I'm making the switch to...

  • Brave browser

    Votes: 19 16.7%
  • Google Chrome

    Votes: 19 16.7%
  • Microsoft Edge (Chromium)

    Votes: 45 39.5%
  • Mozilla Firefox browser

    Votes: 31 27.2%
  • Total voters
    114
Most interested about
Exclusive Features
F

ForgottenSeer 85911

oh please, Brendan Eich is about as trustworthy as the study that says Brave is the most private browser
that is a joke when you can compile Chromium browser from the source code and it is devoid of everthing
Brave's whole business model is ad revenue and while it is opt-in now at some point in the future there will not be such an option
Brave has investors and it has to deliver expected revenue at some point when push comes to shove expect Brave to change massively
like I said there is other stuff for those that know how to look for it

the backdoor might not be used for tracking at this moment, but the potential is there
good grief it is common sense stuff
 

Azure

Level 26
Verified
Content Creator
oh please, Brendan Eich is about as trustworthy as the study that says Brave is the most private browser
that is a joke when you can compile Chromium browser from the source code and it is devoid of everthing
Brave's whole business model is ad revenue and while it is opt-in now at some point in the future there will not be such an option
Brave has investors and it has to deliver expected revenue at some point when push comes to shove expect Brave to change massively
like I said there is other stuff for those that know how to look for it

the backdoor might not be used for tracking at this moment, but the potential is there
good grief it is common sense stuff
I have been seeing Brendan tweets post for quite a while now. And there has been nothing that has make me think he is untrustworthy.

So far I would say I find he is way more trustworthy that the current Mozilla.
 
F

ForgottenSeer 85911

I have been seeing Brendan tweets post for quite a while now. And there has been nothing that has make me think he is untrustworthy.

So far I would say I find he is way more trustworthy that the current Mozilla.
Tweets a measure of trustworthiness ?
perhaps you should do some investigative research
 
i wanted to use edge, but it annoys me. i like to set my start page, and when you do that, it takes friggin eternity to find it. i think it goes to its default first, and then redirects you to your preference?? so weird, b/c edge itself is faster than chromes. if they fixed that it would likely be my main. i hate google chrome so i can't use that. i do have brave that i play with, but it is not my main browser yet (it is still a toy for me). i have returned to firefox and am liking it. it is so light on ram compared to those chrome-based ones. and it works, and now has the same sandbox features. yandex is my main, but not on your list (and yes, it is heavy, being chrome based, but is feature rich).
 
oh please, Brendan Eich is about as trustworthy as the study that says Brave is the most private browser
that is a joke when you can compile Chromium browser from the source code and it is devoid of everthing
Brave's whole business model is ad revenue and while it is opt-in now at some point in the future there will not be such an option
Brave has investors and it has to deliver expected revenue at some point when push comes to shove expect Brave to change massively
like I said there is other stuff for those that know how to look for it

the backdoor might not be used for tracking at this moment, but the potential is there
good grief it is common sense stuff
heheh. you say brave wants to make money to pay its employees and development. such evil buggers. people need to know you want things free and they should work for your approval and not money. you should lead by example and tell your boss at work you're sorry for being so malicious as to expect to be paid for your labour. so unless you want to buy your browsers, developers will need to find a way to fund them. early browsers were paid models. once the browser wars end and a victor emerges, we might have to pay a monthly subscription to use our browser. luckily, this ad revenue thing makes that unlikely.
 
