Um actually… Opera and Edge weren’t always based on chromium!
Chrome was not always based on chromeium. Chrome was based on Apple WebKit until 2013 when they forked WebKit and made the Blink engine.
Chromium was still the base before the WebKit/Blink fork. Chrome and Chromium were released simultaneously in 2008.
Chromium has always existed. Originally it was wrapping web kit and later they forked web kit into blink and diverged from Web kit. Chromium is a level above the engine.
Wha- hold up… I’m not sure I understand…
Chrome was based on WebKit?
I’m not aware about the old stuff as much so if someone could fill me in…
WebKit is a rendering engine which is one of the major components of a web browser. Chrome/Chromium was released in 2008 using a modified version of WebKit as its rendering engine. Eventually in 2013 they created a fork of WebKit called Blink, which is the current rendering engine for Chrome/Chromium.
Pre-Chromium Edge wasn’t even that bad. Sure, the engine had its issues and there was probably a bit of Edge-specific JS on some websites, but I’m sure they would’ve eventually got there.
But seeing that even Microsoft abandoned making their own browser engine, it goes to show how complex it is to make one nowadays and with new web APIs/features coming out every few weeks it feels like, it’s almost impossible to keep up.
But seeing that even Microsoft abandoned making their own browser engine, it goes to show how complex it is to make one nowadays and with new web APIs/features coming out every few weeks it feels like, it’s almost impossible to keep up.
No, Microsoft is just historically bad at making browsers. It was not until Internet Explorer 7 that they finally implemented HTML 4 and CSS 2 without major glaring bugs.
Microsoft was never bad at making browsers, their issue is that they tied browser release to Windows release cycle. IE6 was the best and the most compatible browser on the market in its release date. But it didn’t get a single update during its long life. 5 years old Chrome is completely useless today even if it was a pinnacle back then.
Sure, but Windows Update was already part of the OS and web users were a customer segment that had an Internet connection. They could have pushed patches and bug fixes.
That’s not Microsoft philosophy. Microsoft has strong backwards compatibility. If they would change how border box is rendered on the screen, that would break a lot of apps which use IE engine as a web view. Thus they only push security updates, but ensure that rendering stays the same within one Windows version.
Opera was the shit back in the early days. It could pretend to be any other browser.
Can’t you do that with any browser by changing the user agent?
Yeah:
Sent from Internet Explorer 9
I’m not sure how long you’ve been able to change the user agent in config pages tbh, I just remember Opera had it as an option in the GUI settings and even the right click menu.
I have an installer for Opera 12.18, the last one to use their Presto engine. Every once in a while I test it out to see how it has aged.
It’s not pretty haha. It barely works.
I miss pre chromium Opera so much lol, lot of nostalgia
My favourite browser, abandoned it when they went chromium. RIP in peace Opera.
Always weren’t been
deleted by creator
Firefox with add-ons. Especially, but not only, Ublock Origin.
NoScript 🤌🏻
I love it in theory… but it just broke so many websites I needed to use. And not always in obvious ways.
Then just put those sites on your trust list?
You can go through all the sites the initial HTTP request calls out to and decide which ones get a pass. This is how I ensure sites like gstatic, googletagmanager, etc. don’t collect data even though the rest of the site works.
If that’s too much, just open the flood gates for that site and trust everything there. At least it isn’t just sending all your data out by DEFAULT.
That still breaks a lot of sites. For example, Wikipedia gets broken if you click any link and then navigate back. NoScript is just crap. If you want to actually block scripts for something without breaking everything else, use DevTools.
You can use Wikiless, an alternative frontend for Wikipedia which doesn’t have JavaScript, and LibRedirect.
I call bs. I am not experiencing that on mobile or desktop this behavior you’re describing. NoScript does not break Wikipedia.
It does it on my phone. 100% repeatable.
Yeah these days literally every website uses JavaScript in some format as modern reactive design is easier to do if you can execute client side code. Blocking JavaScript is a sledgehammer solution to the problem.
Same here. I used NoScript in the past and remembering whitelisting way too often so dumped it in the end. Now I just use uBlock with I think some built-in javascript block of known bad hosts.
You can use Ublock Origin in advanced mode, which allows you to block, blacklist/whitelist scripts.
So you mean Librewolf
IMO any of the forks are inherently weaker than the main and there’s nothing stopping you from making Firefox work exactly like whichever flavor of fork you prefer, but with security updates the day they come out.
