ITT We discuss the future of web browsers, are they all doomed to become chrome clones? Will edge ever become something? Where are the upstarts? What IS even otter browser?
And why does mozilla insist on ruining firefox?
The company with the biggest influence is deciding where the journey goes seen by features and design and web standards.
Google is not only in the position to decide which drafts are becoming standard, they have been in the past in the position - and they are now even more in the position to dictate other browser projects future.
That is why Opera became a Chrome clone, that is why Mozilla becomes even more Chrome similar soon.
>>52048339
To remove a final misunderstanding: Mozilla's and Opera's decisions are a combination of both mentioned points. Google can of course not really dictate how they should end, but both companies have decided that Google's "friendly, helpful and insightful advice's towards them" is leading for both in a more bright direction.
And that, was the wrong decision, the reality looks rather grim now thanks to that for both, Opera and Mozilla.
should never have given up the presto engine. fucking opera. version 12 was fucking perfect. too bad it's getting old and browsers that work with it are shrinking daily.
>>52047682
honestly i was surprised that vivaldi was more opera than the current opera release
>>52048413
Vivaldi is the most close thing to Opera 12 - From origin Opera makers, it will get a mail client too. And it offers similar customizations like Opera old or Firefox old.
Are they FOSS yet? Any official word on the source release other than the link?
>>52048485
Opera wanted to go mainstream, same like Mozilla. It made sense for both of them to kill off features and cusotmization and only rely on a shiny design and Web2.0 features. That is what normal users want.
Even if it is the wrong decision.
>>52048516
Foss is overrated. Look at Mozilla, and tell me again that Foss is the cure for everything. I rather trust partly closed source Vivaldi before i ever would use Chrome, Opera or Firefox.
If you want a customizable Open Source, go to Otter or Qupzilla or Qutebrowser.
>>52047682
The future is a web app browser where you can use any browser to access the web app which you then use to browse the web.
I wish I were joking.
>>52047682
Vivaldi is just another chrome clone. Faggots should just open source old opera engine
>>52048528
It's not overrated, when Mozilla (for example) goes full retard there are forks that can carry on properly.
What if Opera (12) was FOSS? People would've carried that on and we wouldn't be in this mess
>>52048573
It may be. But it is more customizable than Opera and Firefox vanilla with Australis.
And more and more people are switching to Vivaldi. Because for most people luckily quality is more important then lame business model reasons.
>>52048577
Haha.. Tell me one single fork which is able to restore Before Australis UI and before Australis customization right into the browsers core without bundling it with Classic theme restorer. That is right, there is none!
Foss means nothing boy.
I'm a sucker for mozilla extensions. I'm lost if I can't have thoses little things like closing tabs by double right clicking.
I installed a bunch of browsers to evaluate what I'm confortable with.
Qupzilla and midori are too minimal for me.
Sleipnir sucked for everything except the font rendering.
Vivaldi could work, there isn't anything wrong with using chrome extensions right?
I still have to look after seamonkey and palemoon.
>>52048577
Forking is also equal in most cases with just replacing engine with a newer engine.
Once Servo is running, Gecko is dead, and if you would try to update a before Servo fork with a recent Servo engine, your customizable UI and the add-on would be gone, because Servo does not support XUL add-ons anymore. And Servo does not support customization features anymore.
And do not make me start to talk about massive page incompatibilities - Look at Pale Moon. They became a real fork and look how they are now ending: HTML5 - 412 points, CSS3 less than 50% ES6:34% and ES7 drafts 1%
Forking is no solution. Mozilla's customization has no future. Which means every single Mozilla based browser will be in the future a Chrome UI clone. Same the forks. All gone.
Enjoy!
>>52048638
Of course not. Because Mozilla's future are Chrome like extensions too. Means you can not change shit anymore. Granted, they gimp them up with some special API which enables some special add-ons to be recreated, but most other complexity in customization over add-ons will be dead and buried.
>>52048686
tŞbh I still like the firefox UI, I want to change because the new updates freezes video sites constantly.
I would happily move to one of the chrome clones but chrome rendering looks like shit tbqh
>>52048721
You are most likely a simple guy who does not want to customize. For you every browser is sufficient because you can turn every browser into a minimalist thing.
So, go to IE, Edge, Vivaldi, Chrome or chose an Open Source browser. Or even Opera. You should be able to adapt to everything as your only needs are video and DRM.
>>52048765
Not true. Vivaldi renders here great. Same like Centbrowser or Pale Moon.
Best firefox fork - palemoon
Best chrome fork - vivaldi?
>>52048792
There is no good Firefox fork. Pale Moon has not good future web draft support and is incompatible with lots of sites which require bleeding edge drafts and all other Mozilla forks will become Chrome similar in Servo engine too or cease to exist like Seamonkey.
While i like Vivaldi, i would still consider Otter Browser once they have a stable QTWebengine available as the only proper Chromium fork. Add-on support is there too planned, but that is more far away in the future.
>>52048528
How is otter browser? Would it work well on a shit laptop?