F

ForgottenSeer 85911

Pray tell, what is your browser of choice? Yandex? Sea Monkey?
compile Chromium from source code it does not use anything Google related every last bit of privacy worrying code is ripped out
the code is open source and regularly vetted

heheh. you say brave wants to make money to pay its employees and development. such evil buggers. people need to know you want things free and they should work for your approval and not money. you should lead by example and tell your boss at work you're sorry for being so malicious as to expect to be paid for your labour. so unless you want to buy your browsers, developers will need to find a way to fund them. early browsers were paid models. once the browser wars end and a victor emerges, we might have to pay a monthly subscription to use our browser. luckily, this ad revenue thing makes that unlikely.
i did not say profit is evil, it is you implying that
actually i am completely for paid software
what i did say is that Brave has investors to answer to and at some point it is going to have a financial reckoning that will likely quash any notions of privacy

really ? browsers need to be funded ?
then tell me how completely unfunded browsers such as CyberFox and Falkon exist ?
how does linux exist ?
how do all free software exist ?
none have regular revenue streams
most live off irregular paltry donations
some get no income whatsoever
so the notion that any software has to be funded is false
 

ebocious

Level 4
Apple is another great example. The introduced the iPhone. No one had such a device. They had the market for a few years, then Android and Apple's competitors started. Again not as good at first, but Apple became complacent and yet again Android and other phone makers caught up and passed Apple. Now Apple is playing the catch up game, adding features and functionality that their competitors have had for years now.
I partially agree with you about Mozilla; not so much about Apple. Just because Android developers occasionally come up with new ideas for features, and Apple doesn't read their minds to beat them to the punch every single time, doesn't mean that Apple has stopped innovating. That's called confirmation bias.

There's plenty the iPhone has that Android doesn't. There are some features iOS has had for years that Android still doesn't have. A few things I like are the three S-es: speed, stability, and security. The A13 Bionic processors are the fastest around. And thanks to the practice of using native code for apps, rather than runtimes, apps consume fewer resources and crash less often. You can't have 10 pages of apps on an Android, and have it run like the day you bought it; you can with an iPhone. As long as Android continues to use runtimes, devices will always have to have bigger batteries and twice the memory just to stay in the game.

As mentioned in HTG, you have no encryption if you send SMS messages natively on Android phones, or between Android and iOS. If everyone used iOS, all texts would be private. How many iPhones are infected, and how many Androids? Granted, since the bombshell discoveries of apps that infected hundred millions of Android devices, Google has been taking app vetting a bit more seriously. But how long does it take to get an Android app approved? Is it still just a couple of days, or do they spend a bit more time with it, like Apple? This is just as important as disallowing the installation of software outside the repository. Also important are updates. When you buy an iPhone, it will be able to run the latest operating system for at least five years. No Android does that. And this is why a 3-year-old iPhone is still worth money.

Anyway, sorry for a very off-topic post. And nothing personal; just some misinformation caught my eye.
 

Raiden

Level 17
Verified
Content Creator
I partially agree with you about Mozilla; not so much about Apple. Just because Android developers occasionally come up with new ideas for features, and Apple doesn't read their minds to beat them to the punch every single time, doesn't mean that Apple has stopped innovating. That's called confirmation bias.

There's plenty the iPhone has that Android doesn't. There are some features iOS has had for years that Android still doesn't have. A few things I like are the three S-es: speed, stability, and security. The A13 Bionic processors are the fastest around. And thanks to the practice of using native code for apps, rather than runtimes, apps consume fewer resources and crash less often. You can't have 10 pages of apps on an Android, and have it run like the day you bought it; you can with an iPhone. As long as Android continues to use runtimes, devices will always have to have bigger batteries and twice the memory just to stay in the game.

As mentioned in HTG, you have no encryption if you send SMS messages natively on Android phones, or between Android and iOS. If everyone used iOS, all texts would be private. How many iPhones are infected, and how many Androids? Granted, since the bombshell discoveries of apps that infected hundred millions of Android devices, Google has been taking app vetting a bit more seriously. But how long does it take to get an Android app approved? Is it still just a couple of days, or do they spend a bit more time with it, like Apple? This is just as important as disallowing the installation of software outside the repository. Also important are updates. When you buy an iPhone, it will be able to run the latest operating system for at least five years. No Android does that. And this is why a 3-year-old iPhone is still worth money.

Anyway, sorry for a very off-topic post. And nothing personal; just some misinformation caught my eye.
Thanks for the clarification. TBH i haven't followed every single feature between them. Both will have some features that the other doesn't.

