Waterfox Browser cuts ties with System 1 to celebrate independence
When the creator of the Waterfox web browser Alex Kontos announced that his web browser had been sold to System1, part of the community eyed the deal suspiciously. System1, which also acquired the Startpage search engine in 2019, was an advertising company first and foremost after all. Its goal was to make advertising better and safer, and the company had a prior relationship with the Waterfox project.
On July 3, 2023, Kontos announced on the official Waterfox blog that the browser has turned to its independent roots again.
Kontos, who remained lead developer of the Waterfox browser after the System1 deal, remains in charge of the independent project. He mentions that the change allows him and the community to "shape the browser's future direction".
System1 must have had some say in the development of the browser after it made the acquisition, based on that statement. Kontos reiterates that the development focus remains on privacy, customization options and performance. Upcoming versions of the Waterfox browser will have online security and also the digital autonomy of users as a priority.
He writes: "s we embark on this new chapter, Waterfox’s dedication to privacy, customisation, and performance remains. I am committed to delivering a browser that prioritises your online security and respects your digital autonomy. With this change, I have the opportunity to accelerate development, introduce new features, and focus on the user experience".
Kontos plans to focus on improvements in Waterfox that " enhance privacy, boost performance, and expand customisation options" according to the announcement.
New versions of the G5 version of Waterfox were released regularly, but the changelogs on the project's GitHub website don't reveal much about the changes that went into any of the releases. The browser's own changelog offers more information, which users may access here.
Kontos does not reveal additional information about the change in the blog post or specifics about the deal with System1. The newfound independence could act as a catalysator, Kontos certainly makes it sound that way. Users who migrated to a different browser after the deal with System1 in 2020 might come back or take another look at the browser at the very least.
Now You: have you used Waterfox recently?
I remember Alex saying something like System1 purchasing WF would allow more hands on deck to work on WF and more money into the project. Really nothing changed much with WF other than he lost a number of users that didn’t care for his snippy defensive attitude when questioned about the buy out and didn’t trust an ad company running the show. He can talk but I doubt things will change much with WF. He talked about improving performance now, which he talked about before. I still have WF as an extra browser but it uses more ram than Firefox on my pc.
i’m really pleased about the independence thang, and i suspect it’s a shrewd move to regain market share.
So will Waterfox cutting ties with System1 also imply that Ghacks will free itself from the shackles of Softpedia and once again become independent?
I signed up to Patreon recently and would be more than willing to support Ghacks through that now if Martin were to consider the move.
As for Waterfox, an independent browser is much more attractive than one tied to an advertising outfit like System1 and I wish Alex Kontos all the best with the project although speaking for myself I use Floorp these days.
You mean softonic right? Softpedia isn’t a bad website.
How well does Floorp run these days, ss Tab Mix fully functional?
I think they are due for version 11 soon.
@Mystique,
> How well does Floorp run these days, ss Tab Mix fully functional?
“Floorp” is based on the latest Firefox ESR.
As such, extensions that can be added to the browser comply with the latest Firefox ESR specification.
“Legacy addons” cannot be added to Floorp, and will cause problems if added forcibly (from the xpi file).
“Floorp” is actively working on native implementations of important and popular features in the browser.
If there’s a feature you’d like, or an extension you’d like to see natively implemented, we encourage you to make a request.
Floorp Browser,
User support (Japanese and English)
> In comments on the official ABlog blog
> https://github.com/Floorp-Projects/Floorp/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aall+
> https://support.ablaze.one/contact/
> https://aka.ablaze.one/discord
> https://twitter.com/ablaze_support
Supplement:
https://www.ghacks.net/2023/05/30/mozilla-confirms-firefoxs-end-of-support-for-windows-7-8-and-8-1-systems/#comment-4567527
Yes, you’re right: I do mean Softonic. Sorry about that.
Floorp runs just fine although I don’t use Tab Mix so I can’t say how it would perform.
Only issue I do have is the MSN site opening unexpectedly after playing a round of Crisis single player, but not on system startup. I’ve searched the whole machine, but cannot pin down why this is happening. The full MSN URL is https://www.msn.com/nl-nl?ocid=wispr
Have tried adding that to UBO, but it doesn’t help.
It’s okay. I think we all understood. I just didn’t want someone coming in to tear you a new one. lol it happens when there are differing opinions in such places.
I will definitely give it another look at once it reaches version 11 which should be a milestone release for them.
Hmm… I have never heard of that one but have seen the question being asked before.
Perhaps follow this line of inquiry and see how far you get.