I also just like to support Mozilla where I can. They’re not perfect, but they’re doing a lot more good for the internet than Google are.
Add-ons are a pretty huge security risk, though. Someone was just posting an article about how tempting it is to sell out with your extension, and how many offers you actually get.
And I’ve already been burned once, and it’s not pretty. Also nothing you can do against this.
The best solution is actually not Firefox, but Mullvad. No need for extensions, based on Tor Browser and can be bundled with a VPN that’s full of other people using the same browser - so you have exactly the same fingerprint, and they can’t tell you apart. Not by extensions, not by IP.
deleted by creator
This is why I’ve stuck with firefox through thick and thin
Been using FF for about 2 decades now and I have never seen a single good reason to switch.
Ditto. As much as people pretend Firefox is niche, it is the only browser with lineage back to the start of the web.
Google accounts for some 80%+ of Mozilla’s revenue. Firefox struck a different kind of deal with the devil than chromium browsers, but Google is the one pulling the strings.
Bit of a weird thought, but I wonder also if they see Mozilla as a sort of controlled opposition too? As in, keep Firefox around so they don’t get in trouble over antitrust or something like that?
Mozilla.org is the corpse of Netscape that Google keeps animated so that it looks like they have competition when they really don’t.
The existence of Firefox is something they can point to to say they’re not a monopoly. The fact that 80% of the revenue Firefox receives is from Google means that Google effectively controls them. Mozilla has to weigh every decision against the risk that it will cause Google to withdraw their funding. That severely restricts the choices they’re willing to consider.
Firefox is only 5% of browsers, so it really doesn’t matter to Google if that 5% of users considers using a different search engine. Because of the Firefox user base, many of them will have already switched search engines, and because Google is such a dominant player, many others would switch back to Google if the browser used a different default. So, maybe 10% of that 5% would permanently switch search engines if Google stopped paying. Is that really worth billions per year? Probably not. But, pretending like you have competitors in the browser space and using that to push back on antitrust, that’s definitely worth billions per year.
Google makes something like $100 Billion a year in search ad revenue. 5% of that is $5 Billion.
It’s odd that people think Google is incredibly worried about having too large of a market share in the browser market (which they don’t make any money from) yet their 92% market share in searches is not concerning at all in terms of the potential for regulation.
The truth is nobody does anti-trust anymore (though they definitely should) and the big corporations aren’t worried at all about it. Google makes Chrome, Android, and pays Mozilla because they want to maintain dominance in the search market. Which is the thing they make money form. What they pay Mozilla is a drop in the bucket compared to what they pay Apple to be the default search engine on their devices.
Google doesn’t directly make money from their browser, but controlling their browser means they lock in the thing that drives their revenues. They can always test it out against all their ads and make sure it works, putting out a fix if it ever doesn’t. We’ve also seen recently how they’re trying to make it so people can’t run ad blockers, something they could only consider if they lock down the entire browser market.
I disagree.
Google doesn’t “control” mozilla in that way.
They can always test it out against all their ads and make sure it works, putting out a fix if it ever doesn’t.
They could do this even if they weren’t funding mozilla. Ad’s aren’t exactly reliant on bleeding edge web standards anyway. You’re thinking about tracking tech, which they don’t have any input in for firefox.
We’ve also seen recently how they’re trying to make it so people can’t run ad blockers
Well yes, and mozilla was quite vocal in their opposition, demonstrating that Google doesn’t have much control over them.
Could you expand on this
Google pays Mozilla in exchange for google being Firefox’s default search engine
I see that as an okay compromise. Anyone who cares will also know how to change it easily.
And I actually wouldn’t have a problem with using google for searches if it weren’t for the fact they constantly do the captcha thing when I’m connecting via VPN. Captchas for a simple google search.
I’m not against google making money off of a good product, but they’ve enshittified it too much to be considered good now.
Bruh, I just checked google.com again after a long time… Damn, I forgot that it was so annoying. Have been using ddg for years — no problem.
Stop using public VPN, problem solved.
A lot of people don’t bother with changing defaults and corpos like Google, Microsoft, and the likes are well aware of this which is why Google pays Mozilla hundreds of millions of dollars per year to be the default search engine.
