Vivaldi 5.4 launches with Rocker Gestures and Web Panel improvements
Vivaldi Technologies, maker of the Vivaldi web browser, released Vivaldi 5.4 today to the stable channel. The new version of Vivaldi comes with a series of usability improvements, including custom rocker gestures and web panel improvements.
Vivaldi 5.4 is available already. Existing users may upgrade to the new version by selecting Vivaldi Menu > Help > Check for updates. The browser downloads and installs the new version of the browser automatically when the option is selected. New users may point their browser to the main Vivaldi website to download the latest release for all supported operating systems.
Vivaldi 5.4 for the desktop introduces several new usability features. Web Panels are a central feature of the browser. They are displayed in a small sidebar on the left side by default, and may be used to display websites. The sidebar itself links to other features, such as the recently introduced email client, feeds, notes, downloads or bookmarks.
Vivaldi users may display websites there, for example, YouTube or other media sites, that are displayed next to the main site that is open in the browser. Handy also for comparing mobile and desktop versions of a site, for research purposes, or just for playing music or videos while browsing the web using a single browser window.
In Vivaldi 5.4, users may now mute a web panel. Just right-click on the icon and select the new "mute panel" option to mute any sound.
Another new option in Vivaldi 5.4 is the ability to customize rocker gestures. Rocker gestures are part of the browser's mouse gestures system. Rocker gestures are enabled by default; they give users options to go back and forward using just the mouse.
To go forward, press the left mouse button followed by the right mouse button. To go back, reverse the sequence and press the right mouse button first before pressing the left.
Up until now, Rocker Gestures could not be customized. Now, with the release of Vivaldi 5.4, comes the option to assign different actions to the actions.
Go to Vivaldi > Settings > Mouse to get started. Scroll down to the Rocker Gestures section and use the menus next to either one of the actions to assign a different action to it. You may map actions such as "mute all tabs", "translate page", or "create bookmark", and dozens more.
Vivaldi 5.4 includes several other improvements:
- Copy link to highlight is a new feature to share a specific highlighted part of a web page quickly with other Chromium-based browser users. Just select part of the page, right-click and use the new Copy Link to Highlight option copy a link to the part to the Clipboard.
- Always use secure connection (HTTPS) is found under Settings > Address Bar > Security Features. Enables automatic HTTPS upgrades for HTTP sites and displays alerts if a site does not support HTTPS.
- Vivaldi Mail, Calendar and Feed Reader updated to 1.1. No new features but a lot of fine tuning and under the hood improvements. Vivaldi Technologies mentions speed and performance improvements specifically.
Now You: do you use Vivaldi? What is your take on the improvements in version 5.4?
Link to highlight is a stroke of genius. I did not think it would work, not always at any rate. I just tried it. It does.
Since this seems to rely on standard html language which has existed since the beginning of times, how come nobody invented that before ?
The Vivaldi developers have this : they guess what everybody craves for (but do not know they do), while absolutely no other software publisher thought of it.
Tab tiling and Web panels fall under that category, too. This should have been invented by Google, Microsoft, Apple or other small-time outfits with no money on their hands at all. Instead, it was invented by 50 guys spread between Norway and Iceland who have next to zero market share.
Competition, free markets and globalization are a wonderful thing.
You prompted me to look for a bookmarklet. I was sure someone would have thought to make one for this in the heyday, 10-15 years ago. I found only a recent one (from a Google employee https://paul.kinlan.me/scroll-to-text-bookmarklet/).
I searched a little more to find that it’s a fairly new web standard that’s not part of the W3C standards: https://wicg.github.io/scroll-to-text-fragment/
@Clairvaux: my apologies if I seem dense (perhaps I am), but after right-clicking selected/highlighted text and clicking on “Copy Link to Highlight”, how do you use that?
I mean, a link to that text fragment is created, then what is the next step?
If you want to share a particular section of a webpage . then you have to just share this link .