>>52048774
eh, I wouldn't say that.
I like current firefox with lots of add ons and my browser is cluttered with bookmarks.
But idk what you considerminimalist. Mind posting a screen?
My biggest gripe with vivaldi right now is that I can't change the position of the UI elements, especially the extension buttons.
>>52048810
>future web draft
I don't even know what that is... I'm using pale moon as my main browser for third month now I think, and I haven't got a single problem with it so far.
>>52048839
Otter is quite nice. Not resource hungry. But be aware, it is less polished than Vivaldi and missing some features - But it is 100% Open Source. And until QTWebengine is matured enough to be able to switch to it, QTWebkit is a bit unstable (QTWebkit is uses right now).
>>52048512
It isn't close at all though. It's basically a Chrome clone at this point. The devs promise a lot, but it's never going to have everything that Opera 12 did. And more importantly, it's always going to be using Google's shitty fork of WebKit, which is becoming ubiquitous in the same way that Trident used to be. That's bad for the web.
>>52048784
Fonts look like shit in Blink. It might not be something that you notice if you don't use a Gecko-based browser regularly, but they're absolute trash by comparison.
>>52048852
Customization does not mean tons of add-ons. a real geek does tons of UI customization with CSS and prefers to have features in the browsers core.
A minimalist likes to have features not in the browsers core and uses instead tons of add-ons because he/she thinks that this creates not that much browser bloat.
>>52048857
Try Pale Moon with this. Try Chromium with this. And you see why Pale Moon is outdated.
http://kangax.github.io/compat-table/es7
http://kangax.github.io/compat-table/es6
>>52048883
No, it is no total Chrome clone. I can customize all parts of the UI with css, i can have side tabs left and right, i can have in window mode no UI, i have tab stacking, page tiling, black UI, advanced speed dials, i can create tabs in the side bar and so much more.
Try to do that with Opera new or Chrome without add-ons. Vivaldi is so much more already.
1) a disappointing number of developers don't even bother testing their code gecko\trident and don't give a shit if it doesn't work on those browsers
2) blink is really the only rendering engine that you can easily drop into applications and use in a cross-platform application
3) mozilla is in a tough spot. there's obviously turmoil at the top of the organisation and their resources have been spread very thin. all the time they spent on firefox os (which was, btw, many many millions of lines of code) is now wasted. firefox is filled with legacy crap that desperately needs removing, but in many ways its firefox's baggage and its harkening back to a different era that makes it so unique
mozilla have done a lot of compromising recently - DRM, addon signing, etc - and i don't think the old mozilla, or a more popular mozilla, would have compromised in that way
ultimately, it's google chrome that has the TV advertisements, so it's google chrome that won the browser war. mozilla had no chance. this is probably bad for the open web.
4) vivaldi is very promising, certainly a lot more so than the other chrome clones, i think it realises the need for UI customisation in particular, but a lot of the features that i'm intersted in are still WIP and the browser is proprietary, which really limits my interest in it.
5) a lot of people think chrome is the new IE. chrome is popular but google are at least proactive with new web technologies (as long as those technologies serve to benefit them...). i would in fact argue that safari is the new IE, because safari consistently drags its heels and yet many people inexplicably still use it
i feel like mozilla are in a tough position, but i think they tried to appease casual users instead of loyalists, and ultimately that's their downfall. they could have spent a few years as a semi-successful niche browser like opera but instead they're doomed to end up as another netscape. perhaps we will have another phoenix?
>>52048892
>tons of info that I don't get any of
Didn't help.
>>52048921
>>52048921
Sad thing is that there is no really good FOSS browser anymore. We are turning back to times where closed source is feature rich and great, FOSS is not polished and Chrome similar and limited.
>>52048931
That features decide if a page loads or not. Which means for Pale Moon that most recent pages will not load. But in Chrome and recent Firefox they will.
>>52048931
To give you a real world example:
https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=10469&hilit=santa Try out the pages mentioned here with Pale Moon and you see they fail to load. Try to load them with Chrome and they work.
The more drafts are supported, the higher is the chance you can see a webpage.
Is there a portable version of otter browser? I really don't like non portable shit. Also ublock blocking sourceforge.
>>52049084
ads-blocker is integrated in Otter. And portable version is available in the zip/7zip files without installer.
I just want Vivaldi for Android!
>>52049084
>Also ublock blocking sourceforge
Sourceforge started hijacking the installers they host and uBlock is configured to block badware risk sites by default.
>>52047682
Can we please get the mods to start banning these vivaldi shills? No one wants your shitty closed source browser.
>>52049109
And no one wants a cheap Firefox UI chrome clone!
>>52049109
Btw. if Firefox is the shining star of Open Source i rather would use Google Chrome. Because i do not want to use something Open Source based which is butt raped by big money business and greed against a big competitor.
Mozilla is butt-fucked by DRM, by proprietary pocket and partnership with companies which are also proprietary or no open at all.
The moment Mozilla made their first deal with Google in the past, the moment Open Source was raped and done.
