or even just jogging my memory of an old contact I am reaching again. While none of this is strictly necessary, I could make do without it if I had to, it does create inertia.
I really need to check out Proton, Google is just getting worse and worse and the sooner I can get away from their ecosystem the better.
Give it a shot! Worst case scenario, you just go back.
Oh my gosh thank you!! I need this exact thing but hadn’t gotten around to figuring out a solution. Much appreciated!!
I think migrating is the hardest part. My email history has a lot of important records and notes that I don't want to lose.
By the way, I recommend checking out this video, which makes a great point that email is inherently insecure, regardless of the provider you choose.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iH626CXyNtE
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=iH626CXyNtE
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Several practical solutions here but the simplest is probably to start with thunderbird on your home computer. That way storage limit shouldn't be a worry and you can see if you find it searchable/usable enough. If so, you can do a Google takeout as a long term canonical archive, do a thunderbird backup to easily switch computers when the time comes, and then sign up for a privacy friendly service.
I bought into proton for a bit but am very very against how they bundled their services and switched my mail to posteo, which i have had no issues with in the last 1.5 years or so. Tutanota was fine but firmly a third place opt for me. I also prefer posteo because I'm anti-magic: posteo has tons of options which can get you to same or better security than proton, but it doesn't "just work" like protons security does. Both are great.
Here's what I did:
I'm still stuck with Google Drive though. As you said, it's just so convenient. I'm trying out OnlyOffice with a self-hosted NextCloud instance, but there's a lot of sacrifices. I have some complex spreadsheets, and switching to literally anything else loses features (I like the
GOOGLEFINANCE()feature).But yeah, I wish Google didn't suck, they have some really convenient products, I just don't trust them anymore.
Restore Privacy – Alternatives to Google Products – The Big List (2024)
I did it by selling soul to apple completely, I mean I am not going to peddle another company but at least it isn't google. However I can afford to throw some cash on their overpriced stuff. They suck but at least they aren't google. I don't use any google services right now. Not even maps. Without any cons because obviously I just use apple stuff for everything wallet etc
I could use framework laptop linux + graphene os but I need to live and thrive among ppl and also get that sweet social credit for not being a total nerd that yells about evil corps and how I have superior privacy in the basement left and right. However I would if it was socially acceptable.
I used firefox back in the day because it was better than IE, switched to chrome because of the convenience and features. I recently switched to brave because chrome became such a pain. If brave shits the bed because of this, I'm going back to firefox.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Other groups don't agree with Google's description, like the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), which called Manifest V3 "deceitful and threatening" back when it was first announced in 2019, saying the new system "will restrict the capabilities of web extensions—especially those that are designed to monitor, modify, and compute alongside the conversation your browser has with the websites you visit."
Google, which makes about 77 percent of its revenue from advertising, has not published a serious explanation as to why Manifest V3 limits content filtering, and it's not clear how that aligns with the goals of "improving the security, privacy, performance and trustworthiness."
Like Kewisch said, the primary goal of malicious extensions is to spy on users and slurp up data, which has nothing to do with content filtering.
Google now says it's possible for extensions to skip the reviews process for "safe" rule set changes, but even this is limited to "static" rulesets, not more powerful "dynamic" ones.
In a comment to The Verge last year, the senior staff technologist at the EFF, Alexei Miagkov, summed up Google's public negotiations with the extension community well, saying, "These are helpful changes, but they are tweaks to a limited-by-design system.
For a short period, users will be able to turn them back on if they visit the extension page, but Google says that "over time, this toggle will go away as well."
The original article contains 692 words, the summary contains 230 words. Saved 67%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Oh no! Wait, I don't use that shit because of shit like this.
How does this affect browsers like Brave?
Are they going to do this on Edge? Please don't judge me. I love the "Continue on Mobile" feature.