Vivaldi really annoys me. Every time a new version comes out with some interesting new features, I install it only to see it to load some website which no other browser (Chromium or otherwise) struggles with. I’ve submitted bug reports over the years about website compatibility, and have yet to see a single issue being addressed. Maddening.
*only to see it failing to load
I’ve noticed the same thing on Vivaldi. Edge also has problems with with some websites, but not as bad as Vivaldi. Brave seems to be the best at implementing Google’s web standards, whether that is a good or bad thing is up to the user.
@ShintoPlasm Can you give us an example of one of these links? I have noticed that Vivaldi, and ALL browsers, are having more trouble loading sites lately. I use a lot of hosts files, though.
It is always amazing to see how such a small group can do so much with so little resources!
Btw Martin, if you come with a workaround to copy/paste Vivaldi notes along with its url à la old style Opera, let us know please!
> Competition, free markets and globalization are a wonderful thing.
What competition? Google has no real competition in the browser market because of their monopoly. Vivaldi is just a more customizable browser than chrome with its own set of proprietary modifications built on top of google engineered chromium.
Real competition would be from something non reliant on google engineering like Firefox. Chrome and Edge are installed by default on literally everything mainstream, popular browser alternatives are all chromium based.
Google does all the heavy lifting lol. The only real competition in browser software from google developers are Firefox developers. Any chromium based browser is reliant on google developers for browser security patches.
> they guess what everybody craves for
Most people crave for meaningless UI features? but don’t care whether a browser is FOSS Or not? Vivaldi have been known to create a unique identifier upon install with the excuse of counting users? Why would they need to count users? Counting users it seems = transmits data. But what data? and how private is vivaldi browser? Well you would have to just trust vivaldi and what they say, and i don’t trust closed source crap. Closed source = something that feels the need to hide something. If Vivaldi was true FOSS, i would trust them more.
I will never use Vivaldi, one it is not FOSS, two it is just google engineered code under the surface by being reliant on the chromium engine.
Vivaldi is just bloatware in my opinion much like all chromium based browsers.
> Google has no real competition in the browser market because of their monopoly.
Chromium (mostly Chrome, also Edge): 80% market share
Safari: 17% market share
Firefox: 3% market share
How is that a monopoly? Monopoly is 100% market share or somewhere very close to that.
> Real competition
Pffft, LOL. My sides hurt. 80%+ of Mozilla’s annual income comes from Google.
“Competition” my ass.
> literally everything mainstream, popular browser alternatives are all chromium based
Think about why that is, mate. They could be based on Firefox as well but didn’t choose it, even when Chromium was not as dominant as it is now.
> Any chromium based browser is reliant on google developers for browser security patches.
Mozilla relies on Google for its very existence. Bought and paid for “opposition” that has never taken the high road on any issue in reality.
> meaningless UI features
Being feature-rich is Vivaldi’s selling point. Maybe it isn’t not for you.
LOL, yep. Vivaldi is actually source available, meaning that the entire browser minus the UI can be audited. Good enough for most people.
> unique identifier
Yeah because the IP address is not reliable, there could be multiple devices using the same router. Unique identifier… Nice scare crow, there is one issue though: You can actually run a packet inspector and find out that the amount of data transmitted in these requests is minimal, it’s down to the level of “Hey, my installation exists” in terms of just how small the packets are. What you spread here is usually called FUD.
> and how private is vivaldi browser
Semi-private, it removes most Google connections minus the useful ones like SafeBrowsing, but on the other hand does little to prevent tracking by ad networks. For example, it has no fingerprinting defenses.
> something that feels the need to hide something
The unique UI and its associated features are the selling point of Vivaldi. They don’t want forks to piggyback on that and reduce their own growth, so they make the UI closed source and the rest of the browser source available.
> google engineered code under the surface
Yeah exactly like Bromite, Brave, Ungoogled Chromium or in case of Android: GrapheneOS, CalyxOS, LineageOS, e OS, I am sure none of which are legitimate privacy projects. /s
I will now drop GrapheneOS and go back to iOS, because Google probably wrote the calculator of GrapheneOS! The horror!
