Hey there,

I’ve been using Firefox for ages now, and I was completely satisfied with it… until very recently, that is. For space-saving reasons, I started to convert my media library to H265, since all devices in my network support it now. Or so I thought. One very noticeable omission is my desktop PC with Firefox. Now, if I watch something from my local media server, the server has to waste resources to convert to H264, which is a noticeable performance hit to all other things running on the server. The GPU in my Desktop PC (or the CPU for that matter) could have displayed H265 without even changing clock speed from idle. So I tried to use the native Plex App for Windows for that, but that one does not support RTX Super Resolution which was really nice when watching old DVD stuff.

From what I can see, to get both, I need a Chromium browser. Since I would rather not have two browsers open all the time: Is there any browser based on the latest Chromium Builds that is not a massive insult to one’s privacy?

  • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
    21·
    8 months ago

    User data in a Mozilla-Firefox Account is shared with Alphabet

    Nobody needs a Mozilla account, and Google analytics domains can be disabled in uBlock Origin with 2-3 clicks, something problematic on Vivaldi since Chromium browsers hate a full featured uBO. However, I cannot opt out of the 5% closed source code in Vivaldi, if I use Vivaldi, and their “performance and security” reasons are very vague and fishy.

    The user respecting choice seems clear.

    • Zerush@lemmy.ml
      22·
      8 months ago

      You need an account if you use sync and don’t want third party or self hosted solutions. I don’t think that there is nothing vague or fishy in Vivaldi, it’s all very transparent. Chromium (Blink) is used by the vast majory of browsers in the web and Vivaldy, apart of beeing the only EU browser is a very small cooperative in Norway. What do you think ocurres if Vivaldi release its nique UI as OpenSource, which compañies in less a second will use it for the own browser? Chrome and EDGE and killing with this definitively the competence and a free internet, include Vivaldi.

      Google dominate the internet and battle against Vivaldi and others, or buy them, like Mozilla, since several years, first with discriminatory browsersniffing, blocking the access of several sites if it detected Vivaldi in the UA. Because of this, Vivaldi was disguised by the devs as Chrome against the own interests, later introducing several tracking APIs in the Chromium base, which the Vivaldi devs stripped out (except security updates) since years, before using it for Vivaldi (Because of this the Chromium base in Vivaldi is somewhat behind (~< a month) the official Chromium version. Later Google tried it with webpage APIs (FloC, idle API and others) also skipped by V devs. Mv3 also not affect Vivaldi with the inbuild blockers, no need to have the daily battle which Gorhill has to maintan uBO up to date. For YT I’ve enough with the Vivaldi trackerblocker and a userscript, to have YT 100% free of ads and nags since more than 8 month.

      I have been using Vivaldi for 8 years and I have seen all of Google’s tricks to eliminate Vivaldi as an uncomfortable competition, especially due to von Tetzchner’s activism against Google’s practices and web surveillance, which together with others and the Norwegian organization of consumers has driven this GDPR in the EU.

      As a user I don’t care about these 5% UI proprietary scripts, but I do care about the ethics and transparency of the company with the user and this is beyond any doubt

      etc.

      You can’t buy trust with OpenSource, the trust must be gained by the author

      • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
        3·
        8 months ago

        You need an account if you use sync and don’t want third party or self hosted solutions.

        And Google has nothing to do with Mozilla account. This is a bizarre conspiracy theory. It takes 1 minute with uBO to disable Google domains.

        I don’t think that there is nothing vague or fishy in Vivaldi, it’s all very transparent. Chromium (Blink) is used by the vast majory of browsers in the web

        Closed source web browser is fishy. The “security” reasoning is the most insane kind of reasoning and is given by the likes of Apple.

        What do you think ocurres if Vivaldi release its nique UI as OpenSource, which compañies in less a second will use it for the own browser?

        I care about transparency, which UGC is and Vivaldi is not.

        blocking the access of several sites if it detected Vivaldi in the UA.

        Vivaldi was not alone. The most affected browser has always been Firefox, the global leader in rooting against Big Tech and Chromium engine monopoly. Vivaldi instead contributes to it, going against what Opera once stood for.

        As a user I don’t care about these 5% UI proprietary scripts, but I do care about the ethics and transparency of the company with the user and this is beyond any doubt

        You can’t buy trust with OpenSource, the trust must be gained by the author

        You do not care about your internet web browser being closed source. This is a you problem, and a Vivaldi problem. This makes UGC the only viable Chromium based browser for privacy recommendations. Very few closed source internet programs have gained trust over time, like IDM on Windows.

        Nobody buys trust with open source. The development model itself encourages transparency, unlike closed source development inventing excuses about obscurity. Internet tools with closed source code should be avoided unless no feasible alternatives exist, and Vivaldi has alternatives.

        • Zerush@lemmy.ml
          11·
          8 months ago

          vs

          Do you trust OpenSource made by Facebook, MS or Google? Vivaldi don’t, because of this use a lot of work to gut the Chromium code (100% FOSS) before using it. For an user it’s irrelevant if part of the UI is proprietary, knowing that the script is clean of any hidden things. Anyone with knowledge of programming can check it and even modify it without problem, the only limitation: it cannot be used by other browsers or companies. Any advanced browser has parts which are not fully OpenSource because of a amount of very different licenses from the scripts of the different features which a browser offer, also Firefox , eg the translation tool of FF, which is from Lingvanex, the same as hosted by Vivaldi, which is proprietary soft. Maybe the definition of OpenSource need an update, currently it’s a pretty grayzone.

          For the rest https://vivaldi.com/source/

          • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
            2·
            8 months ago

            screenshots of Mozilla account with google domains

            Why are you pushing this narrative, despite uBO domain disabling available 2-3 clicks away? Mozilla account is not dependent on google telemetry.

            Do you trust OpenSource made by Facebook, MS or Google?

            Android, yes. Chromium, yes, but as second opinion browser as it leaks a lot of metadata. Anything written in D language would be fine. Zstd is made by Facebook, even if I do not like it as much for technical reasons over 7Z/RAR/ARC/LOLZ, but Yann Collet did a great job just like with the legendary LZ4.

            Vivaldi itself keeps 5% closed source code for fishy reasons, and it has alternatives, and it promotes Chromium engine monopoly which harms internet.

            For an user it’s irrelevant if part of the UI is proprietary,

            No. It is critical to have transparency for an internet application, unless trust is gained over decades. https://vivaldi.com/blog/vivaldi-browser-open-source/

            We don’t publish it under an open-source license and only release obfuscated versions of it. The obfuscation is partly there to improve performance, but it also very much is the first line of defense, to prevent other parties from taking the code and building an equivalent browser (essentially a fork) too easily. But should we be afraid of forks in the first place? This is highly subjective and I don’t expect to convince anyone.

            I have rarely heard of reasons more bullshit than this to stay closed source.

            translation tool of FF, which is from Lingvanex, the same as hosted by Vivaldi, which is proprietary soft.

            This is misinformation. This is the repository of FF translations (https://github.com/mozilla/firefox-translations) marked read only due to moving issue tracker to Bugzilla, which is based on the open source Bergamot toolkit (https://github.com/browsermt/bergamot-translator), not Lingvanex proprietary code.

            Maybe the definition of OpenSource need an update, currently it’s a pretty grayzone.

            Or maybe… Vivaldi must be considered closed source proprietary internet web browser software.