Very Interesting chart...

There are many reasons, of which this change is just the latest one, why those "in the know" have been avoiding the Chrome browser for some years now.

It's not "the browser part" that's the problem, in fact, it's wonderful. It's all the spying (and I do think that characterization is accurate) parts that are the problem, and have been the problem. When you couple that with the multitude of Chromium-based alternatives that are every bit the equal of Chrome's "browser part," why use Chrome?
 
Clearly the browser part works as it has become the de facto base for much of its competition. Edge, Brave, & Opera to quickly name a few I am fairly certain are all Chromium based. I believe Firefox still runs its own and I believe Vivaldi is also on its own platform but I could be mistaken it is tough to keep up with.
 
What's everyone's preferred browser and why? How secure is it?

I've been using Google Chrome for a long time and have been happy with it. Lately, it seems they are adding more and more [frequent and unnecessary] updates and coming out with new versions that you can't turn off. If you reboot your computer, they are automatically upgraded. Thinking about going with a different platform. That's why I'm asking the question. Looking for recommendations.
 
ThatPlace928 said:
it seems they are adding more and more [frequent and unnecessary] updates and coming out with new versions that you can't turn off.
Click to expand...

I don't know of any browsers that are not doing this, but for many of them the updates are a constant stream of security patches for "the latest discovered vulnerabilities."

My partner uses Brave, and I used to, but I find that it's a bit too aggressive in some of the things that it does in the name of privacy that causes things like banking websites to balk. My current cadre is Vivaldi, Firefox, and Edge, with that ordering being how much I rely on them, respectively. The vast majority of my web browsing is based in Vivaldi, with some Firefox, and Edge being a distant third (and with uBlock Origin used with both Firefox and Edge - Vivaldi builds in ad blocking [as does Brave]).

If you hate frequent updates "just because" then you need to avoid Vivaldi. They haven't changed the UI all that much at all over time, but they are constantly putting out security patches, which I can restart the browser and apply in under 30 seconds, in most cases, and since I use the "open back to where you were when I last closed you" option in every browser, it's a non-issue for me.
 
ThatPlace928 said:
What's everyone's preferred browser and why? How secure is it?

I've been using Google Chrome for a long time and have been happy with it. Lately, it seems they are adding more and more [frequent and unnecessary] updates and coming out with new versions that you can't turn off. If you reboot your computer, they are automatically upgraded. Thinking about going with a different platform. That's why I'm asking the question. Looking for recommendations.
Click to expand...
@ThatPlace928

I use Librewolf.

Only Librewolf and Brave are the securest browsers. Mullvad is just behind them.
See this thread

Now that Google are about to make Chrome an "Ad Auctioning Server" it's time to think beyond "Chromium" based browsers.
Microsoft Edge and all other Chromium based will follow suit or lose the right to use Google's code.
 
GTP said:
lose the right to use Google's code
Click to expand...

Chromium is not "Google's code," although they are instrumental in supporting the Chromium project. Chromium is to web browsers what Android is to all the myriad spins on it created by the world's smartphone manufacturers.

From the wikipedia page for Chromium (web browser): Chromium is a free and open-source web browser project, primarily developed and maintained by Google.[8] This codebase provides the vast majority of code for the Google Chrome browser, which is proprietary software with additional features.

The Chromium codebase is widely used. Microsoft Edge, Samsung Internet, Opera, and many other browsers are based on the Chromium code. Moreover, significant portions of the code are used by several app frameworks.

From the wikipedia page for Android (operating system): Android is a mobile operating system (32-bit and 64-bit) based on a modified version of the Linux kernel and other open-source software, designed primarily for touchscreen mobile devices such as smartphones and tablets. Android is developed by a consortium of developers known as the Open Handset Alliance, though its most widely used version is primarily developed by Google.

Google customizes Chromium heavily to produce the Chrome browser as well as Android for its versions on the Pixel phones. Google wants to keep its advertising empire very close to its chest. It's not sharing the potential income with others without a fight, as it wouldn't be in their own business interests to do so.
 
Be prepared for Chrome usage to crash. With Manifest v.3 Google is removing the ability for ad blockers to work on Chrome. Maybe other browsers built on Chrome like Vivaldi will stay on v.2 but I don't know how sustainable that is. I already use multiple browsers (Chrome, Firefox, & Vivaldi at the moment) but I'll be dumping Chrome like radioactive waste as soon as ad blockers no longer work with it. A web browser that doesn't allow you to block ads is completely useless to me. I'd rather go back to IE6.
 
sapphirescales said:
I'll be dumping Chrome like radioactive waste as soon as ad blockers no longer work with it. A web browser that doesn't allow you to block ads is completely useless to me. I'd rather go back to IE6.
Click to expand...