As long as it can be audited and comes out clean, it is trustworthy… no matter who wrote the code! You can look at the code, you can look at the connections the browser establishes on the OS level etc. But I suppose mindless scaremongering is easier!
Some users have bloat heads which cannot wrap around how a business works even the the product is completely free with no privacy issues and tons of features no other g-based-web_browser heads. Stand down and use your g-eyes-brpwser. This one is not for DUMBO users.
I still use Vivaldi as my second browser. I hope in future updates they include some of the customizations from their own forum like an option for this awesome multi-row tabs trick:
Vivaldi Multiple Row Tabs:
I also was disappointed in Vivaldi’s results from the recent browser privacy article here on gHacks. I hope Vivaldi will up their game in real “default” and optional privacy improvements.
PrivacyTests reveals how your web browser does privacy-wise:
Generally, I like Vivaldi, though it does have a few rough spots. While the tab browsing implementation is quite good, I like the way MS Edge handles the tabs being on the side. Also I cannot have panels and the tab bar on the same side or they interfere with each other.
Yes, I’ve encountered a few websites that don’t work well with Vivaldi. On one, I have to log in and open it twice to get a tab with visible content. On others (game sites and such) I have the web page complain about my ad blocker, even when it’s turned off for that page. Their complaint just means, nope, not a site for me, and I go on.
My biggest long standing issue is how Vivaldi stores a backup copy for installing updates in an uncompressed archive that cleanup programs like HiBit Uninstaller want to erase. Which means that partial updates always fail, and full updates have to happen. The whole thing being repeated when I next clean out all of the data (about twice a month fyi).
Dear brother Iron Heart, to question google is to question god itself.
> How is that a monopoly? Monopoly is 100% market share
You think sounding pedantic makes you sound credible? It doesn;t.
Google does have a kind of monopoly, their code is the backbone of the most popular browsers, and chrome itself is literally a monopoly on android and desktop.
Google steers the ship that is chromium, without google there would be no security patches for your precious Brave, because google does the heavy lifting, chromium is a google project after all and google is king of the entire kingdom as regards chromium code. The rest are peasants feeding off google browser codebase scraps and security patches. If google went a different route in the future and lost interest in chromium and developed their own exclusive engine for chrome without it being FOSS, then where would that leave browsers like Brave and vivaldi? if Mozilla were to go out of existence as you imagine because you think they are irrelevant?
You are a foolish person who only wants a chromium monopoly because you seem to worship google and their engineering.
> They don’t want forks to piggyback on that and reduce their own growth, so they make the UI closed source and the rest of the browser source available.
And? It is either FOSS or it is not. Vivaldi is not FOSS. All about the money hey? Librewolf is superior to vivaldi, do LIbrewolf developers get paid like vivaldi developers?
> Yeah exactly like Bromite, Brave, Ungoogled Chromium or in case of Android: GrapheneOS, CalyxOS, LineageOS, e OS, I am sure none of which are legitimate privacy projects. /s
Smartphones are not privacy focused devices by design, they are tracking devices by design because they are designed to ping towers for a signal. There are also front/rear cameras, GPS, and microphones. Look at the name android? android means human robotic. Again read what privacy pioneers like stallman has to say about smartphones.
> You can look at the code, you can look at the connections the browser establishes on the OS level etc. But I suppose mindless scaremongering is easier!
How can you look at the code of Vivaldi when it is not FOSS? you dummy, much of it is proprietary lol.
> Dear brother Iron Heart, to question google is to question god itself.
That’s completely idiotic, brother Anonymous123. I criticize invasive data collection techniques as much as the guy next to me and people who follow my posts on gHacks know that. Therefore I never promote Chrome or Edge, or default Android installations.