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1305977
What’s funny is how much nothing changed after his hiring by System1, and nothing is going to change after his departure.
No significant extra development resources seem to have been provided by System1 during that time. And nothing, absolutely nothing more evil than the ordinary happened either during that time.
Startpage became a default search engine, and only in private browsing mode in fact, which was a progress compared to Bing. That’s it. In fact, they were even too cautious there in my opinion.
The avalanche of hate and defamation against Waterfox after the acquisition was, as I had predicted, nothing more than the usual hypocritical browser giants being too happy to find an excuse to shoot at a small relatively ethical browser while they have always been the actual bad guys themselves. The goal was for System1 to embed Startpage, nothing more. The dev probably left then as he arrived, just as part of new negotiations for his search deal revenues.
And the reason why WF didn’t suddenly become more unethical is that it was already before the acquisition funded by a search deal (the dev had even unsuccessfully experimented launching his own search engine in a further past if I remember well, called Storm or something). But Mozilla isn’t going to criticize him for having a search deal, because they are the epitome of disastrous search-deal-initiated corruption. So they said instead boo System1 ad company, forgetting they are *all* ad guys from the beginning.
This is similar to the Startpage story, when bought by System1. Horrible stories popped up everywhere about what would happen next, boo ad company. Well that’s already what Startpage was doing before, personalizing ads from search queries (just shorter term). While that one is harder to check, I think that nothing worse happened then, no such news appeared either, and of course they have yet to even alter their privacy policy.
Those two examples (especially the WF one, where it’s easiest to check) remind that they were all ad guys from the beginning, those hypocritical red lines were intentionally misplaced by worse people. Mozilla people screaming their fake hate for the ad business (against WF) at those times were especially entertaining considering what they *actually* do with their own browser, a true adtech ideological vanguard for the whole sector, and an ad platform in itself.
That’s great news for Waterfox and its users!
It doesn’t change the reality though that Kontos sold Waterfox to an ad company to cash in. Same way Opera was sold to the Chinese or all the crap Mozilla did to poor Firefox. I can’t trust any of them again. Chromium is the filthy rat king of web browsers. I can’t even use any of those “superior” forks after they all abandoned my OS. I’m stuck with outdated browsers and forks that will stop working one of these days. Then my only choice will be “hardened” Firefox or LibreWolf which I consider unusable for power users with all sorts of features pulled to fit those tinfoilhats’ definition of privacy. No thanks.
I admire that, but I also think it’s a waste of time and effort to work on browsers like this. Why can’t they just work on either improving the base Firefox code or better yet, actually use their skills on improving Chromium’s code? It’s not flawless but it’s like 4 years ahead in terms of stability.
They could be working on the future, but instead they’re going to work on catching up to today.
> Why can’t they just work on either improving the base Firefox code or better yet, actually use their skills on improving Chromium’s code? It’s not flawless but it’s like 4 years ahead in terms of stability.
“Floorp” based on Firefox ESR was originally based on chromium.
The developer said, “Chromium is open source software, but the reality is that Google has closed program its core program, making it impossible to break free from Google’s shackles. So Floorp switched to Firefox, a completely open source program”.
That Floorp is working hard to improve the base code of Firefox. “Floorp” is managed by about 10 members, and has acquired advanced programming skills at a specialized institution, making it a promising project.
https://blog.ablaze.one/category/ablaze/ablaze-project/floorp/
https://github.com/Floorp-Projects/Floorp
@Sajadi,
Regarding the “Floorp” posture:
I should clearly mention now that Floorp is not an “anti-Mozilla” posture.
Floorp has never denied Mozilla and has great respect for it.
Before the Floorp team migrated from Chromium to Firefox, they visited Mozilla and had discussions with the techs and got a lot of technical advice from them.
Since then, the relationship between the two has been close, and Mozilla continues to provide various insights.
In short, Floorp is developed and supported in a strong partnership with “Mozilla”.
If you stand by Floorp because of your anti-Mozilla values, you’re going to “sooner or later call Floorp a traitor”. If you’re anti-Mozilla, Floorp may not be for you. Either accept it or leave it.
@owl As long as they support features and customization, i see no reason not to use them not as Backup browser for Pale Moon. If the Floorp team gets infected by Mozillas Chrome imitation madness, i leave them.
But nothing points in that direction, the version 11 beta is even more feature rich than the old one as far as i have seen. They make use of a bastardized and trash browser so that this one becomes useful again. I never said that the Mozilla code base is shit. It is the opposite, the code base still can be used and the UI enhanced – all what Floorp or Waterfox have done could be easily implemented by Mozilla too.