Firefox is a disgrace for Open Source. Mozilla is a disgrace for Open Source.
No one wants a SJW infested butt-raped and big money controlled caricature of Open Source!
Now go home to your Netflix or Amazon Video DRM device and stop shilling!
>>52049109
Scared of a little competition, Furrykuck?
>>52048976
>>52049034
Ah, well, its good that vivaldi is decent then, might have to use it as a backup, or maybe even main if they add more customization.
>>52049213
You do realize that most of that guys which seem to defend Firefox and Open Source are actual minimalist design lovers who hate customization and user choice.
So they damn everything which has one check-box in the UI or the options too much. Feature and customization lovers are peaceful and agree that different workflow options should be in one and the same product, simple users are spreading hate against anything which is not like or similar to Google Chrome.
Simple fags are so easy to spot :D
>>52049222
Only thing that makes me want to drop vivaldi is that tab closing focuses the last active tab instead of tab on the left or right, setting when?
>>52047682
Freeware has no reason to be propriatery.
>>52049287
I can't bring myself to use vivaldi yet because it lacks the option to drag tabs out of window to open another one, which I use rather often
>>52049287
Option to put it to the right is there in the latest snapshot. You can also show full address and deactivate auto complete function in the url bar
>>52049295
And a lot of you FOSS shills are only demanding Open Source because you do not want to use an official product you just want to create your own branding of it. Sorry to say, Vivaldi makers are too clever to fall for this trap!
Go to hell shill!
>>52049295
I'm sorry but we was the last time you wrote a browser? They have every right to their own code. It's not like we have some deal with Amazon to deal your data like other shitty organizations. They just don't want it to get forked to hell.
>>52049311
Thats a "Tab Clone" not "Tab Close" option.
>>52049310
Option is also added in latest snapshot with right menu click. Option to drag with the mouse is upcoming in the new year.
>>52049325
It's not about writing a new browser with vivaldi's 'amazing' code.
It is about making sure I am not being fucked in the ass by them.
And no, I will not read the codebase of the browser. Just knowing that other people are provides a good sence of security.
>>52049359
Vivaldi guys are not Chrome ones. They do not sell your data like Google. They only get money over search engine integration.
They are honest guys and will not fuck you. Just contact them in Facebook, Twitter or their blog and ask them.
Btw. Vivaldi is an add-on. They do not modify the Chromium code. They only bundle the add-on with Chromium, and only the add-on is proprietary. They can not release it on Google add-on page because Google recently banished advanced add-ons which support more than one specific function.
Firefox still has issues that have been around for about a decade now. They can't even split tabs off as new windows right.
>>52048528
What purpose do they have to make a closed source free browser?
>>52049385
I know it seems strawman-ish, but how can you be sure? Because they said so?
What is their reasoning for having it be propriatery? Are they afraid about the theft of their intellectual property? If that is the case, they have nothing to worry about.
>>52049359
What Vivaldi guys add to the browser is a slightly modified version of resource.pak and the resource directory which has inside the bundled JS and css files. That is all what Vivaldi actually is.
Replace the recource.pak file with the version of normal exact Chromium build and you should get a simple not modified version of Chromium.
>>52048364
>The company with the biggest influence is deciding where the journey goes seen by features and design and web standards.
It is a fucking shame to see mozilla do this shit considering their history.
>>52049416
They can not release the source code of the add-on as they use many closed source components to create it.
Even if they would, they are unable in doing so.
>>52049416
In fact they have only created the JS code which renders the UI and some UI background buttons and pictures, the rest is third party components where they have neither the control and are also not allowed to release the code.
>>52049462
So it's not just vivaldi that I have to worry about?
Well, thanks for ruining another browser for me, back to pale moon.
>>52049475
The UI has no spy functions. It is only bundled with unmodified Chromium. You are using in fact only Chromium with 8 MB files created by the Vivaldi devs. And some bundled DLL files which render the UI they have written.
>>52049501
So its a chromium UI mod?..
>>52049475
You are a stupid fag! What do you not understand of unmodified Chromium code and no spy features? The UI has no access to deeper Chromium code and can not insert tracking features.
You only can complain that the Chromium part of Vivaldi phones home to Google. That is the only botnet function. Because it is Chromium!
You understand nut-head?
>>52049528
Exactly. What the hell is so hard to understand about the terms bundled and add-on?
Google does no longer add add-ons which are complex and have more than one single function aspect. If they still would accept that, Vivaldi guys would have added the add-on for Chrome on the add-on page.
That is all what Vivaldi is. A bundled UI modification add-on!
>>52049529
Pajeet calm down. They won't pay you if you go too far off script.
Will Edge browser ever get fucking addon support? I swear it feels faster than chrome and firefox
>>52048512
it is nowhere near opera 12. it'll get there, i hope. but not there yet. the closest i've tried so far is avant browser, which was inspired by opera.
all i want is opera 12 with a modern rendering engine. that's it. but nope. can't have nice things.