Firefox has this feature too, just saying
not the ios app unfortunately, due to webkit
I overall love Edge. But when the ads come running, I'll have to switch :/
Looks like they will follow Chromium so as with Chrome you have till 2025 June if you use ExtensionManifestV2Availability policy
Thank fuck I switched to mozilla
since people here are more tech savvy than i could ever be if like to ask what you guys think of Vivaldi, because i like it a lot. super customizable, has quick command search, side panel lets me use some websites like extensions, and workspaces help me organize especially with work... has anyone used it and can anyone tell me if waterfox or other forks are better and how?
I tried it for a week, but eventually left back for Firefox.
Vivaldi is cool af and I used it for a few years but ditched it for firefox the minute i read about manifest v3(2 years ago? don't remember). Not the devs' fault but I'll be damned if i allow ads on my devices.
is that guaranteed to force all chromium browsers regardless? like, does that ban the ublock origin extension (or something to the effect of rendering it useless)?
It does! However, uBlock Origin has a "Lite" version that works with Manifest v3.
https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home
wow. ok. time to experiment with Firefox forks.
Yeah, all chromium-based browsers will be affected, sadly.
Vivaldi is the new Opera, right?
If by Opera you mean as it was back in version 12 before it got sold to some chinese company and completely changed, then yes. Nothing to do with what opera is now.
If Vivaldi were free and open source, it would make an interesting alternative to Ungoogled Chromium. But it's not, so I'll stick with extensions on Firefox (and Ungoogled Chromium as a backup).
It is source-available though, so that's a plus.
According to Vivaldi's blog post "Why isn't Vivaldi's browser open-source?", all of Vivaldi's UI is closed source and not source-available:
The UI is the main thing that differentiates Vivaldi from Chromium, and Vivaldi chose to keep it closed source and obfuscated for business reasons. That's a negative compared to Firefox and Ungoogled Chromium.
Huh, hadn't seen that bit before, thanks for that. Ok, well that is disappointing. I did notice this bit in there too though:
It not much consolation, but it's better than nothing. As it stands though, FF still has too many problems for me. I'll have to see how this ad blocking thing shakes out though, might have to revisit my decision then.
As a long time user of Opera (from before they went with Chromium), I've been using Vivaldi as my primary browser since they first released a public preview. It has its downsides (i.e. the UI is slightly slower than that of Chrome), but at the same time it's the thing that feels most "at home" for me after migrating away from the joke Opera has become. The developers seem to hold a strong anti-manifest-v3 stance, but unfortunately at one point they might have to comply. I just tried the built-in blocker instead of uBlock Origin I normally use and it seems to do a pretty good job.
I get the whole "switch to Firefox" thing; for me the major blocker is that it doesn't have global mouse gestures and this messes up with my muscle memory. If they add that, I might give Firefox another chance.
I use Firefox and Brave at work. I need a Chromium-based browser, and Brave's ad-blocker works, otherwise I would be Firefox only.
Oh no, anyway
I think LibreWolf is going to end up being the go-to browser at this rate.
I really like KDEs Falkon browser, based on QT web.
But it having no extension support kind of kills it for me...
What engine does it use?
It's Chromium under the hood.
Funnily, KDE's early KHTML engine got forked into WebKit, which got forked into Blink, which is at the heart of Chromium. So, we've gone full circle...
kHTML, that's a name I haven't heard in a long time
I feel old
what chrome? haven't used that in ages
I've long ago stopped using Chrome on my computer because it was getting too bloated.
I am using firefox over six month i guess. Added firefoxcss and some important extensions. Its just invincible. In my experience, its better than edge and vivaldi. I stopped using chrome many years ago. I switched to edge, then vivaldi, then again edge. Now, firefox forever. But, I have a question. I understand that, it will stop extension. But those chromium based browsers, which have built in adblocker, will they also get affected? Edge, brave, vivaldi etc, all of them are chromium based. It would be sad to see them suffer. They all fight against the mighty emperor like chrome. Hope they are going to find alternative way. However, firefox should make it customization more easier for normal user. They can offer extension like sidebery, ublock origin, gesturefy, dark mode, auto discard tabs at the beginning of their installation. Also, some different looks as theme from Firefoxcss. Normal users don't dig much. Many people still don't know that ads can be block by extension. A easier setup would boost users.