But the difference of morals AND ideologies regarding this between Mozilla and Floorp or Waterfox or Pulse is literally making me angry. As Mozilla, that spineless Google back-end-lickers/front-end-suckers will not reverse their course which is dominated by inferiority complexes against Google and they are jealous beyond reason and will go on with becoming “best Chromium possible without Blink” to get Chrome users.
And Floorp is not going that way. So… Floorp are the good ones, Mozilla not.
@Sajadi,
I didn’t know there was a PulseBrowser.
https://github.com/pulse-browser
quote: We are a small (read two people) team trying to make building and maintaining custom web browsers far simpler.
I tried that browser: Version 1.0.0-a.65 (Firefox 113.0)
The platform is “Firefox Release”.
Currently, only “Alpha build” is released.
Good impression than Waterfox 5.1.9. And it’s faster and lighter behavior than Brave. Besides, it’s system resources are also low, comparable to Pale Moon.
It performed astonishingly and I was very impressed.
I will regular use it for a while.
Thank you for the information!
Note,
uBlock Origin is implemented natively and cannot be updated with the Add-ons Manager (Synchronized with browser updates)
Troubleshooting Information (about:support)
Application Basics,
Google Location Service Key: Missing
Google Safebrowsing Key: Missing
Mozilla Location Service Key: Missing
Pulse Browser Features,
Firefox Screenshots 39.0.1 screenshots@mozilla.org
firefox-qr-generator 0.0.0 qr-generator@browser.fushra.com
Form Autofill 1.0.1 formautofill@mozilla.org
Picture-In-Picture 1.0.0 pictureinpicture@mozilla.org
Pulse Sidebar Expansion 1.0 sidebartabs@browser.fushra.com
Tabliss 2.6.0 extension@tabliss.io
uBlock Origin 1.49.2 uBlock0@raymondhill.net
Web Compatibility Interventions 113.0.0 webcompat@mozilla.org
WebCompat Reporter 1.5.1 webcompat-reporter@mozilla.org
@owl
No problem. All 4 Mozilla code based browsers are worth using – at the moment – but have ofc their different issues.
1) Pale Moon in that way that it has no perfect web compatibility as there is no new browser engine incoming and everything has to be implemented from scratch – success depending on the skill level of contributors
2) Floorp/Waterfox/Pulse as Mozilla could pull the plug with every future version incoming – in taking down userchrome.css, which is essential for the browser included customization features – This main feature Mozilla already branded as legacy and which they have hidden behind a flag to be more easily able to justify a removal as compared to when it would be activated out of the box – all past and present possible incoming removals are caused thanks to their biased telemetry – which was weaponized by Mozilla as their crusader tool of choice against everything which sets them apart from Chrome.
How long all the browsers will stay valid can nobody say for sure. Only one thing…. If something is around and is an alternative to a in general shitty product… Then simply use it!
While many other forked browsers “use publicly available source code”,
Floorp is a collaborative product in direct and indirect partnership with “Mozilla”.
The developer’s main focus is to “We would like to natively implement the functions that users want in Firefox, which Floorp respects, and achieve reliability and high performance”.
Just, the purpose is to “create a tool” that is a safe, secure, and easy-to-use browser, and it has nothing to do with ideological conflicts.
If I floorp had worked correctly with Tab mix plus that would have been great and I might have kept using it. New tab button was constantly going missing and a few features were not working and as I would later find out that amongst those features the session manager and restore function was not working.
I will keep an eye out on the project but so far Waterfox seems to handle Tab mix plus as well as many older extensions once you tweak a few things.
There could be some great things coming up for both browsers with the support of community developers and extension developers which is one of the reasons why phoenix/firefox used to thrive.
“I admire that, but I also think it’s a waste of time and effort to work on browsers like this. Why can’t they just work on either improving the base Firefox code”
That’s a very good question. And the answer is that such forks are made to remove the crap from libre software once gone rogue (or at least it’s the main interest of Waterfox even if the intention of the author was originally having a 64bit browser and today search engine revenues). There is no reason why the original developer gone awry (MozCorp here) would tolerate those crap cleaning contributions to their code. They won’t even tolerate hearing those suggested.
“It’s not flawless but it’s like 4 years ahead in terms of stability.”
Firefox is unstable ? And unstable to the point of recommending Chrome instead ? First time I hear such an argument, even the most dishonest Google shills never attempted that. I don’t believe so.