>>52048573
if that were permitted, it would have been done already. if opera 12 source ever leaks, i hope someone jumps all over that.
>>52049546
If people would understand right the first time, there would be no reason to use insults. But as usual people try to be stupid instead of reading what others are writing.
Really that hard? Reading is one of the first things a person is learning in life, so i do not understand how persons can be intentionally THAT stupid! I was for 10 over years teacher in schools and it is disgusting how low the brain capacity has fallen in general in the last decade!
Ilike Vivaldi but I wish when opening a lot of tabs and closing them it would move to the next tab instead of the previous open tab, also wish the bookmark toolbar was more like Firefox's where you could open bookmarks in a new tab with middle click or right click.
>>52049563
What about icecat?
>>52048810
tell me when otter has a simpler installer.
>>52049638
It already has. Exe installer.
>>52047682
Because Firefox is run by a bunch of SJW retards. Many of the core programmers are leaving. There was a post on hacker news about one of them recently.
Edge is almost dead again. Users are fleeing in masses. A Microsoft project which fails badly. You will see soon that they will pull the plug.
Edge is a lame Chrome wannabe clone. People rather use the real thing instead the one of Microsoft.
>>52049109
Vivaldi is open source now furrynigger.
https://vivaldi.com/source/
>>52049310
>right click tab
>move to: new window
>arguing over web browsers
>>52049685
This is just the Chromium code. Vivaldi is not Chromium, it is about 8 MB bundled files created by the Vivaldi devs and a slightly modified resources.pak with some dll inside which render the UI with that 8 MB Vivaldi exclusively create files.
The libraries used in that resource.pak are proprietary and not created by Vivaldi.
>>52049685
>over a month old
>just the Chromium source with some additional binary blobs
That's not how open source works retard
you can always just use chrome
>>52049700
>one click to open menu
>second to select option
>then move to desired position
>instead of drag and drop where I want
Still not gud enough for me
Pale Moon has been my primary browser for years. I don't like a lot of the newer features or interfaces changes in Firefox, whereas Pale Moon is more like FF4 or 5 in terms of GUI and memory usage. SeaMonkey is also a good lightweight alternative, but it's bundled with extra functionality you may or may not use, like an email client.
I still use Firefox with my Slackware laptop, but the version bundled with the OS seems to be a very stripped down distribution. It definitely doesn't use the same kind of memory as a fresh installation of the latest FF would.
>>52049659
>le SJW boogeyman
>>>/pol/
>>>/trash/
>>52049731
Firefox is not better. DRM! Same concept you idiot!
So vivaldi guys could potentially add\remove botnets and features from their chromium source right?
And since its closed source it will be a coin flip determining if the browser is good or not?
>>52049747
Pale Moon is a dead end. Want a prove?
https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=10469&hilit=santa - Try out that pages in Pale Moon.
and compare how few drafts are supported in Pale Moon.
http://beta.html5test.com
http://kangax.github.io/compat-table/es7
http://kangax.github.io/compat-table/es6
>>52049715
Arguably the most significant accessory to productivity in the 21st century m8
>>52049782
>since its closed source it will be a coin flip determining if the browser is good or not?
Since it's closed source you can guarantee it has added botnet features.
They aren't selling it, so they have no reason to keep it closed source unless they're doing something shady with it.
>>52049782
They have no knowledge about Chromium code base. They only bundle their add-on with Chromium and avoid tinkering in the Chromium code.
Basically they are similar incompetent guys like Mozilla but they are at least able to create customization features with CSS and Javascript. But they have no real coders.
>>52049649
>Otter
ok. so it now has an easy installer and i'm giving it a go. so far, it feels comfortable, like opera 12. however, it is still missing a few things. for example, sorting bookmarks. i'm going to play with it for a few weeks and see how i like it. thanks mate.
>>52049798
They only see the add-on as their possession and they do not want that others use their own intellectual property.
That is their right. Why sharing with FOSS fags which create thousands of forks then? It is their project and they do not want to share potential users with the likes of you who would exploit the add-on for your own bundled forks!
Fuck off.
>>52049824
Otter is a work in progress. I guess it needs for sure another year to have it fully working and basic feature complete.
And i am not talking about possible components like mail, torrent or irc right now. That belongs to additional components and not basic stuff.
>>52049802
>>52049798
Well, thats a damn shame. And I started to like it too.
At least its better than chrome, right?..
>>52049850
>At least its better than chrome, right?..
It's just more botnet and less performance
>>52049862
> less performance
Runs way better than chrome for me m8. 30%~ less ram on same setup.
>>52049798
The add-on code can be viewed btw. It is inside the resources directory.
Explore the Javascript and CSS code if you want for spying features. The part which is proprietary and can not be open sourced is the resource.pak file. It has 3rd party libraries which render the UI with the code inside the resource directory.
The only amount of MB which belongs to Vivaldi devs are the 8 MB in the resource directory.
t
>>52049850
Chrome is total botnet and has no customization. Yes, that is better. A bit! In general Chromium is more secure and has less spying features than Chrome.
