Theses are the only browsers worth trying in early 2017

File: Opera.jpg (16KB, 720x662px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 720x662px

I don't need to try a new browser

File: 1487007407982.jpg (24KB, 505x405px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 505x405px

>>59065691
Finally, someone with a good opinion.

>>59065753
>02/22/17
>march 2017

>>59065691
>diy botnet
>will die as soon as the dev realizes it's fucking work for nothing
>last security update in 2015
>you are the betatester
>>59065744
literally WH[logo] / rethemed diy botnet
>>59065753
>collecting ressource wasters

File: 1200px-Midori.svg.png (164KB, 1200x1200px)

164KB, 1200x1200px

>not using a poor man's safari

>>59065691
but you are wrong
>>59061583

>>59065753
>ungoogle chromium not in god tier
100% just works
0% botnet

what about iridium?

Pale Meme needs more dev support to be truly good. It's definitely serviceable, I'm giving it a "fair shake" period.

>>59065691
Whoa, I didn't know K-Meleon was still around, I had forgotten about it for over a decade.

>>59065691
All of them works just fine. Use any one of them and do the shit you have to do on the web. If it doesn't work use another.

It doesn't fucking matter what god damn browser you use. They all do literally the same thing.

waterfox, yes/no?

>>59065753
Firefox developer edition indeed seems really comfy.

>regular firefox is still the most reliable, non-botnet-controlled browser around who is also responsible for the downfall of the internet explorer 13 years ago improving not only internet standards but also security and privacy
just come home, anon.

>>59066771
>%0 botnet
no. even in the github page they say that it's possible to let some botnet code work due to rapid development of chromium.
>>59067320
yes

>>59065691
I don't see SeaMonkey in that pic

File: 1486614249305.jpg (11KB, 318x313px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 318x313px

>>59065753
Why the hell is webkit nightly at the top of all these charts?
Is it actually good? What about it makes everyone put it on the top of every tier list?

Anything Mozilla/Firefox based automatically belongs in the trash.

>>59067547
imo stable tier>bleeding edge tier

>>59067461
>no. even in the github page they say that it's possible to let some botnet code work due to rapid development of chromium
I prefer that over using outdated vulnerable version of chromium (read every chromium fork) or firecucks anything.
I actually fucking despise anything based on chromium and would prefer to keep using firecucks forever but ff devs actively do everything they can to make me not use their browser. Palemoon is not an answer.

>>59066803
shitty german botnet which gets shilled recently here

What's your browser tier for mobile, anon?

Can someone recommend a fast, customizable browser that respects my privacy and supports addons like ublock and https everywhere?
In these threads nobody ever explains their reasoning for preferring one browser over another.

>>59065753
>vivaldi in shit tier
It's acceptable at the very least. I'm using it to see where it goes since it's still VERY early in its development.

>>59066251
Are you fucking serious?
>midoli
>only works on Linux
>what is security
>crashes on all pages

>>59066771
>100% just works
>no HTTPS Everywhere
you don't belong on /g/

>>59065691
3 of these aren't worth using though?

>>59068822
Literally palemoon.

>>59068983
its mostly closed source, we are in /g/, consider it lucky that its not in botnet tier

>>59069968
I'm gonna try it, but I've read it doesn't support many addons including ublock.

>>59070123
It supports virtually everything, but the mozilla addon site may fail the version check. You can try finding a direct link or forging the headers to get through. For things that are known not to work, there are typically forks on the palemoon site (e.g. encrypted web for https everywhere, adblock latitude for abp)