@Anonymous Better a developer creates a feature rich browser than working with Mozilla directly. Firefox is featureless and no longer a power user browser, Waterfox is the opposite.
And Chromium, thanks but NO thanks!
@Sajadi Well said!
@deleatur
Thanks. Mozilla has such a long history of alienating and mistreating their first core user group who used and advertised the browser from version 0.x towards 20-22 – Only to betray them for a different target user group, never issuing an apology to their old core group without which Mozilla never would have came into existence or would have been existing today at all.
A once beloved browser company which had high values and morals decided to descend into the mindset of a greedy, money and power hungry shady organization – and most of the remaining users which are using official Firefox today are political radicalized activists who hate like Mozilla Free speech, freedom of expression and freedom of choice – just look at Mozilla’s dystopian Mastodon instance where free speech is discouraged for the sake of conformity, and it is well known to which political alignment this description fits best – a censorship loving developer and censorship loving users – oh, how deep the once mighty hero Mozilla has fallen.
It is utterly depressing to have witnessed all that. Still, the code base can be used even today – but Mozilla should not be supported as much as possible…. blocking telemetry, changing user agent and so on. My hope is that Mozilla at some point crumbles and vanishes and the remains are taken over by people with the right development ideology again – people who believe in empowering users instead of thinking that some corporate design is more of value than the users choice to make the browser look the way the user wants it to look like.
I always will love and adore Mozilla of old, but this new Mozilla which made a hostile take-over basically – they deserve no positive mention or support at all.
“political radicalized activists who hate Free speech”
Uh, ok
@Sajadi
You’re talking, for the benefit of WF over FF, about feature richness and power users, but today those “extra features” are mainly anecdotal things like toolbar customizations, now that Waterfox Classic is only a zombie browser with absolutely awful remaining support for classic extensions. And maybe the support for Chrome extensions, but I wonder how many WF users actually use that, I’m not one of them, the AMO store is full enough like that and probably more trustworthy.
For me the actual benefit of WF is that this developer is much less nasty than Mozilla. Sure he pulled a few bad tricks of his own like abusive censorship on his forum or search engine reinitialization, but compared to the hellfeast of Mozilla, he’s an angel.
@Anonymous Well, power user browser regarding additional customization features which do no longer exist in from Mozilla bastardized and abused Firefox.
I am also well aware that if we talk about “power user browser” Floorp would fit this description more better, and that in the end what is left of Firefox customization is just a bad joke compared to much earlier XUL versions.
And we can also bet that Mozilla is doing whatever they can to destroy the rest of customization abilities in their code base which will also affect Floorp or Waterfox in the end. But this end has so far not come luckily.
And yes, Mozilla is just a big dumpster (Progressive) fire
When Mozilla was lagging behind in the 64-bit productization of Firefox,
Waterfox adopted Firefox as its platform, optimized it for the 64-bit Windows environment, and released it in the spring of 2011, attracting a great deal of attention.
I had tried it at that time,
And I was keeping an eye on the development since then…..
I stopped using Waterfox after “LibreWolf” came out.
As for the Waterfox project, Alex Kontos was a student, so it seems he wasn’t able to support browser development well enough, due to his Compatibility with schoolwork, In addition, “applyd the patch” from upstream was often delayed. The limitations of this project (development resources are too small) were exposed, and many users left.
However, I felt passionate about Alex Kontos on the official blog, so I’m feeling of trying Waterfox again.
I’m interested in Waterfox because it uses the extremely stable “Firefox ESR” as a platform, and because the specifications are simple (additional functions are suppressed).
“it seems he wasn’t able to support browser development well enough, due to his Compatibility with schoolwork, In addition, “applyd the patch” from upstream was often delayed. The limitations of this project (development resources are too small) were exposed, and many users left.”
None of this is true, at least for the many years I have used it.
The problem with all those brilliant initiatives is that it are very often one-man-projects, from a highly motivated individual.
However ICT-history has shown that even a highly motivated indivdual is not capable of ensuring continuity of his project.
It is essential that there is a team, without dictator, or an organisation with a motivation to keep the project alive and up-to-date.
If I understand this article than this can only be a good thing and I can only hope for more contributors and that the community rallies behind this project.
@Iron heart
Does that -3% cover Firefox forks? More specifically is it gauged by engine used or just fluffery such as usage agent?
@Mystique
> Does that -3% cover Firefox forks? More specifically is it gauged by engine used or just fluffery such as usage agent?
