Is this browser even good?

no it doesn't even have all the extensions i like, i hate it!

no it doesn't even have 32 bit support for gnu

I use it for all of my personal shit. Job applications, banking, shit like that. Chromium for everything else.

it's literally chromium with extra shit, right? Is it noticeably slower or something?

I've never used such a laggy piece of shit before

>>61037792
Better than google chrome™.

>>61037937
>0 research done

>>61037792
It's kinda redundant on PC but it's the best Android browser

>>61037983
What about ungoogled-chromium, inox, etc?

Quite nice on Android.

>>61037792
Only on android. Desktop version is shit and has screen tearing.

>>61038930
It is not on fdroid. Why would I use it?

>>61038972
Best browser.

>>61038930
>Desktop version is shit and has screen tearing.
since when is the browser's job to vsync

>>61039032
It doesn't happen on any other browser.

samsung browser is the only mobile browser worth using everything else is a laggy battery draining waste

>>61037792
It's ever ao slightly buggy and not very smooth on desktop Linux. On my android phone and tablet it's a godsend because it seems to be able to block ads better than adaway can.

other than that, it's not all that impressive. it's still very much in the growing stage it seems like.

It was founded by a guy from Mozilla to create a browser that blocks third party ads while serving proprietary ads.

>>61039746
>while serving proprietary ads
that's an option. Either block the ads or replace them with Brave ads.

The only reason you should ever use it is if you're on iOS and can't block ads

>>61037792
you'd be brave to use that

What is Brave based on ? it doesn't feel like a completely standalone, more like an existing engine with extension like ublock hardcoded in it so it's called a core mechanic.

I tried chromium based browsers recently (muh webkit) but I can't get used to it. Firefox feels like home everytime I switch back to it.

>>61039794
How do you replace them with brave ads?

>>61039746
There's about:adblock and an option to add custom rules with AdBlock+ syntax. I would assume if you import all ad rules from there it'd block any ad. Although this seems to exist only on desktop version. Android should use AdAway anyway.

>>61040142
It's based on chromium. Chromium uses Blink, not WebKit.

>>61039746
>a guy from Mozilla
That's Brendan Eich, co-founder of Mozilla and creator of JavaScript. Not just some lame somebody from Shitzilla.

>>61037792
Tried it for a couple of weeks on my desktop
horribly gitchy, and is just a worse version of chrome
I never noticed a brave ad so there wasn't really any point of using it.
im going to try the android version because of what /g/ is saying, but they are coming out with a chrome browser extensions so you really dont have to use it later on.

>>61037792
No SOCKS option, built in ads. No its shit

PALE MOON
A
L
E

M
O
O
N

>>61039112
firefox is goat on android

>>61040191
>Chromium uses Blink, not WebKit.
blink is webkit forked for google to do as they see fit

>>61041588
recently downloaded FF4
australis is the best thing that happened to it

>>61040779
Yeah he's even worse because he's responsible for the shitshow that is Javascript.

File: Mobile Browser Benchmarks.png (258KB, 2828x1708px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 2828x1708px

>>61041639
>blink is a webkit fork
So? It's still blink, not webkit. You wouldn't call Ubuntu Debian just because it's based on it.

>>61041639
>firefox is goat on android
Inferior performance. Pic related.

>>61041639
sowing moz://a with salt is the best thing that could happen to ff, a bit of ugliness is not a concern

File: IMG_0023_2048x2048.jpg (282KB, 1536x2048px) Image search: [Google]

282KB, 1536x2048px

literally the best android browser I even tried.
Also literally the worst desktop browser I ever tried. Wish it was good. The bitcoin micro-payment novelty was kinda interesting

>>61040779
I would have fired him just for being the creator of JavaScript

great on android, meh on desktop.

>>61041639
>australis is the best thing that happened to it
That's the problem with Firefox. In 25 versions their best idea was a Chrome look-alike. Mozilla is in a death spiral of their own creation.

File: nrc098 (624).jpg (93KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 1280x720px

>>61037792

ITT: Jew shills

fuck off, Eich

fuck you and your cryptocurrency bullshit

and your browser name is stupid and so is the fucking logo

>>61041696
Agreed. The adblocker is shit, but the performance is amazing. Trying to add filters as >>61040191 suggested just makes the browser perform like shit. So as long as you patch your hosts to block ads you'll be fine.
But they should have integrated uBlock origin instead of adblock plus.

>>61038972
There is linkbubble, from the same devs on fdroid

>>61041673
>Pic related.
don't care about artificial evidence
it performed well on the chinkshit i had and was actually comfy and also configurable

>>61041723
i think he's making fun of the fags

>>61041901
>le artificial evidence maymay xD
Test it yourself then.
Although it's true that chromium browsers aren't optimized for MediaTek cpus I doubt it would make that much difference.

>>61037792
it's slow af, Firefox tier
other than that it's pretty nice

>>61037792
No, its shit

>>61037792
Cuck browser

>>61039746
>that blocks third party ads while serving proprietary ads
You're not exactly being up-front here. There's basically three options, block all ads, don't block all ads, or allow third party ads. I don't know why people get so hung up on this aspect when in reality, the only real shitty thing about the browser is the lack of granularity in the script blocking feature. Script blocking is an all or nothing affair which becomes not only annoying, but also dangerous, imho.

>>61041551
>built in ads
Not even remotely true.

I don't see the point of using a Xbased browser. Use either firefox or chrome.

>>61037970
That's not Vivaldi anon

>>61043072
P A L E M O O N
A
L
E

M
O
O
N

>>61037819
who even uses a 32bit in [current year]?

File: 1497126896017.jpg (42KB, 361x369px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 361x369px

>>61037819
Lol, linux doesn't even have 32 bit support anyway.

Besides, why would you want to use any chromium derivative with a 3GB process limit? That shit eats RAM yo

>>61043423
Shitzilla insisted for years that you didn't need a 32-bit browser, and Windows users suffered while OS X and Linux got release versions in 64-bit. They have finally changed their attitude, but too little too late.

>>61043894
That's why Waterfox was initially created for.

>>61043945
And Pale Moon. But why did it take third party projects to bring these to masses? And why would they disavow the need for so long but create these for other platforms?