Why not fork firefox
this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2025
95 points (75.7% liked)
Linux
52867 readers
307 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I think maintaning a Firefox fork is pretty demanding especially considering you are already maintaining a distro. And there are already a lot of Firefox forks out there.
True
A bad move. But again i hate that many distros have a default browser and they don't let you choose.
one of the worst distros ever so I guess this is pretty obvious choice and telling to some.
No, that would be manjaro.
load more comments
(1 replies)
"we replaced the browser with ad ware, that we even admit we had to ship settings to minimise its malware effect"
Brave hates gays
the everyday linux distro that is famous for asking people for money for their pro version, cause they know most of the userbase is coming from windows and doesnt know that everything is free?
load more comments
(11 replies)
“Mozilla has a bit been shady lately, so we are making the difficult decision to change our default browser to something significantly more shady. We are confident our users will feel safer knowing their data is in even worse hands than before"
Brave marketing has gone crazy to convince people it's less dodgy than Firefox. Come on!
Every time someone says anything positive about Brave I assume they're part of the Crypto scheme, or love Brave's CEO.
Yeah. Viral marketing is real but people never seem to be able to identify it.
They should've picked LibreWolf which ships with uBlock Origin. Brave is a disappointing choice because it supports multi-level marketing pyramid schemes which says enough about their moral compass.
--
✍︎ arscyni.cc: modernity ∝ nature.
I kinda dislike the default LibreWolf settings. Unsure if they changed it, but I remember that you have no history except you change it in the settings.
A Windows refugee wants a history. Addituonally, many pages just dont work.
My University also does capture a picture and reads it from the Canvas or something, which LibreWolf blocks. It doesnt show again if something is okay or wrong. I just got a Mail that I need to reupload it and go by myself to pickup my University-Card.
I wasnt the only one as Informatics has many Linux users and some Librewolf users.
While FF's evil quotient has been on the rise, Brave definitely isn't a better option. If anything, librewolf is the way to go.
As a Librewolf user I wouldn't make it default for casual users this kind of distro is aiming for. Sure enabling logins to use it as a main browser is piss easy, but that's still more work than the average person wants to put into setting up their system.
Waterfox would be the better choice since it's just default Firefox in every way besides Mozilla's spyware.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Doesn't Librewolf log you out of every site when you close it, by default? I don't think that's a good default
That is the default behaviour, but it's pretty trivial to change. Also, I'd imagine the distro maintainer could choose to change the default settings as part of a post-install script, if they wanted to.
Edit: Not sure why you're being downvoted, as I do think it's a valid concern.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
load more comments
(19 replies)
I'm actually not familiar with this distro. But if I installed a Linux distro, and it had brave installed. I would immediately switch.
load more comments
(1 replies)
How is brave the lesser of those two evils?
Crypto scam browser is never a better evil...
Based on absolutely nothing, I feel like it isn't..
It isn't.
Brave sucks Google balls.
load more comments
(10 replies)
Seems like a strange choice. If anything i would've expected them to just use a firefox fork or something.
load more comments
(3 replies)
That's a clown makeup moment for Zorin OS
That's gonna be a no from me, dawg
Firefox is bad, Brave is evil. Why did they decide switching is a good idea?
Recent firefox policy change is controversial, but how brave is better?
"We don't like the proposed new Coke recipe, so we're switching to drinking raw undiluted sewage instead".
Blech. I'd downvote this because I disagree with their decision, but I'm glad you brought this to our attention.
talk about bad taste
Boo
🤡
I feel like if they were gonna go chromium, they should have gone with Vivaldi. It may not be open source but it's not doing a crypto scam. Waterfox would have also been a good choice, probably better because it's Gecko.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›