I think this is usually done by user agent. Most Gecko-based browsers use Firefox’s user agent for compatibility reasons, because some websites do discriminate by user agent. Small Chromium-based browsers like Brave or Vivaldi use Chrome’s user agent, for the same reason. The bigger Chromium-based ones (Edge, Opera) can “afford” their own user agent.
So measuring by Firefox’s user agent should relatively precisely measure the market share of the entire Gecko-based browser landscape.
I know I have spoofed my user agent in the past as chrome so I don’t know if it’s an entirely accurate metric but you are probably right.
I honestly do not think that anyone should be asking for there to be only one browsing engine. Such unchecked/unchallenged dominance could only lead to bad things. If Google decides to make some changes that cannot be undone then even the most lucrative browsers will not have the money or the resources to build their own engine or browser from scratch or rollback or modify the browser on a deeper level.
Wonderful news, that makes Waterfox also a possible option as backup browser. Pale Moon is my ultimate main, but i am still unsure a bit if i want to have Floorp or Waterfox as backup.
This decision is a big bonus which is utterly important in my personal opinion.
@Howard Pearce,
An Update on Waterfox Classic | http://www.waterfox.net
https://www.waterfox.net/blog/classic-update/
Will die along with Firefox, which is now below 3% market share. If upstream ceases to exist, so does Waterfox.
That 3% market share is including mobile, where Firefox doesn’t really compete almost at all. The phone OS makers and phone manufacturers run practical monopolies on mobile (Chrome, Safari, Samsung Internet).
On the desktop, Firefox is holding steady or improving at 6% to 8% market share right now according to the various firms that claim to track that data. That puts them at #3 or #4 in the desktop browser space. That should be enough to keep them relevant and to keep the money flowing in from their various search engine agreements. It’s a lot more than the share for the browser I use, Pale Moon, which is probably at more like 0.001% or something. Or the browser that you use, Brave, which is at about 0.05% according to a couple of websites.
@Andy Prough
1) Why would you exclude mobile? Mobile usage has outpaced desktop usage.
2) Brave has 60 million+ users, Firefox has 200 million+ users. So if Firefox is at 3% market share, how can Brave be at 0.05% then? Also Brave is hard to measure separately since it uses Chrome’s user agent, which is also making me question your figures.
I don’t know where you get your figures from, but all you have to do is search “2023 desktop browser market share” on any search engine and you’ll find the data exactly as I described it quickly.
I already told you why I exclude mobile – because it is a phone maker or phone OS maker monopoly where Firefox doesn’t compete almost at all. It’s pointless with regard to Firefox.
I’m sorry if reality does not align with your presuppositions, but that’s the way it is my friend.
@Andy Prough
Firefox offers a mobile browser, so they DO compete in the mobile sphere. They just don’t do it very well. Firefox on desktop isn’t preinstalled on the desktop either anywhere except on Linux, in itself not very relevant on the desktop. So your argument flies right out of the window, I personally believe you just don’t want to discuss Firefox’s abysmal overall performance.
And Brave had 50 million users in 2021 already: https://brave.com/2021-recap/
They have over 60 million now, and this does definitely not equal 0.05% market share. How was the market share of 0.05% even measured, according to your unmentioned sources? By user agent? If yes, it’s not accurate from the get go, because Brave uses Chrome’s user agent. We all know that Brave has more market share than that, who are you trying to fool here, Andy…
>”your unmentioned sources”
I gave you the search terms – are you physically unable to perform a web search for some reason?
@Andy Prough
> I gave you the search terms – are you physically unable to perform a web search for some reason?
You sound aggravated when called out – why are you unable to provide a source? Why should I go out of my way to support YOUR claims?
@Iron Heart
“You sound aggravated when called out”
You sound more aggravated when called out. Watch in 3..2…1
@Andy Prough
> And, as I say, since it’s not capable of competing for any real market share on mobile
You always throw that into the room, but you fail to support it. They DO compete on mobile, frankly it’s just that their product is shit (see also the reviews on the Play Store).
> So every browser except Chrome, Safari and Samsung Internet takes a huge hit if you look at combined desktop/mobile market.
No browser except Firefox and Edge takes major hits.
I am still waiting for your source for 0.05% market share of Brave along with an explanation of how (by what metric) it was measured, by the way. If it’s easy to find, you should have no problem providing that source.
@Yash
> Just so you know, UC browser has more downloads than Brave browser.
Market share is measured continuously and refers to the currently active user base at any given time. UC browser has been around since forever and was popular in the early days of Android. I don’t believe for a second that it has more currently active installs than Brave.