>>52049802
They have real developers, but they don't have any budget. It's a pet project that only exists because the new Opera is such an ungodly piece of shit.
>>52048864
Man i'm trying it now and wow it actually manages the "is it remotely like opera 12" test, which means pressing ctrl+t very rapidly, then ctrl-w rapidly to see if the UI lags or hangs, otter actually has smooth tab handling even on this shit laptop, i'm impressed.
Vivaldi/Chrome isn't even close and lags everytime I open a fucking tab, have to wait half a second before it accepts input.
>>52049913
Be aware of one thing: Otter will also adopt Chromium. It will be called QTWebengine. If Chrome lags, Otter will perhaps lag too, as it will also have multiprocess usage.
>>52049913
QTWebkit is deprecated and will be killed off soon. Right now Otter uses QT 5.5. The first version with - theoretically - really useful QTWebengine will be QT 5.6 which is right now in Beta stage.
Most likely the switch is coming mid 2016 or end 2016
>>52049938
>multiprocess usage
What is the fucking point of that?
>>52049909
Sure, but they still miss the knowledge to dive deep inside the code. Opera guys have created a native UI, Vivaldi devs are unable to do so, they had to create a non native CSS/Javascript UI.
Opera has created special API for their new Opera, Vivaldi guys are unable to do that.
It is not false, they lack parts of the Opera knowledge, which does not mean the add-on they bundle with Chromium is bad. For a non native bundled 3rd party add-on... really awesome result.
>>52049972
if le one tab or addon crashes it will not break entire browser xD
>>52049972
That the browser is not crashing as a whole when one tab dies.
>>52049913
>pressing ctrl+t very rapidly, then ctrl-w rapidly to see if the UI lags or hangs
ctrl+w works great on firefox 44, ctrl+t was fucking horrible though
>>52049909
So it's kind of like what Palemoon is to Firefox?
>>52049848
the way things are looking, i wouldn't think that a torrent client is a priority at the moment.
anyway, there are a lot of things that i do like so far. it's moving in the right direction. i hope tab stacking is implemented soon. it will be a good secondary browser for the time being.
the otter dude should team up with the dude from avant, since he's stated he's also a fan of old opera. for now, avant is my main. you can switch between trident, blink and gecko and somehow, it uses less resources than the original browsers who use these engines.
>>52050019
Not exactly. If you make that comparison, Vivaldi is like what Seamonkey is to Firefox. No real fork which is using the recent engine what the source project is releasing each month.
>>52050017
>>52050008
How about a more stable browser instead of a crutch?
>>52050054
You misunderstand.
No program is so stable that it will never crash. Multiprocess just makes sure that the chance that it crashes is even smaller.
>>52050054
And it is a standard implemented by Chrome. Every browser developer is implementing it today.
>>52050079
With that we have come to full circle. Things are developed today because Google can tell what is standard and what is not.
Welcome in the new old world where Google Chrome is the new IE!
One browser, one company, one universal standard for all other developers of browsers!
Also the reason why everyone adopts Chromium styled add-ons and throws away their own creations.
>>52050054
Please never try to develop software
>>52050134
I'd addopt whoevers style of addons if theyll have ublock.
>>52049848
me again. otter has minimize all tabs! wonderful. too bad i can't double click on the grey space behind to get a new tab. also, no password management yet? no tab stacking either.
>>52050079
He isn't misunderstanding anything. The developers lack confidence in the product they shat out, so to avoid complaints they have a backup "solution".
Why do all these Vivaldi shills read like they barely know the english language?
>>52050154
As i said it is a heavy work in progress. Feel free to join the irc in server freenode with the channel called #otter-browser.
There you can directly talk with the maker Emdek and his helpers. Quite an active community.
>>52050175
It's just the one Indian shitposter
>>52050175
Why are all recent Firefox shills minimalist fags which hate features, choice and customization?
>>52050134
actually, the universal standard is what is set out by w3. however, back in the day, ms couldn't give a flying fuck, leading to their browser being the least standards compliant browser of the nineties and two thousands. the only browser that really did follow standards properly, was opera. however, due to virtually all companies adopting shitty ie and retarded and lazy developers, standards compliance didn't mean much for the better part of two decades.
>>52050192
I really hope you enjoy your Firechrome which becomes more and more featureless as time is moving forward.
Minimalist fags like you should have no saying in how technology is advancing. You and the likes of you are to be blamed that there is almost no power user project anymore.
>>52050220
:^)
>>52050199
W3 does mean nothing. Apple and Google are shitting on them and implement whatever they think which is right. And everyone is forced to break REAL standards because what Google and Apple implement and create makes stuff impossible in other browsers.
>>52050196
>features, choice and customization
>red chrome
>>52050220
maybe someone could reverse engineer opera 12?
>>52050239
>using the smiley with a carat nose
>>52050259
Not possible, Opera does not give away the source code. Opera hates like Mozilla and Google today customization.
They would never give away anything which enables others to create a new customizable browser.
