• pHr34kY@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Well, it said right there in the article that until today, Brave was that only browser that would truncate tracker tags when copying a URL to clipboard.

      Moar browsers == moar innovation.

    • haruki@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Default Brave blocks ads more aggressively than default Firefox. Of course you can achieve that with Firefox + uBlock Origin, but add-ons are not available on iOS and iPad OS.

      That’s just my experience. I still use Firefox + Firefox Focus BTW. To block more aggressively, I also use VPN + Adguard Home.

      • Colonel Sanders@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        This. Only reason I use Brave is for my iPhone (which I am already planning to jump back to Android when it’s time for a new phone) because I can listen to YouTube videos/music in the background and no ads when going through the browser (another reason I’m going back to Android is for Revanced). Everything else is FF

      • online@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        Yep and for some people it’s too hard to think about extensions so just having them install Brave is a perfect recommendation (for now anyway).

      • varsock@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Brave has superior fingerprint protection, they achieve this by randomizing the browsers fingerprint. Visit EFF’s cover your tracks to test your browser.

        To achieve the same functionality that brave achieves out of the box with Firefox I need many extensions and then when I profile both browsers, Firefox is more resource intensive. Brave’s blocking is native to the browser. I will give Firefox the W because I’ve read that uBlock is technically more capable. But as a long time Firefox/uBlock user who switched to brave - this has not been noticable.

        As for accessibility, I can configure brave to be really aggressive at ad blocking, tracking blocking, fingerprint blocking, and restricting JS even, and all those options I can set from one place instead of in different settings/extensions. When a website breaks, I click on the button next to the URL and immediately have options to granularly dial down the “protection” or add a website to my trusted list. In Firefox I was annoyed to having go through settings for the extension.

        Brave plans to continue supporting Manifest V2 after Google kills it. For Ungoogled Chromium, however, it’s still undecided, likely depending on whether UG contributors are willing to maintain it.

    • not_a_bot_i_swear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      10 months ago

      The only reason why I still have Brave installed is because some sites don’t work with Firefox. Like Webflow’s editor. At least they claim it’s not supported yet.

      • PlexSheep@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I use chromium for that, there are many better browsers (even chromium forks) than braves IMO.

        • not_a_bot_i_swear@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          No, technically, I don’t even have to. The website just gives a message that it wasn’t tested on Firefox. But it’s still usable. I just don’t want to deal with any problems that might arise in the complicated process of building a website in the browser.

    • varsock@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      Brave has superior fingerprint protection, they achieve this by randomizing the browsers fingerprint. Visit EFF’s cover your tracks to test your browser.

      To achieve the same functionality that brave achieves out of the box with Firefox I need many extensions and then when I profile both browsers, Firefox is more resource intensive. Brave’s blocking is native to the browser. I will give Firefox the W because I’ve read that uBlock is technically more capable. But as a long time Firefox/uBlock user who switched to brave - this has not been noticable.

      As for accessibility, I can configure brave to be really aggressive at ad blocking, tracking blocking, fingerprint blocking, and restricting JS even, and all those options I can set from one place instead of in different settings/extensions. When a website breaks, I click on the button next to the URL and immediately have options to granularly dial down the “protection” or add a website to my trusted list. In Firefox I was annoyed to having go through settings for the extension.

      Brave plans to continue supporting Manifest V2 after Google kills it. For Ungoogled Chromium, however, it’s still undecided, likely depending on whether UG contributors are willing to maintain it.