I'd be glad to switch back to Firefox, but websites straight up don't work on it anymore. That was the only reason I went to Chrome.
What websites? I use Firefox as my daily driver on desktop and mobile, and I rarely run into problems. Like so infrequently that I don't even remember the last time.
Same. My Dark Reader doesn't always show websites properly but Firefox hasn't let me down in ages.
Some websites display warnings even though everything works fine, like web.skype.com. But that's the closest thing to doesn't work I've ever seen on Firefox.
They are around...
Try this one: (https://www.starbirdchicken.com/starbird-chicken-menu)I was curious of what their menu looked like as I have one by my work. Haven't checked it on desktop, but on Android, the menu items never get loaded. ($10-12 for an á la carte chicken sandwich from a fast casual place is a ripoff anyway)Edit: It looks like it's the mobile site/formatting that is broken. Using desktop mode lets the menu items come onto screen. (Firefox 126.01 on a pixel8pro with Android 14) The same issue seems to also be present with chrome under my work account.
I still argue that they are present, as I had to with it doing taxes a couple months ago. (Just not going to give those sites away)
No problems loading that page on Firefox for Android or desktop for me. Are you using Firefox or a fork of Firefox? Do you have any extensions or about:config changes that may be affecting the page rendering?
Works perfectly for me on desktop with firefox
works flawless here on Android 14 with Firefox 126.0.1. not tested desktop yet.
I've yet to find a single website that doesn't work in Firefox.
There are some sites out there that won't work. ESC Configurator won't work in Firefox because it needs web serial to program an ESC connected over a serial port. That's the only site I use that I have to run in chrome. I'm sure there are more out there, but they are not very common.
That's a reason to insist on Firefox even harder. Fuck those websites!
I encourage those in this situation to do their small, small part in fighting for the future of the open web by only switching to Chrome when necessary.
Which is almost never in my daily life!
How do we combat Google Chrome being Internet Explorer 2.0?
I have never encountered this... Do you have an example, just curious
Which sites? Been using Firefox since forever and all is well.
Last I tried, I had serious issues using it on Comcast's billing pages and Quest Diagnostic's site, among others. The pages would not load at all until I went to Chrome.
As with others, I use Firefox for my main browser, and Brave when I need a Chromium-based browser for something. I don't see many ads...
Consider ungoogled chromium instead. Brave is not great, it just has the advantage of being heavily promoted by the middle part of the (privacy nerds) and (want privacy because their beliefs are rejected by most of human society) venn diagram.
I use that on my personal computer, but at work I'll occasionally hit sites other than what I'm debugging, and Chromium has ineffective ad-block, whereas Brave has reasonable ad-block. I can't control the network at work like I can at home, so I can't really rely on something like a pi-hole or whatever.
As a web browser with an embedded ad-blocker, it works fine. I'm not going to stop using something because someone distasteful is using it, I'll stop using it if it no longer meets my needs. It blocks ads and renders as Chrome would, so it works well enough for me.
I disable the crypto nonsense and pretty much only use it for debugging work stuff. Sometimes that means I need a JSON formatter or something, and those sites are riddled with ads w/o an ad-blocker.
oh, hrm. Im not sure what specific build you're using, but the one I'm using has mechanisms for installing normal adblockers like ublockorigin. note: afaik, this doesn't solve the problem indicated in this thread -- I'm operating on the basis that the blocking functionality will be nerfed. However for me, I use it purely for (stuff that doesnt work in firefox) and my jellyfin server (since firefox is kinda particular about hevc videos...you can kinda get them to work in windows, but in many cases I dont fully understand jellyfin still tries to transcode to 264).
worth stating that "because someone distasteful is using it" is a reasonable misunderstanding due to me assuming some knowledge. Brave was created because firefox kicked a homophobe out and he wanted to make a browser. Said person is also clearly a cryptonut, which makes him a yet more negative person in my book. Now, unrelated to that base, you have a lot of people out there who are promoting it by my personal experience in more privacy centric groups is that these promoters are often quite...unsavory. Is that enough to stop using software? not necessarily. Is it enough when there are far better options out there? to me, absolutely.