In regards to the app store Apple has taken a better approach. It seems like Google just wanted to get the biggest app store as fast as they can without any regard as to what may happen if they aren't paying attention. Technically speaking most android phones are capable of running the latest versions of the OS. It's the phone makers that are choosing not to support it to drive continuous sales for new devices. At least with Apple they control everything, so they don't have 3rd party phone makers to deal with.

Thanks again for the clarification.
 

ebocious

Level 4
Technically speaking most android phones are capable of running the latest versions of the OS. It's the phone makers that are choosing not to support it to drive continuous sales for new devices. At least with Apple they control everything, so they don't have 3rd party phone makers to deal with.

Thanks again for the clarification.
Part of it is also hardware. Flagship Android devices still have cheaper hardware than iOS devices. Google quotes support for at least three years, or 18 months from the last time the model was sold in their store, whichever is longer. The iPhone 5s continued to run the latest version of iOS for six years.

No problem. :)
 

ebocious

Level 4
I've recently started using Waterfox. A couple different sources say it's the fastest browser of all. Add uBlock Origin to the mix, and it's almost like being in the mid-1990s, back when cable was 3 Mbps and DSL was 1.5 Mbps, but webpages were just text and the occasional grainy image; it's pretty quick.

One thing to remember when using third-party browsers (including Chromium Edge): first-party browsers get updates first, and then there's some lag time before the updates are ported for the 3P browsers. Unless your system security is beefed up, you'll probably be best off with Firefox or Chrome, especially Chrome.
 

Azure

Level 26
Verified
Content Creator
I've recently started using Waterfox. A couple different sources say it's the fastest browser of all. Add uBlock Origin to the mix, and it's almost like being in the mid-1990s, back when cable was 3 Mbps and DSL was 1.5 Mbps, but webpages were just text and the occasional grainy image; it's pretty quick.

One thing to remember when using third-party browsers (including Chromium Edge): first-party browsers get updates first, and then there's some lag time before the updates are ported for the 3P browsers. Unless your system security is beefed up, you'll probably be best off with Firefox or Chrome, especially Chrome.
One the reasons I switched to Brave was due to how fast they were able to update.
 
F

ForgottenSeer 85911

Flagship Android devices still have cheaper hardware than iOS devices. Google quotes support for at least three years, or 18 months from the last time the model was sold in their store, whichever is longer.
that is why $250+ Android devices are a complete scam
the cost of ownership is stupidly high
the consumer is being ripped-off but cannot help themselves and the OEMs know it
$1000 and $2000+ Android devices nobody in their right mind would buy one

The iPhone 5s continued to run the latest version of iOS for six years.
the cost of ownership is lower
better deal
not quite a scam, but almost a scam
 

ebocious

Level 4
that is why $250+ Android devices are a complete scam
the cost of ownership is stupidly high
the consumer is being ripped-off but cannot help themselves and the OEMs know it
$1000 and $2000+ Android devices nobody in their right mind would buy one
Samsung Galaxy phones are over $1,000. But I agree: people who buy them are not in their right minds.
 

Burrito

Level 23
Not when they're crucial patches.
Google’s security team has announced that they will now release the security patches of the Chrome browser faster.
Browsers like Chrome are at risk from vulnerabilities due to their dependence on open source components. However, Google’s security team announced that the Chrome browser will reduce the update interval from 33 days to 15 days. So Google Chrome will soon start getting security updates faster.
Browser Guru oldschool,

I'm still planning to switch away from Chrome when something else catches up and feels right.

I tried both Brave and Chromium Edge awhile ago.... neither really did if for me at the time.

Which one do you like better now?

Which one gets patches faster in your estimation?

And speaking of patches.... I need to go and get a 6-pack to get over this rough patch.

Oh.... and your choices of browsers is decidedly new school..... making your moniker a misnomer.

That is all.


-Sick Burrito
 

oldschool

Level 53
Verified
Top