On this, we absolutely agree.

But anyone who thinks that ad-blockers aren't going to come up with a way to keep working over time hasn't paid attention to their history. They're not going away, nor are web browsers with that functionality built-in.

You and I are far from the only users who would stop using the web, or awfully close to it, if we could not block ads. I would never have felt the need to block ads if web advertising was akin to print advertising that could be easily ignored by visually gliding right past it, but it's not. The scrolling, flashing, insertion of video with audio overlay boxes, and the list goes on and on is intolerable. It directly interferes with what I am trying to accomplish. I never felt, and still don't, feel that way about advertising in print or even on TV or radio, all of which can be easily ignored or where one can shift one's attention to something else until it's over.

I will never understand why there has not been a huge outcry for regulation of exactly how web advertising can be presented and, just as importantly, the collection of metrics about how many times it's *actually* been viewed forbidden. Cyber advertising should be exactly the same as advertising in print media, where payment is for placement. There is no guarantee that any placement will be seen by every subscriber/user in any print media. The web is more analogous to print media than anything else when it comes to advertising.
 
britechguy said:
On this, we absolutely agree.

But anyone who thinks that ad-blockers aren't going to come up with a way to keep working over time hasn't paid attention to their history. They're not going away, nor are web browsers with that functionality built-in.

You and I are far from the only users who would stop using the web, or awfully close to it, if we could not block ads. I would never have felt the need to block ads if web advertising was akin to print advertising that could be easily ignored by visually gliding right past it, but it's not. The scrolling, flashing, insertion of video with audio overlay boxes, and the list goes on and on is intolerable. It directly interferes with what I am trying to accomplish. I never felt, and still don't, feel that way about advertising in print or even on TV or radio, all of which can be easily ignored or where one can shift one's attention to something else until it's over.

I will never understand why there has not been a huge outcry for regulation of exactly how web advertising can be presented and, just as importantly, the collection of metrics about how many times it's *actually* been viewed forbidden. Cyber advertising should be exactly the same as advertising in print media, where payment is for placement. There is no guarantee that any placement will be seen by every subscriber/user in any print media. The web is more analogous to print media than anything else when it comes to advertising.
Click to expand...
Ad space is paid advertising, no matter how you slice it. If it was free, Google would care less whether you have ad blockers or not. I use Malwarebytes Browser Guard extension as my ad blocker and I'm very happy with it. If I click on something and it tells me the site is unsafe, I either click out or "proceed at my own risk".

Google [and probably a few others] are forcing us to stop blocking ads because they're afraid those who pay for ads will stop paying and they want every dime they can get. It's sickening. I feel we're losing control over what we see and how we want to see it.
 
ThatPlace928 said:
It's sickening. I feel we're losing control over what we see and how we want to see it.
Click to expand...

I agree with the first sentiment. I don't with the second, since every time someone tries to block ad-blocking, those who do ad-blocking find a way to do it. I have little reason to believe that cycle will not repeat itself.

But, the only solution to all of this is legislative, and that would still involve wildly different standards in different countries. Cyberspace should have started to be regulated much nearer to its appearance on the scene, much like telecommunications were not very long after their advent. It was just as clear that what was already happening in the 1990s was analogous to what went on in the early days of telecomm that there should have been legislative action. But by that time, the attitude that "Government is the problem" rather than a tool (however imperfect) to protect the public had already taken firm root. That, coupled with the complete lack of understanding and expertise on the part of legislators, with the aversion to consulting with experts, sealed our fate and the path we would travel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

britechguy
Interesting: M365 updates are still shown as "for Microsoft Office 2016"
2
Replies
31
Views
983
nlinecomputers
nlinecomputers
thecomputerguy
Story Time. Simple install went to hell in a handbasket REAL quick! Learned some things!
Replies
16
Views
892
Sky-Knight
Sky-Knight
timeshifter
Any tips on getting Crucial scanner to work again - or a replacement?
2
Replies
21
Views
4K
River Valley Computer
River Valley Computer
lan101
Changing user login display name on a domain
Replies
6
Views
161
lan101
lan101
Rosco
[SOLVED] G suite for Outlook sync tool
Replies
7
Views
283
callthatgirl
callthatgirl
Back
Top