I understand the compromise at the surface level but the implications just result in Google gaining more power and data, making it harder for “alternatives” to replace it over time which puts us all in an a bad situation when they decide to pull shit like WEI.
That’s a good point, though I still think the average person is already entrenched in Google. Being the default on an alternative browser isn’t really going to make the difference to the average, uncaring individual.
In a perfect world it wouldn’t be necessary but on the bright side Google search is already doing enough itself to make the average person want to try something else.
Yeah that’s hardly a game changer.
Do you have any examples of how google is pulling the strings at Mozilla ?
For an example, Mozilla being forced to use Google Location Services as default even though Mozilla has its own. I am also a Firefox user but it always makes me wonder what other TnCs forced on Mozilla as part of the search deal.
go to about:config and type “google”
For default search.
I’m sure you’re aware Firefox isn’t in the search market. They are in the browser market and need to fund browser development. They’ve used Yahoo in the past and will go with whatever deal gives the best value. They could go with Bing if they wanted.
Funding from them does not mean control, and your insinuation is misleading and false.
Sshhhhhh you’ll destroy the narrative!
This feels weird to say… I really think Microsoft should’ve stuck with trident / edgehtml.
Why? Because you liked the greater browser diversity or because you think it made a better browser?
Diversity. MS had made great strides with EdgeHTML, but it was still pretty bad
But at least opening the browser didn’t take all my ram.
And also at the very least you had another option. Which, in my opinion, wasn’t that bad, at least it could’ve been if they just gave up on Bing and MSN.
No way, they can’t give up on bing. They do that and all we have is Google for searches. We need the competition. For MSN, it’s all about content now, I kinda like that branding… It makes it easier to see that I don’t want to see it.
Microsoft could host their on SearXNG instance. /s
As a web developer, EdgeHTML was the source of so many bugs, including a few that were regressions, and it didn’t seem like Microsoft dedicated enough resources to the Edge project.
Wait STEAM AND DISCORD ARE CHROMIUM?
Yep, just like slack, spotify, and anything else looking fancy while wasting few gigs of ram to just open. They’re built on electron, which is practically chrome without tabs.
I wish they could bring back mozilla prism. Like all this electron web app shit is popular, so we don’t we use the faster and more efficient browser engine and use gecko!
Speaking of Mozilla, the project they dropped and fired all of their employees working on it all while giving CEO a million dollar raise, the same one that provided most of the performance improvements in the Quantum update, Servo is targetting being an embedded solution. https://floss.social/@servo/110780173168763670
Nice, I didn’t know Servo was still being developed!
This whole Chromium fiasco is partially Mozilla’s fault, they let Google grab the embedded browser monopoly by making Firefox hard to componentize and letting Electron take all the market share. No competition.
Visual studio code is chromium.
dies
Yeah, just wrappers. Steam wasn’t untill fairly recently, but they were slowly switching to it for some time.
Not a good idea if Google be pulling some shit
Yeah, it’s weird for them to rely on Google considering how hard Valve has worked to make Steam independent from MS.
It probably doesn’t matter for what they do. There isn’t really much need for an ad blocker on a browser that’s going to a store page which is essentially an ad for a product in and of itself. A steam user actually wants that store page to load, why would there be a need for a store page?
And they could transition to something else if Google does something that affects them.
Chromium isn’t technically Google
Still serves googles goal of control over the internet.
It is, good luck hard forking such a huge codebase.
I mean what would stop a company from doing that? I get why they don’t, because a lot of changes and fixes get implemented into the code from various companies/individuals, but if you had enough manpower and money, it could be done.
Exaclly money and manpower. Noone is going to do it.
I don’t think it’s too weird. So many apps today are just Chromium wrappers. It’s just easier to use a premade base, plus you don’t have to develop the web and desktop version independently, they can literally be the same code.
While that’s fairly typical and good practice in dev circles, we’re talking about a company that’s single handedly elevated an entire OS to prevent a big company taking too much power. I think the key here is they don’t really compete with Google.
Mozilla doesn’t make it as easy to use the Firefox / Gecko engine in other projects, which doesn’t help for adoption.
I’m way out of the loop, but is the issue that they actively make it difficult to use the rendering engine or is it that the cost to modularize it isn’t worth the payoff to Firefox itself? A subtle but important distinction IMO. I always felt it was the second, but maybe I was being dense?
