Well, Mozilla seems to be making some pretty questionable decisions, So I’m considering switching browsers for the third (Is it the third?) time. The thing is, I really like the way Firefox works, so I’ve been trying out the more famous Forks like Waterfox and Librewolf, although I’m going for Floorp. However, I’m wondering: is using a fork enough? I mean, they are Forks maintained by other people, but is there a chance that whatever Mozilla does to Firefox could affect those Forks? Should I jump to a totally different browser like Vivaldi?

  • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Huh?

    Manifest v3 is not the rendering engine. The issue with manifest v3 is that the extension format is changing, so it’ll be more difficult to make ad blocker extensions work on Chrome. But a Chromium fork that is focused on privacy, of which there are several, and an ad blocker of which there are several, want to work together to make sure that their ad blocker is still working on the Chromium fork in question, it’s hard for me to see it being insurmountably difficult for them to collaborate on an API that will let it happen.

    It’s not automatic, it can be difficult since they’re diverging from Chromium. But it is not on the same scale as trying to maintain a divergent browser engine.

    • cm0002@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yea, I wasnt entirely clear, I brought up Manifest v3 as a “this is already complicated, and a browser engine is even more complicated” example

      No Chromium fork maintains Mv2 anyways even though it is easier, and yes some do have their own builtin AdBlock and are able to function well that way. But I do not consider that ideal, one would be entirely dependent on their AdBlock implementation where as if a fork maintains Mv2 then you would be able to just change your extension if you don’t like something about it