At home, it's whatever ships with my Linux distribution. I use it mostly for web dev testing (I dev on Firefox, test on chromium) for personal projects, and for my kids to play certain games (Firefox works most of the time for that).
Sort of, but I don't think that's really telling the whole story.
Brendan Eich was the CEO of Mozilla for many years and was the initial creator of JavaScript. He was ousted because he made a private donation to block gay marriage legalization in California. There is no evidence that he was or is a homophobe, just that he didn't believe that gay marriage was something that state should legally recognize. By all counts, he was pleasant to work with regardless of sexual orientation, the issue was that someone found out about his donation. He didn't harm anyone and wasn't unfair, he just made a private donation.
I think he was a great CEO, and Mozilla needs a technical CEO imo (in fact, everything started going downhill around when he left). I disagree with him politically, but if I avoided every product where I disagreed with the executive team politically, I'd have to avoid pretty much every product (and quit my job).
So I need a better reason to avoid Brave. I'm not sure what the plan is for their cryptocurrency, and I honestly see it as more of a gimmick than anything. It's easy to disable, so whatever, it existing doesn't impact me.
I also don't actively recommend it to anyone, I always recommend Firefox or a Firefox derivative. The only time I recommend it is if someone needs a Chromium-based browser and wants ad-blocking, and Brave works well for that. If they just need Chromium and don't need ad blocking, I recommend Chromium.
If you have a better alternative, I'm interested. I literally just need a Chromium-based browser that works on macOS (what I use for work) with proper ad blocking. I don't need to sync anything, it'll only ever exist on that one device. I also need something for Linux, and open source is more important than ad blocking there.
I'm also interested in Brave Search since it uses its own index. I currently use DDG, but search results are kinda crappy so I'm looking for alternatives.
Brave Chads keep on winning
So maybe my experience is unique but websites don't always test with Firefox now and some simply don't work with it. I use it anyway out of principle but occasionally I need to open Chrome.
On mobile it's even worse. Firefox is stuttery on my Pixel 8 Pro and doesn't handle more than ~20 open tabs well. The nightly version fixes the stutter but crashes all the time (it's a nightly build after all so this is expected).
This post reminded me to try out Brave. It's based on Chromium but purports to block ads and trackers...
Anybody else use it?
Edit: Interesting. Anyone care to explain the downvotes? I know nothing about this browser other than it purportedly blocks Youtube ads, which are driving me nuts.
Edit2: Well shit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Eich
I had no idea about this guy. Ok, so completely not an option.
My brother uses it, just remember to look through the ad settings. There was a toggle at one point to allow their approved ads or something like that.
i tried brave recently after finding out it's open source, and that setting is off by default. ended up keeping firefox, because on android somehow the new tab page in brave is even worse than in ff. too tricky to access bookmarks.
I still to this day don't know how to get back to the tab I was on in firefox-android if I get to the new tab screen. It's been 2 or 3 years since the redesign.
you need to close keyboard, hit the tab icon on the address bar and select the tab. easier way is to open some recent website and either close the current one or swipe from the address bar. it's stupid.
Sigh, thank you
Iirc there was also some drama about the money they collect not going to the promised destination. Anywhere other than silicon valley this might be called fraud.
They still might be forced to follow chromium's manifest v3 ant ad locking stuff though, we'll just have to see.
No I'm pro lgbtq folks having rights
How does this relate to Brave browser?
Edit: I had no idea about the CEO. So yeah, not gonna ever use that.
yep :(
very disappointing all round. on a sliding scale thats not the worst thing brave has done, but given that the entire browser was literally birthed from "we don't want your hate here" its hard to avoid.
Too bad for your little black and white worldview those are the same people against adblockers. The good thing is this world has sensible people like me who could give less of a fuck who's feeling is getting hurt and only care about our browsing experience. The rest can go die for all I care.
What the actual duck are you talking about? I genuinely can't figure it out.
filtered