← Back to context

Comment by AegirLeet

6 hours ago

The real hegemony is the Blink hegemony. Google (an advertising company) can pretty much unilaterally dictate web standards. A terrible state of affairs for the web. That's the real issue and using another Chrome reskin is never going to fix it.

13 comments

AegirLeet

Reply
_verandaguy  2 hours ago

This is the main reason I stay away from Vivaldi; using Firefox is, for all of Mozilla's borderline comical mismanagement, a protest vote against Blink (and previously, Chromium).

  • tapoxi  23 minutes ago

    This has been a lost cause for the past decade or so. Web developers don't target Firefox anymore because a 5% share isn't enough to matter.

    Both projects (Chromium and Firefox) are open, so it's like Linux vs FreeBSD, but at least FreeBSD has a clear licensing advantage.

    • Barbing  16 minutes ago

      We need some billionaire class people to take their business from a site that won’t support Firefox, and say why. or whatever that’s less pie in sky

      No defeatism though please, some of us will advocate till the end (pen & paper)

  • swed420  2 hours ago

    Firefox is controlled opposition practically owned by Google. Follow the money.

    Ladybird seems to be the only hope, once available.

    • Petersipoi  39 minutes ago

      What is the advantage of building a browser engine from scratch? As opposed to just forking Blink and maintaining it as a separate project? Seems like the former just adds an ungodly amount of work and still doesn't solve the problem of Google using its weight to control web standards.

      If Firefox and Apple can't rein in Google with their competing engines, what exactly does Ladybird change?

    • buran77  2 hours ago

      > Firefox is controlled opposition practically owned by Google

      And how does that "ownership" look like in practice? Has Google ever decided how things should be done "or else"? What Google does is pay a protection tax. Without Firefox around and independent, the EU is almost sure to break Chrome away from Google, especially with the warm EU-US relations now. So Google pays and is going to pay as much as it takes to keep Firefox alive, kicking, and doing whatever it wants.

      Google Chrome needs Firefox to be moderately successful more than Firefox needs that money. Or else it might become someone else's Chrome.

      > Follow the money

      Everyone has this revelation once. If it was that easy then customers would practically own the company providing them the services. Do you and your fellow paying customers feel like you own any company, especially big-tech? Do you all control Netflix? Amazon? Apple?

      1 reply →

    • andai  2 hours ago

      I heard Mozilla described as "Google's antitrust lawsuit insurance."

      That doesn't really seem relevant these days though. Although I guess duopolies are totally fine.

      1 reply →

  • arikrahman  1 hour ago

    This is why I use Zen. All the benefits of Vivaldi, with the peace of mind supporting a Mozilla stack.

    • tapoxi  20 minutes ago

      I love Zen but it doesn't support TouchID passkey auth on macOS. I'm someone who needs to Okta with multiple times a day, and this drove me to use Vivaldi instead.

  • NoGravitas  2 hours ago

    Vivaldi is almost certainly the best Blink browser, and I'd certainly use it if only Blink browsers were viable. As long as that's not the case, I am, like you, using something based on Firefox; in my case, Zen.