What I do question though is idiotic stances like bashing entire codebases like Chromium or AOSP, which for the most part, big surprise right there, consist of code aimed at making the product work. Not every single line of code that Google engineers write is aimed at spying on you, that’s what I alluded to in my calculator half-joke above. Downstream forks look at invasive Google spyware code and remove it from the product, resulting in degoogled versions of the code, e.g. Brave or GrapheneOS. Why should I disown the credibility of these projects when provably (since open source) no Google spying is taking place there anymore? Because Google wrote other parts of the code that have no privacy impact? That’s IDIOTIC.
> Google does have a kind of monopoly
No, the market situation does not justify the “monopoly” moniker. Safari will continue to exist as long as Apple products sell, making it a duopoly at best even when you completely discard Firefox. Sorry if that sounds pedantic to you, it’s reality.
> Google steers the ship that is chromium,
They “steer the ship” of upstream, not of downstream forks.
> without google there would be no security patches for your precious Brave, because google does the heavy lifting
Security patches for free? That’s a plus in my book! Makes it possible for Brave to concentrate on other aspects.
> If google went a different route in the future and lost interest in chromium and developed their own exclusive engine for chrome without it being FOSS
I think you don’t even realize what kind of an ecosystem Chromium is. Most websites are being tested against it, and a whole load of Electron apps are based on that code. There are also other major parties involved like Microsoft (Edge) or Amazon (their Silk browser uses Chromium as base). Furthermore, Chromium is licensed in a way that does not allow it to be closed source. What the license does allow is to create closed source forks of the code, Chrome and Edge are such closed source forks, while e.g. Brave is an open source fork. If Google only worked on their Chrome variant of the code in the future, we would still have the last open source state of the code due to licensing requirements, so someone else would be able to pick it up and go from there.
I doubt that this will happen though; Google profits from outside contributions to the code and they would piss off other industry giants like Microsoft who are invested in the codebase if they pulled that stunt.
Last but not least, the way things are organized right now are already allowing Google to do whatever they want with their closed source fork of the codebase (that is, Chrome), Chrome can contain as much malicious components as they like in a closed source fashion while they still profit from open source contributions to the Chromium base code. Best of both worlds as far as Google is concerned, I see no reason why this would change for no reason.
> if Mozilla were to go out of existence as you imagine because you think they are irrelevant?
They are not only irrelevant by now, they are also completely dependent on Google money. What Mozilla does with their 3% market share or so is inconsequential, and they are only allowed to do what their benefactor allows them to do anyway. Clown opposition.
> You are a foolish person who only wants a chromium monopoly
“What I want”, LOL, sounds as if I have enough power to move the needle now. In case you are unaware, this is just a random tech forum in the outer rim of the Internet. We can’t decide shit here. What I do observe though, rather than decide, is that the market has obviously settled on Chromium as the dominant / majority share player. I don’t hold little dictators trying to decide what people are supposed to use in high esteem. So your personal imperatives are not necessarily something the majority cares about and you sound ridiculous if you claim otherwise.
Realistically, Firefox is going the way of the dodo and is already beyond recovery, therefore it makes sense to look at the Chromium code base and create a privacy-preserving fork from that, because this endeavor could actually have a future. Further, I don’t want Mozilla to recover at all, they are bought and paid for pseudo-opposition that is also pro-censorship and anti-free web behind all the propaganda to the contrary.
Either Google continues with the open source base code of Chromium and there will be privacy-preserving forks of it, like Brave, OR Google does the tyrannical yet stupid thing, goes closed source and focuses on Chrome, and thereby gives the opportunity for actual, not bought and paid for, opposition to rise. Such theoretical opposition could possibly use the last open source state of Chromium and go from there or use WebKit, since that’s open source as well. I don’t believe Google will choose the closed source route and change the current state of things that already allows them to do what they want with their fork of the code, Chrome.
> It is either FOSS or it is not. Vivaldi is not FOSS
You can also always monitor the connections Vivaldi establishes via e.g. WireShark, and there we would be able to tell whether or not it establishes connections and where it connects to. And there, again, nothing was found that was unexpected or undocumented, sorry!