>>52050246
hence the problem. there are standards and the major players don't follow them. more importantly, website devs don't follow them either. it's not like the guidelines are difficult to follow either. it's just that the devs have always been lazy as fuck. if they just followed them, it wouldn't even matter what browser is used, as everything would work correctly.
>>52050196
They're preparing for future firefox:
>>52049598
>>52050246
>Apple and Google are shitting on them and implement whatever they think which is right
Do you want to give some examples of all these terrible standards that Apple or Google are creating without consulting W3?
>>52050239
You simple fags own us an answer:
Give us one single good reason why a software should today only feature a nice design, web 2.0 features and no customization.
Come on, we are waiting!
>>52050285
Do you not understand the concept of reverse engineering or are you just really stupid?
>>52050259
What would be the point? Presto is so outdated at this point that it's almost useless. It would take a huge amount of work to bring it up to par, requiring it to be a huge project with a ton of developers.
There's a reason that there are so few layout engines left now, and it's because developing and maintaining them is fucking hard and fucking expensive. Just creating a skin around Blink or WebKit is much easier, which is why every fucking browser around except Firecux, it's spin-offs and Edge use it.
>>52048921
>end up as another netscape
Plot twist: Firefox IS Netscape!
>>52050311
it's actually ms who is the biggest culprit. apple and google are small time.
>>52047682
Try edge for 1day
Not disappointed
>>52050311
I am no technician, but ask the Otter-Browser maker or the Pale Moon maker. They have complained countless of times that all Webkit based software has created a quasi standard which must be accepted by others.
>>52050319
Idiot. Even if you can recreate something you should better have the source available, because developing stuff which is only similar to a certain feature creates never the same experience.
>>52050322
edge doesn't use webkit or blink.
>>52050325
i thought everyone knew this?
>>52050366
again that is not what reversing is
>>52050322
>because developing and maintaining them is fucking hard and fucking expensive
Do it the Mozilla way and ditch C++, 300% increase in productivity.
>>52050397
>I am a Firefox shill who tries to obfuscate everything
Ignore that lame sucker.
Is there any good browser who has the favourites menu and favourites tab like Firefox?
>>52050449
its forks maybe
How about we end this at this note. Chrome clone simplicity is bad, features and user choice is good.
Who does not agree is a heretic and should be burned in the everlasting hell fire of creation 8-)
>>52050449
Mozilla is all about simplicity, even that will be changed sooner or later. Best is if you say good bye to features and choice already if you are using Firefox.
Sorry, but that is the way it is. :(
o shit i didnt notice he was namefagging, now i feel like the retard for responding
>>52050461
I could go for a feature rich and customizable browser with the ability to disable components you dont need thus making it faster and lighter.
>>52047682
If Vivaldi is just a Chrome clone whats the point in using it other than the better tab management?
>inb4 muh botnet meme
Of course other than this
>>52050520
Faster and lighter is an illusion. Mozilla has a problem with features and the slow engine, that is true. For example this would be of no relevance with Chrome. Blink is fast enough to have both features and speed, the only difference is almost none is making a customizable Blink browser.
>>52050338
>>52050343
So you don't know of any examples then
>>52050550
If you don't want to have botnet you should be using Firefox.
>>52050573
Firefox is a worthless Chrome UI clone. There is no joy in that software anymore. And Mozilla is no better than Google anymore these days.
Firefox shill go home!
>>52050573
I used to be a FFfag becuase noscript was so comfy and umatrix is autistic.However ever sincce 2012 the whole world has exploded to JS autism so I switched to Chrome.
>>52050573
As i have already said in my post I don't care about botnet.
>>52047682
>Vivaldi
Why would a shitty chromium mod be the future of browsing? It's 2016 and they refuse to even release the full source code for it and instead give partial code only part of it the vivaldi specific part and a nice 2.5gb of chromium.
and even then that's old code and they refuse to let people see the latest.
Firefox shills and simple fags.... We still wait for your examples why that is necessary today!
Give us one single good reason why a software should today only feature a nice design, web 2.0 features and no customization.
Come on, we are waiting now since quite some time!
>>52050642
Because that browser adds customization and features instead of trying to be a simple Chrome carbon copy like Mozilla and Opera does?
Open Source means nothing if backed by such a shitty org like Mozilla!
Edge could be the one. Hopefully enough people make the switch
>>52050657
Favourites menu.
>>52050690
Do not reply to the Indian shitposter
>>52050642
Ever heard of intellectual property? Vivaldi will switch at one point to a 2 version system: Basic version which is free and Special extended feature version which will be sold, like old Opera.
So, they will not share their creation with you, sorry greedy Foss fag!
You have no right to create your own versions of Vivaldi. There is one single organization and they want to stay the only one.
>>52050696
Do not reply to the Chrome UI loving minimalist fag who loves to have Firefox without features and options and user choice and who wants too that every other software looks and works the same like that.
Hey, Vivaldi improved a lot actually. It was a blurry mess with scaling on Windows 8.1 now it works fine on Windows 10.
