Serious Discussion Now Brave Will Continue to Support MV2 Extensions in Its Browser, but What About the Developers, Will They Continue to Maintain Their Extensions?

[lokamoka820]

As the title said, brave will continue to support mv2 extensions in its browser, but what about the developers, will they continue to maintain their extensions just for brave users? What are brave browser ideas for the future after June 2025?

 

[Bot]

The decision to maintain MV2 extensions will depend on the individual developers. Brave's future plans are not explicitly stated, but they likely include enhancing privacy and security features, improving performance, and expanding their ad and reward system.

 

[Divine_Barakah]

As the title said, brave will continue to support mv2 extensions in its browser, but what about the developers, will they continue to maintain their extensions just for brave users? What are brave browser ideas for the future after June 2025?

Well, that might make people make the switch to Brave. And if Brave has a bigger user base over time, developers might keep working on MV2 extensions.

If that becomes much of a hassle, which I believe will be the case, developers will move on and drop support for MV2 and Brave will have to too.

 

[Marko :)]

Brave and other Chromium browser can continue supporting MV2 extension as long as Google lets them. Google gave grace period to all developers until June 2025. After that date, Google will completely remove MV2 code from Chromium code base, and I honestly doubt Brave and other Chromium developers could do anything to bring it back.

Google knows what it's doing. They invited browser developers to develop their own web browser on their platform. And now that it became literally a monopoly, they can do whatever they want. And can blackmail other developers as much as they want.

Currently the best thing for users is to just give hugeto Google and to switch to any browser that isn't using Chromium.

 

[silversurfer]

I use mainly Firefox from the beginning... but it's most likely that sooner or later even Firefox is forced to stop the support of MV2 addons/extensions.
On topic: Not to mention why should the majority of developers working on two versions as MV2 and MV3 unless they would earn enough money for the work...

 

[Marko :)]

I use mainly Firefox from the beginning... but it's most likely that sooner or later even Firefox is forced to stop the support of MV2 addons/extensions.
On topic: Not to mention why should the majority of developers working on two versions as MV2 and MV3 unless they would earn enough money for the work...

Literally nothing was preventing Google to keep MV2 support just for specific trustworthy extensions like uBlock Origin and blocking MV2 for new extensions. I think we all know why this wasn't the case.

I have no doubts that Mozilla will also switch to MV3 only in future, but before that, they'll listen what add-on developers will have to say, how to do it in a way not to leave users and them in the dark. Maybe Mozilla will use selective method mentioned above, who knows. This is certainly the thing we don't have to worry, at least for now.

 

[oldschool]

I use mainly Firefox from the beginning... but it's most likely that sooner or later even Firefox is forced to stop the support of MV2 addons/extensions.

I have no doubts that Mozilla will also switch to MV3 only in future,

And when this happens, Brave will have the upper hand in terms of ad & tracker blocking, since their developers do most of the heavy lifting in maintaining the default blocklists like EasyList, etc.

It should also be noted that, depending on the outcome of the Justice Department's lawsuit against Google, Mozilla may well lose its huge funding from Google, so its days could be numbered afterwards. Of course, the final outcome of that suit is likely years away, given the complexity of the court's determination of possible remedies and slow nature of the appeals process.

 

[Marko :)]

And when this happens, Brave will have the upper hand in terms of ad & tracker blocking, since their developers do most of the heavy lifting in maintaining the default blocklists like EasyList, etc.

Yes, exactly!

It should also be noted that, depending on the outcome of the Justice Department's lawsuit against Google, Mozilla may well lose its huge funding from Google, so its days could be numbered afterwards. Of course, the final outcome of that suit is likely years away, given the complexity of the court's determination of possible remedies and slow nature of the appeals process.

I'm not too worried about that. They are mentioning Apple and Microsoft in anti-trust case, but not Mozilla. I believe it has something to do with Mozilla being non-profit organization and with small market share. The money Google pays Mozilla could be look at like donation. It just wouldn't make sense to me to poke Google about this. Beside, in reality, punishing Mozilla this way would only be contradictory if you want to break a monopoly.

 

[oldschool]

I'm not too worried about that. They are mentioning Apple and Microsoft in anti-trust case, but not Mozilla. I believe it has something to do with Mozilla being non-profit organization and with small market share. The money Google pays Mozilla could be look at like donation.

Not really. Google pays to have it be the default search engine. There is an exchange of $$$ for something tangible (potential increased clicks & profits), i.e. it's determined by contract.

It just wouldn't make sense to me to poke Google about this. Beside, in reality, punishing Mozilla this way would only be contradictory if you want to break a monopoly.