Ridiculous FUD is what you are spreading here, with zero proof attached to it so far.
> Librewolf is superior to vivaldi
LibreWolf is Firefox with a new icon and a Tor-inspired user.js + uBO preinstalled. Wow! How long did it take to create that? Less than a day? That hobby project vs. the most feature-rich browser in existence… LOL, I can’t. My sides hurt! Totally comparable effort!
> Smartphones are not privacy focused devices by design
Not more or less so than any modern PC.
> they are tracking devices by design because they are designed to ping towers for a signal
Ah, so they are evil because they connect to cell towers in order to establish calls and SMS functionality, understood. Makes total sense.
There is an issue with your scaremongering though: Your PC also connects somewhere, probably to a WiFi hotspot. When you use your PC with WiFi, timestamps can be created, people observing your network can tell when you were at home, what you did, and if you are using a notebook on the go with public WiFi, a profile of your movements can be created just as well as with a smartphone. Your MAC address is giving your device away in either case.
> front/rear cameras, GPS, and microphones
Minus the GPS part, this is also true for most notebooks these days.
> Again read what privacy pioneers like stallman has to say about smartphones.
Stallman says very educational things but also very dumb things at times, like every other human being. His stance towards smartphones is idiotic in so far as most of the complaints are also true for most notebooks. Notebooks have similar hardware components built in and they can’t be librebooted either, and don’t have open hardware, at least not too my knowledge.
> How can you look at the code of Vivaldi when it is not FOSS?
Most of the browser is source available to begin with, the installed files can be inspected, the connections established can be inspected etc. Good enough for most people, as I just told you.
Anyway remember 4 years ago, in 2018, Ghacks made an article about Vivaldi sending people’s information every 24 hours and then they updated it saying how Vivaldi were saying they wouldn’t ping people’s computer information every 24 hours in the future?
LOL who can trust this company, this is the same company that asks you for a phone number to be able to use their mail system they keep pushing in you face when you create and account.
Also, they don’t do much to stop Google from spying you, every time you update an extension, google knows you did it, other companies would try to stop it.
Their UI part is still closed source and really slow, the browser uses a lot more CPU watching videos than any other chromium browser.
It has nice features but I don’t know why people are always talking about Vivaldi like the savior of the browsers when they can’t even stop sending people’s information every 24 hours. Their adblocker is mediocre, they don’t seem to have many plans with manifest v3, they develop useless features like having an email client inside the browser.
Just weird development, but apparently people don’t care.
Remember, this is a browser with the same CEO guy who lied about swimming when Opera 8 got million downloads in 2005, he couldn’t even do what he promised, I am sure he didn’t even try to sim and only told his team to say ‘he tried’ sitting on his couch and watching tv. The same guy who complains about Microsoft and Google but you never see him saying anything about Apple. lol
Dear brother Iron Heart to criticize non FOSS software like Vivaldi is to question a google chromium clone itself and in your religon, we can not go questioning your engineering super god google and non foss products like M$ and privacy invasive devices like smartphones lol.
> I criticize invasive data collection techniques as much as the guy next to me
No you dont. I and another user here criticized Vivaldi and their unique ID data collection. You support data collection in vivaldi and actually go out of the way to defend it with your asinine wall of text as usual trying to sound smart, when you seem very far from smart.
It is hard to condense a post down to expose your questionable ideas about corporations, FOSS and other such topics.
> Downstream forks look at invasive Google spyware code and remove it from the product, resulting in degoogled versions of the code, e.g. Brave or GrapheneOS.
Which has the potential for human error, bugs, security issues etc due to google greedy direction in engineering browser code and OS code. But of course google is your god, they can do not wrong, even if their products are a monopoly and are getting constantly patched and chromium having way more problems than something like Firefox.
> Why should I disown the credibility of these projects
Google. But They are your god, so i guess that would be blasphemy. LMAO.