Back in the days it was possible to use Firefox engine to create apps. It was called XUL. Heck, Firefox itself was just a XUL app! But then they decided it wasn’t worth it for whatever reason and now their engine is tightly integrated.
I believe it might be still possible with UXP - a hard fork made for Pale Moon project.
Pale Moon is based on a derivative of the Gecko rendering engine (Goanna) and builds on a hard fork of the Mozilla code (mozilla-central) called UXP, a XUL-focused application platform that provides the underpinnings of several XUL applications including Pale Moon. This means that the core rendering functions for Pale Moon may differ from Firefox (and other browsers) and websites may display slightly different in this browser.
They don’t try to make it difficult, but they make code changes that make it clear they have no concern for anyone who might be trying to use the engine anywhere other than in a retail build of Firefox, without providing things like deprecation warnings or upgrade paths.
wait, the steam browser is chromium? no way
Basically every in app browser is.
How the fuck has everyone so easily allowed so few tech companies to dominate?
That’s just late stage capitalism.
Do you just keep that on the clipboard?
Honestly my google auto-type keyboard suggests that any time I post.
No, that’s just people don’t want to pay for anything and expect everything to be free.
The harder and more complicated something is the bigger barrier to entry there is to competing against it.
When video games were simple and fit on a single floppy disk or tape - a single person could develop an entire commercially released game. John Romero could make Dangerous Dave in a week or two, by himself.
Now that games are like Grand Theft Auto V they require hundreds of millions of dollars to create with teams of hundreds of people over nearly a decade. The voice acting in motion capture alone cost many many times more than a game would cost to make in the '80s.
The same goes with web browsers. Chromium is open source and free, it works well, so why spend tens or hundreds of millions of dollars to make your own new thing?
What benefit did Microsoft get from spending all that money on EdgeHTML versus just using Chromium? None. That’s why they switched to Chromium.
Oh… so to answer your question no one is “allowing” a few tech companies to denominate, just the complexity and cost of creating new products leads to these natural monopolies sort of forming. You’re free to spend the tens of millions of dollars to make your own browser if you want to and break up this domination. I doubt you’ll do it you’ll probably just use Chromium.
And if you were to actually create an innovative or competing product, Google would just buy you out like Android, Waze, Nest, etc
Not on browsers, probably. It’s one of the areas where antitrust still has some echoes. They’ll probably pay you to stay afloat.
Tech giants are buying everyone left and right because people don’t want to pay for these innovative products. Imagine paying a monthly subscription for Waze! Who would do that? Literally no one. Innovative products can’t exist without paying customers.
Have you tried developing your own web browser?
The Web has become so complex, you need a huge team of talented developers to keep up with it, and for that you need a lot of money.
How hard can’t it be just put scrum on GitHub and let it work from there
Strange that nobody’s doing that, then. Especially since so many people want more competition for Google.
Software development is very expensive. And everyone just wants free stuff. Imagine the outcry if Firefox would drop revenue from Google search and switched to a subscription model a-la Adobe! People would literally lose their minds and call Mozilla Nazis.
Robert Bork:
He also became an influential antitrust scholar, arguing that consumers often benefited from corporate mergers and that antitrust law should focus on consumer welfare rather than on ensuring competition.
…What the fuck?
Yeah, it’s fine if you drive all your competition out of business, as long as the consumer "isn’t harmed"TM . But, of course, how are you going to prove that the consumer isn’t harmed?
Was IE for the longest time
deleted by creator
Laughts in LibreWolf
This is the way
It gets worse. All Electron applications are Chromium, too.
deleted by creator
How much RAM you got on that toothbrush!?
Can it run Crysis?
Only gamers get that joke
Chromium is everywhere…
Be sure to install AdNauseam on your Firefox to really go full “fuck you” to google.
AdNauseam
Note that AdNauseam no longer recommends Firefox
Sigh. I believe this is simply because of the removal from Firefox mobile
It’s uBlock, but it’s fucking with their revenue
Unfortunately, if you have properly set up Firefox, i.e with arkenfox user.js or by using Librewolf, it doesn’t work :/ It still blocks adds without issues, but it’s not visiting them.
Or if you’re running PiHole - same issue. Is there a way how to make PiHole actually go though all those clicks? I guess it would be hard to figure out what’s an ad and what’s telemetry.
