• OrdinaryAlien@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          “In July 2023, Alex Kontos announced that Waterfox had been turned into an independent project again.”

          That’s very recent, I didn’t know.

          I wouldn’t use a browser bought by a shady company when there are good alternatives. I wouldn’t want to support that company by using it.

          • inactive@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s fair, but I get the feeling Waterfox wasn’t very profitable for them to begin with.

            I personally use it because it fills the very specific niche of re-enabling support for the legacy add-on format by default. You can do this in Firefox and other derivatives, but it’s kind of a pain and it’s easily undone by updates. I don’t know of any alternatives that do the same thing.

      • Aatube@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago
        1. I don’t care that much about privacy anyway. I don’t really get why privacy geeks talk about Google collecting your searches while willingly keeping Mozilla telemetry (which is something W disables by default) on. What’s the difference? I get why Google shouldn’t be collecting external data but I have no issue at all with giving them the data I actually input. Plus Firefox has a lot more deals with bad privacy groups like Google, Fakespot, and Pocket.
        2. You can’t make the assumption that they got worse on privacy just because they got bought. They’re open-source, show me the code.
        3. Waterfox is said to be slightly faster. They also seem to have a lot more focus for development.
        4. Waterfox disables some of the Mozilla BS, like Pocket and that weird redesign of tabs to floating, by default.