> Safari will continue to exist as long as Apple products
Lol. Apple is another big tech corporation, Btw, safari has a very low percentage market share on desktop and notebooks both of which are dominated by chrome and edge and even more so in the future by chrome because of chromebooks, the cheaper alternative to mac OS.
> They “steer the ship” of upstream,
Which is all that matters. They are the captain of the ship called chromium.
> Security patches for free? That’s a plus in my book!
Security patches? yeah and a lot of them because chromium is a buggy security mess due to googles greed with trying to control the browser industry.
> Makes it possible for Brave to concentrate on other aspects.
Fixing broken tor windows? Whitelisting facebook trackers? Braves history is very interesting lol.
In June 2018, Brave released a pay-to-surf test-version of the browser. This version of Brave came preloaded with approximately 250 ads and sent a detailed log of the user’s browsing activity to Brave for the short-term purpose of testing this functionality.
> I think you don’t even realize what kind of an ecosystem Chromium is
Oh i do. It is called an attempted monopoly and power grab of the browser industry by large and very powerful corporations like google and M$.
> There are also other major parties involved like Microsoft (Edge) or Amazon
Yes, Big tech has their hands all over chromium.
> Chromium is licensed in a way that does not allow it to be closed source.
What would happen If google and m$ and their godlike engineering went in a different direction and decided that chrome and edge should only use exclusive codebases that are not based on chromium?
> we would still have the last open source state of the code due to licensing requirements, so someone else would be able to pick it up and go from there.
Lol. But, your god google would not be maintaining the codebase and any other maintainer would be irrelevant in your opinion because they do not have the MIGHT of google engineering.
> Google profits from outside contributions to the code and they would piss off other industry giants like Microsoft who are invested in the codebase if they pulled that stunt.
Lol. M$ have more than enough financial power to develop an exclusive browser that only they control the code of. They do not need to rely on google. M$ are getting more and more cloud based with each new OS release from them. They literally dropped Internet explorer, it won’t come as a surprize if they stop using Edge too at some point.
> open source contributions to the Chromium base code
Lol. Google have the most commits to the chromium code. M$ second. You think those contributions are taking a privacy focused direction? Chrome launched a controversial keyboard API recently, that is the direction chromoum is going. I Have no confidence whatsoever in bloatware browsers like Brave and vivaldi in cleaning up the chromium codebase from google when forking the code. Both browsers are shit on Linux and are CPU and RAM intensive applications.
> They are not only irrelevant by now
Firefox is only irrelevant to google promoting noobs like you.
> Further, I don’t want Mozilla to recover at all,
Because you only want google to be in control of the browser industry. That is why if there was a voting system on GHacks, you would likely get a downvoted a lot as being someone who constantly promotes google. That is fine, but what it shows is that you love big tech and more and more call you out for it.
The way you defended M$ over Linux, also shows how you love BIG CORPORATION software.
> I don’t believe Google will choose the closed source route
LMAO. They already close source chrome and use chromium as a stepping stone to put all sorts of privacy invasive features in the codebase like manifestV3.
> The majority of the code is source available, and can be audited, which is already good enough for most people! You sound like a paranoid alarmist, saying that you expect them to hide something in their closed source UI code.
I Don’t trust closed source browsers like Vivaldi. It is especially important for a browser to be FOSS in an OS if one expects privacy. Vivaldi creates a unique ID whilst being proprietary, that rings alarm bells as it seems they count users for financial reasons. Why else would they need to count users and have them ping back to their mothership? Contrast that with something like Librewolf, where there is no financial motivation or idea to create unique ID upon install that phones home every 24 hours like something in vivaldi whilst also containing proprietary UI. Lol.
Vivaldi is crap software compared to librewolf.
> You can also always monitor the connections Vivaldi establishes via e.g. WireShark,
Vivaldi is a private company you dummy. Unless you are actually an employee with them, you have no idea what they could be doing with user data, whether they sell it or not. By using a proprietary browser like Vivaldi, you would have to just trust them. That is fine if people trust them, its their choice. But FOSS Advocates usually do not trust closed source browsers lol.