Still no whatsapp web support yet tho. Close but no cigar.
>>52050802
It does support it. You only need an add-on to change the user agent. Whatsapp does not support other user agents, only the ones of Chrome and Firefox.
>>52050802
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/48.0.2564.48 Safari/537.36 Vivaldi/1.0.357.5
That is the problem. The Vivaldi/1.0.357.5 part which is seen by whatsapp as not recognized browser.
>>52047682
>And why does mozilla insist on ruining firefox?
The same reason Google insist on ruining Chrome. The only reason I use Chrome is because of built in flash integration (I hate having to fucking manually install and keep flash up to date), and Firefox's rendering engine is slow as fucking molasses.
>>52050681
Edge is fucking garbage and has been ever since it was that Spartan bullshit in the Technical Preview builds.
>>52050572
you're at a computer. fucking use a search engine. there are many examples of most major browser makers balking at w3 and doing their own thing. do some fucking reading and stop being 12 years old.
>Be current year
>NOT using IE11
Common guys, IE11 is king all others are shit.
>>52050930
So you still don't know of any examples then
>>52050960
So you're still 12 years old then
>>52050930
> 1990's
> Be microsoft with 100% marketshare for everything
> w3c comes along
> no longer using current standards because fuck you
> All of the wuts
>>52050710
are you stupid? opera has been free to use for over a decade now. that's fucking ancient history for tech. paid desktop browsers will not be making a comeback. i'm not even sure how that's happening on mobile, but i guess people are stupid.
>>52050919
Agreed. I had the displeasure of using it on a tablet and was amazed what a steaming pile of shit MS managed to churn out and call it a competent web browser. It was even unstable. Switched to Firefox instantly, even the desktop version worked better than Edge on the tablet.
BTW Pale Moon gets 409/555 from HTML5test, on all the important areas. That's quite adequate.
>>52050994
w3c has been around longer than ie. go fuck yourself.
>>52051062
at least it's not msn explorer.
>>52048596
I don't know of any, but you can write one yourself.
>Foss means nothing boy.
What's with the proprietary shills on here lately? Are you guys really needing to get THIS creative?
>>52051102
Actually, the IE11 or something I previously used on Win8 was vastly superior for touch usage. Edge is limited as fuck, there were so many basic features missing. Too bad I can't remember any right off the bat.
I also had the UI stop responding on me on some occasions, and some HTML5 newspaper sites were wonky as fuck
>>52051083
REVISED VERSION 1.1
> 1990's
> Be Microsoft with 100% marketshare for everything
> w3c all of a sudden decides that it makes the rules for the internet with its 0% marketshare
> MS get cucked by FOSS kikes
> All of the wuts
>>52049105
baka senpai
>>52049109
Fuck off freetard.
>>52051155
How pathetic. The typical argument of the FOSS supporters.
>Foss is so superior, just do it on your own
You fucking cunts do not create solutions, you only make problems.
FOSS is garbage! and so are you!
>>52051155
I want to have a customizable solution with features inside the browser i download, i do not want to create that on my own and i do not want to install add-ons for it.
Therefor i love Vivaldi. Made by persons which create for power users only. They at least deliver a solution instead of offering only big talk like you do.
Must be painful to see a partly closed source product constantly gain more traction while Firefox constantly runs into more problems!
Sucks to use a second class code base, and it sucks to be you!
>Chrom*
>current year
>almost next year
Install Palemoon.
>>52049890
What exactly can you infer from
>the only amount of MB which belongs to Vivaldi devs are the 8 MB in the resource directory
Are you telling me it's impossible to fit spying features into 8 MB? Can someone more knowledgeable chime in on this? I'm not a programmer.
>>52048588
>And more and more people are switching to Vivaldi. Because for most people luckily quality is more important then lame business model reasons.
Confirmed for Vivaldi dev shilling here. I bet it has even less market share than Opera which is near zero anyways
Firefox performance keeps getting worse with each update i fucking swear
They will all become chrome clones because they will all become a giant runtime environment for service-apps that disrespect your freedom to the max
You have more (practical, not legal) freedom with a copy protected binary than you do with a webapp
>>52048667
Those new standards are part of the problem
>>52052864
You know Vivaldi devs officially stated that they do not care for large numbers of users. They want to be a small project for power users.
A browser which inserts features and customization. No fag company like Mozilla which removes features and customization just for getting minimalist fags.
Better to use a quality browser which is small instead of a butt-raped Open Source project like Mozilla! Btw. How does it feel to see Firefox becoming more and more featureless? Do you enjoy it hopefully?
I don't understand how this shillposter keeps going on about firefox's lack of features and cuztomizability.
addons provide any feature you want, and everything about how firefox looks can be changed in your userchrome.css
>>52053721
Only good customization is if it is inside the browser. If a browser does not feature features and customization inside, it is just a lame Google copy.
>>52053721
add-ons will not save you from Mozilla's Chrome copy madness.
This is a betrayal of power users. Fuck Mozilla, fuck simplicity fuck simple fags!
