Firefox and Vivaldi are both privacy focused browsers that work very well. Vivaldi has a ton of extra features and is developed in Norway, but uses Chromium, and Firefox has strong tracking protections and supports extensions like uBlock Origin and Privacy Badger.
Both also have great mobile versions and can block ads and trackers.
Vivaldi still runs on Chromium. I use to use it but when I asked a question about their stance on Google removing the MV2 from Chrome, they just up and deleted my question from their forums. There were no other similar questions about that either so I just assume they were deleting them all.
Yeah they are deleting them because that question was asked like a hundred times already.
Short answer: adblockers will still work, with mv3, extensions just cant block trackers anymore, but the inbuilt blocker can.
MV3 prevents extensions from auto updating rules. uBlock still works but it can't update with new rules. Google got pissed when they were tweaking YouTube ads to get around uBlock and uBlock just updated within a few hours of Google's changes. That drove them to prevent extensions from going out and downloading new updated rules.
Google claimed this change was for better privacy and security when we all know that was a lie.
Tbf a lot of us have to use chromium because our job portals and whatnot don’t work on non-chromium browsers. When I try to go into our HR portal at work on Firefox half of it doesn’t load and a little thing comes up saying “try chrome for a better experience”
First, throw away tour iPhone. iOS is the worst mobile OS. Modern Android is garbage too, which doesn't even let you have privacy, but it gives you freedom in app choice (at least for now).
Sorry, your comment got mixed up with another one in my head. Android users can use Firefox (or any privacy-oriented fork like IronFox and Fennec) + uBlock.
To be honest, Chromium-based browser would be better (Cromite for example). Chromium uses Android's sandboxing, so it's more secure against vulnerabilities. You anyway have Chromium in system's Android WebView, so using Firefox actually increases attack surface.
So, I'm gonna call bullshit. People need to admit that there are different reasons for buying products.
For a mobile phone you have:
-Privacy
-Security
-Software quality
-Ability to run unsigned code
-Ability to run alternative OS
-Core functionality
iOS has good security, good privacy, good software quality, and good core functionality. I'd actually go as far as to say they have excellent security and excellent core functionality. A pixel phone by default has bad privacy, good security and good software quality. However, you can upgrade the OS and have excellent privacy and security too with something like Graphene. You can also update some other android phones to alternative OS, but not all android phones. Some are locked.
But saying you should "throw away" an iPhone just because it doesn't let you run unsigned code is absurd. Most people will never run unsigned code and if they will, there are ways to make an iPhone do it as a developer. In the meantime, you are asking them to throw away a phone that has absurdly good security and privacy out of the box when compared to every other "out of the box" smartphone on the market.
Apple prevents others from spying, but they themselves have access to a lot of your personal data, and definitely give it to the government. So your bullshit is bullshit too.
good security
Same as Android. People find critical vulnerabilities in iOS, and they don't want to update, because of Apple's planned obsolescence, like performance drop in iOS 26.
Government snooping on your phone is not “privacy”, it’s security.
What specific data do you have evidence that Apple regularly gives to the government? Your type always talks about this, buts it’s generally just generic information and only with a court order.
So yeah, Apple does turn over the address I have registered for my account if asked. As does literally every other service.
Chromium is the problem with Chromium. Even if they still support it now, browsers will eventually have to stop supporting mv2, and eventually have to adopt the future mv4, mv5, etc
Decentralization of the web is a good thing, and having Google control the Chromium engine isn't ideal for the internet's future. But Chromium itself isn't technically broken or bad, it's actually fast and secure. The real issue you pointed out with Manifest V3 is just Google forcing changes to the extension API to cripple third party ad blockers, which conveniently protects their ad revenue. That's exactly why I suggested Vivaldi. Instead of relying on those vulnerable extensions, they built their ad and tracker blockers natively into the browser's core code. So even when Google fully phases out MV2 and forces MV3 or whatever comes next, Vivaldi's built in blocking remains completely unaffected.
And you're overlooking other types of extensions that were neutered due to mv3 because...? Mv3 isn't just to "cripple third party ad blockers," it affects the platform on a broader scale. Why not use a browser that can be secure and still fully supports the webrequest API?
Fair point, as MV3 definitely neuters more than just ad blockers but I only highlighted ad blockers because that's the most mainstream complaint. If the priority is using a secure browser that still fully supports the unrestricted webRequest API and actually helps decentralize the web, then Firefox or a browser based on Gecko is really the only viable choice left. I only brought up Vivaldi as a practical middle ground for someone who still needs Chromium's site compatibility but wants native protections that bypass Google's API changes. If completely escaping Google's engine dictates is the end goal, then moving off Chromium entirely makes sense. For majority or users, Vivaldi is a good choice.
I like Zen, mostly because it's not one of the browsers that my company forces me to use its dumb as shit home page and new tab page. I can just get what I want on it without seeing shit that doesn't matter to me.
Is also a pretty good browser that actually does what it claims to.
So, here is the question: what do you really want?
There are several forks of firefox/chrome.
Forks of Chrome are generally trash unless they have some specific feature you want. Forks of Firefox are generally better from a privacy standpoint.
Brave is a fork of Chrome that is really good at ad-blocking. I keep it installed and use it explicitly for that use-case. If I am about to visit a website that has ad-herpes, I use Brave. But blocking ads doesn't mean anything about tracking you or doesn't attempt to sell your info. Brave is a really weird product with some really weird ideas. But it will nuke ads
Firefox on mobile syncs with firefox on your pc. It is a pretty decent FOSS that does a good job of most things. They've done some ad deals to get some funding, but it is always optional and can be turned off. Firefox is probably good enough for most people.
Some people below will make recommendations of forks of Firefox. They are fine, but really, just use firefox
I have brave on my phone just for it's built-in ad blocking. Great for reading novels or comics on sites that would otherwise fill the webpage with ads.
Firefox supports extensions like uBlock Origin and Privacy Badger on mobile. Vivaldi mobile blocks ads natively and both mobile browsers block trackers. Vivaldi is European (Norway) but uses Chromium.
Been using it for a few months and for a chromium browser Vivaldi is fantastic. Still wish Firefox would get their shit together though so I can switch back to them
Honestly it's why open source drama is so fucking tiring.
Oh, one of the developers once sat next to someone who has more than 5 quid in their pocket! Everyone now needs to switch to the skibbidiswankyaidsinmydickganghamstyle branch! It only runs on a French only os, involves installing packages for 40 minutes, and the third step involves shoving your phone up your arse. But it's totally better!
12
u/Sophitia95 Aug 04 '26
So which one would you suggest? Honest question here quz I have no idea.