> Ridiculous FUD is what you are spreading here,
Really? Go visit any FOSS forum and privacy community and you will see much criticism directed towards closed source browsers and google and M$.
Go look at some FOSS community videos on youtube lol. You will see similar criticism.
> LibreWolf is Firefox with a new icon and a Tor-inspired user.js + uBO preinstalled. Wow! How long did it take to create that? Less than a day? That hobby project vs. the most feature-rich browser in existence
Feature rich for those that look for a more private browser than vivaldi.
Smartphones are not privacy focused devices by design
> Not more or less so than any modern PC.
Noob level argument from you. Personal computers are stationary objects usually, smartphones are mobile and have IMEI (International Mobile Equipment Identity) technology that come into contact with towers and smartphones are around other peoples devices more which potentially creates wifi and bluetooth security risks. Also, cameras and mic can easily be disconnected from a desktop computer, with smartphones they can not.
You are a noob.
Of course some people use smartphones because they have to, but smartphones by design are not privacy devices no matter what OS is on them. They can be made more private sure, android has strong sandbox and security, but by design smartphones are not private due to IMEI and being mobile devices by nature. OH and no hardware switches to turn off gps, camera and mic in mass produced products.
> Ah, so they are evil because they connect to cell towers in order to establish calls and SMS functionality, understood. Makes total sense.
It is called location tracking. Read about stallman. Read why he dislikes smartphones.
> a profile of your movements can be created just as well as with a smartphone. Your MAC address is giving your device away in either case.
Noob level argument. A personal computer if left stationary does not let its mac address get exposed to location profiles built on movements through coming into contact with public wifi spots
Also, even a simple notebook does not contain IMEI (International Mobile Equipment Identity). And, even notebooks are not exactly carried around like a smartphone in a pocket. Notebooks are heavy and are not used like smartphones.
> front/rear cameras, GPS, and microphones
> Minus the GPS part, this is also true for most notebooks these days.
Not true for stationary desktop towers and again, both desktops and notebooks do not have IMEI and are much more stationary than smartphones as people usually use smartphones as an extention of their hand and take them everywhere in a cultural sense living in the modern age.
> Notebooks have similar hardware components built in and they can’t be librebooted either, and don’t have open hardware, at least not too my knowledge.
Noob level argument and very uneducational. Do some research before you type lol.
Mass produced Notebooks have no IMEI like a smartphone. Also the THINKPAD T440 can be librebooted with effort, some other older models can be librebooted too and system 76 makes laptops with similar features to libreboot.
Open source hardware is also becoming a thing.
> Most of the browser is source available to begin with,
Lol at most. Vivaldi has a proprietary UI which in my opinion is a form bloatware. Browsers should be simple, they do not need fancy UI. But i guess you want the fancy UI, must be the reason why you like Brave so much because they have a lion as a logo lol.
> LOL who can trust this company, this is the same company that asks you for a phone number to be able to use their mail system they keep pushing in you face when you create and account.
Iron Heart trusts them LOL.
Overbloated all over, even competing with corroded_head posts!! Stand down, no one is forcing you to use this web browser! You’re a g-blob. Will even be able to compile the “closed” UI code??
Rooting for Mozilla which betrayed its own power-users and add-on developers for Chrome users? So much about having morals and integrity *laugh*
Vivaldi, and Google are loyal towars their own users, Google delivers simplicity, Vivaldi features. What did Mozilla? Taking away features for simple users,
Vivaldi beats Mozilla every single moment in developer and concept mentality, honesty and its what Firefox still should be.
No sir, Mozilla and Librewolf suck both. The only thing in what Mozilla is good these days is in politicical activism and bashing Conservatives. And a browser developer which goes to such lows simply deserves no respect.
Vivaldi rocks, Mozilla not. Hey, even Pale Moon is more honest and has more morals as compared to Mozilla.