PiHole is doing DNS resolution only, it doesn’t have any way to know what the link is, its not sent that data.
I actually think AdNauseam is the cause of Google making WEI.
Firefox user since before it was called Firefox.
Mozilla browser was great.
Safari still uses the WebKit engine… right?
Google Chrome used to use WebKit before switching to their own weird engine that a whole bunch of other browsers now use.
When Google forked from WebKit to create Blink, they had genuine reasons for it.
Apple was stalling any progress of web by stalling new features in WebKit. They wanted to push their native apps and get big cut from developers’ money.
Google had to fork and progress web dev further.
And unfortunately for us, Google folks are greedy assholes who stop at nothing to own everything web even if they have to bend everything.
WEI is a perfect example.
I never expected to fall down a rabbit hole.
Apple was stalling any progress of web by stalling new features in WebKit. They wanted to push their native apps and get big cut from developers’ money.
I mean, whatever their reasons, for World Wide Web of hypertext pages the list of necessary features shouldn’t be so long.
So a good thing.
Anyway, that battle is long lost, so I’m just slowly moving my “internet reading” needs into Gemini. Friends I can’t move, though.
If most of what you want out of the web is browsing static web pages, halting development of standards is fine. But if you want to expose capabilities through the browser like location that are available on new platforms instead of relying on platform-specific apps, you’re going to need new features.
I don’t want that. WWW is not intended for that.
If you want that, there’s been Flash and Java applets at least allowing whatever you’d like.
That was the correct way to put cross-platform applications into webpages.
Don’t tell me about security problems in those, these are present in any piece of software and fixed with new versions, just like with the browser itself.
I don’t want that. WWW is not intended for that.
Okay, then links awaits you. I’d rather use something that enables powerful in-browser web applications while not relying on a host of proprietary bug ridden plugins.
Okay, then links awaits you.
It’s a client for the same broken thing.
while not relying on a host of proprietary bug ridden plugins
This is utter bullshit.
Obfuscated JS is not any less proprietary or bug-ridden than Java bytecode.
google uses blink which is forked from WebKit
Named as such because, like Weeping Angels, if you blink you’ll be sent back to a society without enforcement of antitrust laws
actually the name of Blink engine is quite interesting, it was named after the non-standard html
blinktag and ironically it never supported it. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blink_(browser_engine)#NamingI don’t understand this argument about antitrust laws. As far as i know Google hasn’t done anything to block other companies from making their own search engines or browsers. Nor does Value and Steam, nor Microsoft and Windows.
nor Microsoft and Windows.
Come on, this is ridiculous.
WEI checks if your browser and system is “genuine” and “unmodified” before letting you access any content “protected” by it, which inevitably leads to smaller and custom mods that don’t fit their predetermined criteria for “genuineness” being locked out, which in turn forces you to use Google (and Microsoft and Apple, they’re in on it too) products in order to access certain content and eventually the entire internet, just as surely as it’s almost completely impossible to avoid their Google Analytics malware.
And before you say “that’s a ridiculous slippery slope fallacy! That’ll never happen!”, Logitech is already requiring you to go to a website that will only open in Chromium browsers in order to pair devices with the Logitech Unifying Receiver.
Thanks for reminding me of what the hell it was called
But… but… it’s an open-source…
From this band, I get more and more in love with Vivaldi, especially their Workspaces feature.
I tried FF the other day instead of Vivaldi and I was like, no scroll wheel to switch tabs? No quick commands? No workspaces? Ugh I am prepared to keep using a chromium engine rather than give up all the “power user” features. It’s just sooo good.
Been using gestures for so long I constantly catch myself using them in other apps where it doesn’t work and getting frustrated at myself.
I know, right?
I’m currently using both browsers, and I’ve been with FF for a very long time. But the things that come with Vivaldi from the very beginning make it my daily driver.
Yeah, I use Vivaldi at work. I love it.
It’s not on my personal devices, but if work is going to default to Chrome anyway, I may as well be using the best version of it.
I went whole hog. The sync features are great between computer and phone app (phone app is excellent!) and they actively disable all the terrible shit from chrome. It works with bing/chat gpt too which is nice. They have been very vocal against Google proposed changes and I’m confident they will work around them if at all possible. If not, hell yeah, I’m jumping ship, but I give Vivaldi a lot of credit for what they’ve done this far. I’m hanging in there for now.