> However Brave and Firefox both have 50 million plus downloads(in case of Firefox, more than that but you get the point).
Again, total number of downloads (all time), as shown in the Play Store, is not the same as the currently active user base.
@Anonymous
> You sound more aggravated when called out. Watch in 3..2…1
Doubt that.
@Iron Heart
Just so you know, UC browser has more downloads than Brave browser. Mobile space doesn’t matter when it comes to market share. Most popular apps are also the one which come preinstalled and can’t be removed aka Chrome, Opera, Samsung Internet, UC and other trash browsers.
However Brave and Firefox both have 50 million plus downloads(in case of Firefox, more than that but you get the point). That should be celebrated because those are users that downloaded Brave and Firefox because they were not happy with default option. The wind looks like in favour of Brave and Firefox’s sail.
As you wish. Just know that your 3% number you often use is wide open to challenge, with the data readily available from the top search results of a simple web search. Firefox, on the desktop at least, looks like it is in a fairly healthy market condition, with opportunities for growth.
And, as I say, since it’s not capable of competing for any real market share on mobile, that’s not a good metric to measure it by. No browser but the ones by the 3 big phone monopolies has more than 1% market share on mobile. So every browser except Chrome, Safari and Samsung Internet takes a huge hit if you look at combined desktop/mobile market. Safari actually appears to far exceed its desktop browser usage with its mobile browser usage.
@Iron Heart
And i would gladly love to see Mozilla to cease existing…
BUT – that means that the change exists that somebody else will take over who will reverse course, who cares for power users and FOSS again, who believes in features and not in one design fits all as concept.
So, Mozilla’s death will not be the end, it would instead offer the chance for a fresh start – with a limited user base, but still alive just under a new (and hopefully better) management.
Mozilla is a corrupt money addicted organization… Seeing Firefox abused by them is painful. They must go… and that soon!
what we actually need are strict regulations to prevent forced monopoly (google wont allow phone makers to use any other OS otherwise they will cut them off from using android, google spyware apps being default on android) and stealing of user data by these spyware corpos. If data is the new oil, why aren’t the creators of the data (users) paid anything? and since these corpos love subscriptions so much, they should pay a subscription fee to access our data
@Anonymous
> what we actually need are strict regulations to prevent forced monopoly (google wont allow phone makers to use any other OS otherwise they will cut them off from using android, google spyware apps being default on android)
I mean, I too am shitting on Google for their spying on users etc. But as far as smartphones are concerned, their Pixel phones are among the last ones that allow you to easily install a Custom ROM. The only other phone which actively allows for it is Fairphone. All other manufacturers are locking their bootloaders, giving you no way to unlock.
I would not call Google a bastion of freedom (lol), but their smartphones are currently more open towards modification than others.
@Iron Heart
That may be true, but as long as browsers like Floorp, Pulse, Pale Moon and now Waterfox again exist, i will pick always 2 of them over Chromium which swallows resources, destroys SSD writing cycles.
Granted, morally and ideologically Mozilla is way worse – but as long as some options are around which featuring customization instead of Mozilla’s Chrome clone minimalism – and who are NOT official Firefox – they should be used instead of using a Chromium based browser.
Chromium and Blink are terrible – And no matter how many skins exist of them, they just sugar coat the terrible stuff with some – granted – useful features for example in Brave, Edge or Vivaldi.
Still, trash stays trash.
What is Brave market share?
@Anonymous
> What is Brave market share?
Don’t know? 1% or something? Brave will remain technically viable as long as Chrome and Edge remain viable, as it is using the very same rendering engine. All Brave Software has to do is to stay financially afloat, and a good part of the development costs of the browser is indirectly carried by Google developing Chromium.
Firefox insists on using its own engine and is on the verge of no longer being technically viable. Brave is currently both technically and financially viable.
@Nameless
> None existent. It is a browser for paranoid people.
The browser you are thinking about is called the Tor Browser Bundle (TBB).
None existent. It is a browser for paranoid people.
The market share is much more than your ignorance.
@hyperio
> The market share is much more than your ignorance.
The sound of someone coping hard.
I still have Classic Waterfox.
Anything for that version in particular ?
Waterfox Classic hasn’t been updated since 2022. Better use Pale Moon or Basilisk.
@ Andrzej,
Basilisk doesn’t support WebEx addons and neither does Pale Moon.
@Howard Pearce,
An Update on Waterfox Classic | http://www.waterfox.net
https://www.waterfox.net/blog/classic-update/