>>52053721
And one more thing asshole, compared with Firefox 22 the new Australis builds and later Servo will be a large disgrace!
And Servo will only allow you to customize limited parts of the browser, the stuff Mozilla thinks which should be able to customized.
In Vivaldi and Otter, once it switches to QTWebengine you can customize everything out of the box.
So fuck you you lame subhuman!
servo will be the biggest thing to hit web browsers since firefox came from netscape and since mozilla invented javascript
why is every other company so worthless?
>>52053721
So you know, Mozilla has no right in turning Firefox from a geek ware into a simple ware.
Simple users like you should have no decision in how the web is turning into the future.
>>52053891
>>52053931
>>52053970
>>52054021
i knew that post would make you mad
>>52048528
chromium is foss and that's why chrome exists, without it.. it would not
linux is open source, bsd is open source. and that is why: google, mozilla, apple, facebook, 4chan, amazon, yahoo, etc can all exist
what's your point? I don't get it
>>52047682
I use Chrome because it just works.
>can choose when to update
>can turn extensions on and off without restarting browser
>can keep a literal fuckton of browsing history without it being auto-wiped
>can run a hundred tabs for weeks on end without browser slowing down to a crawl and requiring a restart
>can open new tabs and windows without a fuckton of lag
>can play media with proprietary codecs within browser
>no other browser comes close to the hassle-free experience of Chrome
>no longer need to hold back from punting my computer out a window due to Firefox's constant bloat-induced lag
>mai browserfu respects my privacy more than wimmin irl
>reports back to her pimp Google, who ALREADY knows everything about my degenerate browsing habits (and yours) since before Gmail was even a thing
>they also read all my emails for years because tfw too cheap to use a paid email provider
Ironically enough, insecurity is freedom. I can kick back with a fast browser and not worry about jumping through hoops to hide my streaming of girl on girl porn from Google or the NSA.
This is pretty much why every browser wants to be Chrome. Taking off the tinfoil hat is actually a real load off, especially when you realize the feds cares as much about your yaoi binges as they do your neighbor's proclivity for bestiality.
What matters most right now is that people actually enjoy using their browser, or rather, that it doesn't constantly assault users with problems/errors/lag.
Anyway, Edge a shit and upstarts are too busy using Chrome to try building a better browser. Even Otter is just for filthy nostalgiafag casuals who don't need a fuckton of scripts/extensions (i.e. 4chan X) to keep up with their hardcore web surfing.
>>52054048
Mad? You have not seen me mad. But the first Mozilla guy who i am running into will see me mad. When i break his/her neck and rip their head off to shit inside their corpse afterwards.
THAT is mad. All other stuff is just a little bit upset.
cont from >>52054141
Don't even get me started on Firefox, which is basically a gumpy old SJW-infested grandpa who puts on campy shades and hawaiian shirts while spouting hip young lingo in order to avoid its own inevitable irrelevance. The only thing it still does great is bookmark/history management, but even that's marred by the inability to keep your history from steadily auto-purging once it reaches a certain number of entries.
The fact is, Chrome just does the interweb best because nobody can be arsed to build or maintain a newer/better browser anymore. Even Opera gave up (and raped their browser's ability to manage bookmarks) despite being one of the best alternatives to both Laggerfox and Chrome.
>>52054141
>can keep a literal fuckton of browsing history without it being auto-wiped
I can't seem to keep past 3 months or so.
>>52054251
There's an extension for that.
History Trends Unlimited
>>52054721
Thanks m8.
>>52049325
>we
Found the Vivaldi dev
>>52054159
So basically you have no real arguments aginst firefox?
And did you try out the millions of nice addons?
Firebug, adblockers, video grabbers, security stuff..
>>52056298
I used to use Firefox. Now Chrome is my workhorse.
Addons aside, I still got tired of having to wait 5 minutes to open a new window every time I left the browser open.
>>52049613
Will never catch on.
>tfw want to switch to Vivaldi but no tree-style tabs and pic related
>>52049747
>>52049747
Butthurt SJW detected.
Brendan Eich was the one thing stopping Firefox from adopting DRM bullshit and you cucks got him fired because MUH GAY MARRIAGE
Half of the bullshit we have to deal with today is because of Social Justice Retards who feel that everything has to conform to their petty world view
firefox is dying. it's been playing catch-up to chrome for years and years, and it's abandoning the one important thing that differentiates it from chrome.
can't wait for some shitty web api extensions you piece of shit
>>52053989
Brandon Eich and Netscape invented js. Too bad fucking sjw's got him fired for having the wrong political view
>>52059278
Pretty much this.
SJW's are little more than a menace
>>52051158
are you implying that it was nearly as bad as msn explorer? no sarcasm, that's a sincere question. i'd install win8 just to see how bad that browser was.
>>52051174
netscape actually had more marketshare than ie you fucktard. since w3c was founded by the same person who pretty much made the internet, i'd say they have the right to do so.
>>52054141
But can you sort bookmarks by URL?