That would concern the Justice Dept.'s other lawsuit, against Google's Chrome browser. Totally separate lawsuits. Totally different remedies. Of course, the complexity of all the total issues makes it more likely the Supreme Court will have the final say, and I wouldn't place any bets on it ruling in favor of consumers/users.

Check the below link and the related links at the end of the article.

Judge rules that Google ‘is a monopolist’ in US antitrust case

The DOJ and Google faced off in a 10-week trial.

www.theverge.com

 

[Marko :)]

Not really. Google pays to have it be the default search engine. There is an exchange of $$$ for something tangible, i.e. it's determined by contract.

Sure it is, but again, Mozilla is non-profit organization with tiny market share. Really tiny. According to Statcounter, 4% while Chrome has 51% and Safari 33%. Third browser is actually Microsoft Edge with 7.51%.

Browser Market Share United States Of America | Statcounter Global Stats

This graph shows the market share of browsers in United States Of America based on over 5 billion monthly page views.

gs.statcounter.com

That would concern the Justice Dept.'s other lawsuit, against Google's Chrome browser. Totally separate lawsuits. Totally different remedies. Of course, the complexity of all the total issues makes it more likely the Supreme Court will have the final say, and I wouldn't place any bets on it ruling in favor of consumers/users.

Check this out:

‘There’s no price’ Microsoft could pay Apple to use Bing: all the spiciest parts of the Google antitrust ruling

Apple thinks Microsoft’s search engine is pretty bad.

www.theverge.com

If it was up to me, Google should be ordered to give up ownership of the Chromium project to some independent and non-profit organization. It's just too big, way too big.

 

[lokamoka820]

According to ghacks.net:

Firefox users have been concerned by the news, because Google is practically the biggest funder for Mozilla, paying the browser well over $500 Million. Apple's Safari and Firefox are the only non-Chromium browsers that offer some real competition in the market. But, Firefox barely has a user share, so losing out on the Google deal could be a big blow for Mozilla. Will another search engine step up to partner with Mozilla? Wouldn't that be anti-competitive behavior too?

U.S Judge rules that Google has an illegal search engine monopoly - gHacks Tech News

Google has lost its antitrust case against the U.S. DoJ, after a district judge found the search engine of building an illegal monopoly.

www.ghacks.net

 

[oldschool]

but again, Mozilla is non-profit organization

Which is meaningless & irrelevant to its contract activities. And Mozilla is not a subject of the Google lawsuit, possibly only the Chrome lawsuit.

We'll just have to agree to disagree, my friend. And only time will tell.

 

[Marko :)]

Which is meaningless & irrelevant to its contract activities. And Mozilla is not a subject of the Google lawsuit, possibly only the Chrome lawsuit.

We'll just have to agree to disagree, my friend. And only time will tell.

Not trying to offend anyone, but seeing your past anti-trust hearings, your politicians aren't the sharpest tools in the shed. Luckily for us Croats, ours don't give a damn about tech companies and just let EU handle everything for us. And I think EU is doing God's work.

 

[aidunno]

Why uMatrix? Isn't it abandoned?

 

[Marko :)]

Why uMatrix? Isn't it abandoned?

Who mentioned uMatrix?

 

[aidunno]

Who mentioned uMatrix?

Cause is in the page of Brave about V2 extensions. So I was asking

 

[Marko :)]

Cause is in the page of Brave about V2 extensions. So I was asking

Oh, it is discontinued. But since there aren't any risks of using it, some people just kept it so that's why it's there. It's still one of the most advanced browser extension that gives you total control of what goes through and what not.

 

[CyberDevil]

The problem is that no one who has stated continued support for V2 has a mobile browser that supports extensions. That is, in the mobile segment we lose V2 on Chromium completely (on actual versions of the engine). That leaves only Firefox as a safe haven, for while.

 

[Marko :)]

The problem is that no one who has stated continued support for V2 has a mobile browser that supports extensions. That is, in the mobile segment we lose V2 on Chromium completely (on actual versions of the engine). That leaves only Firefox as a safe haven, for while.

That's because barely any Chromium browser for Android supports extensions. I know that Kiwi Browser supports extensions, I'm not sure if there are any other.

 

[CyberDevil]

That's because barely any Chromium browser for Android supports extensions. I know that Kiwi Browser supports extension, I'm not sure if there are any other.

Of the chromium-based mobile browsers, extensions support Edge (Edge Canary supports installation of any extensions), Yandex Browser, Kiwi, Lemur.

So in principle it is possible, but unfortunately neither Vivaldi nor Brave nor Opera have added such functionality. It's especially bad since the first two use Lingvanex as a built-in translator, which is worse than even Google Translate version 10 years ago... That's why I gave up both Brave and Vivaldi a long time ago.