Discussion in 'other software & services' started by The Red Moon, Jan 20, 2016.
"....early version of its new web browser that displays websites quickly, by blocking programmatic ads, and replaces them with Brave’s own ad inventory....."
Their own ads, FN A! That's a SCUM move.
LOL, that doesn't sound too good. Never the less, it's interesting to see a new player on the market, on which engine is it based?
EDIT: I just read it's based on Chromium, so it's probably using Blink. At the moment Vivaldi is the one to beat.
It may help if you read what the developers are trying to accomplish. Read Eich's blog on the bottom of this page. https://brave.com/
I'm not sure I understand it perfectly, but the purpose seems to be to clean up tracking ads and such and to give the user an opportunity to support the site they're visiting either by viewing ads or to make a donation, as they realize web sites are being hurt by ad blockers. It doesn't sound to me that the purpose of the ads are to produce revenue for the Brave Software developers themselves.
Or from the top of the site:
Hmmm, so they are basically trying to fix the whole online ad system, now that would be interesting.
That's what it sounds like. Of course I think it depends on people being willing to put up with any ads to support the websites they visit, and a significant number of people adopting the browser, or other popular browsers adopting their concept.
I've happily (pretty much, at least) used Pale Moon with ad and script blockers for years, and this is the only browser I've been really interested in trying, even after just hearing about it just now. Maybe there are a lot of other people who don't understand or like messing with ad and privacy add ons that would go for a browser like that.
Been using pale moon myself for a few months and its a great browser.
I don't think I worded this well though. To clarify, I mean that the Brave Browser is the only other browser I'm really interested in trying. Not that Pale Moon is the only browser. Especially as I've been wondering if there's some reason I should have a Chrome or Chromium, or whatever it's called type of browser. And I have no trouble with ads if they're clean, appropriate, don't track, aren't malicious, unobtrusive, and help the websites I care about without me having to send cash. So I'm interested in both the browser and concept.
Thanks for bringing it to our attention!
Same here, and don't slow down page loading. I don't feel brave enough to try out brave yet, but maybe later on
Me too. I feel bad that I need to block ads on my favorite sites, just because the ads are annoying as hell. And when they are not annoying I still can't white-list them, because I also want to block all of the trackers. About the browser itself, I'm only interested if it's highly customizable like Vivaldi.
There has been quite a lot of coverage of the Brave browser, this is one of many articles:
We do remember Mr Eich. His exit from Mozilla wasn't gracious. A bit unfortunate that he should borrow from the language of fascism in order to stage his comeback:
'We need to clean the swimming pool,” Brendan Eich says. “Chlorinate the pool. Only by doing that can we build a better ad model for publishers as well as users.'
I think it's very questionable as to who the real fascists are. But getting away form the PC police:
Has anyone tried the Brave browser yet? The "development" version wouldn't install on my computer, so I guess I'll have to be patient for the release, beta, or whatever the next step is, unless maybe someone else knows.
On my machine this website isn't correctly displayed on both Opera 12 and FF 42. Is it just me?
So, Brave's claim to fame is that it eliminates the need for extensions as ublock, umatrix, Noscript, Ghostery, etc. And then they turn around and "Then we put clean ads back, to fund website owners and Brave users alike. Users can spend their funds to go ad-free on their favorite sites." (Quote taken from post #5.)
Brave has an option to block ads too. Not only replacing it.
It has ad-blocker/tracker implemented natively...
One unique feature i like about it is partitioned sessions..
Yeah, terrible, ain't it.
But why it's so revolutionary!
It does seem to promise some good features, if you can get past all the people who automatically see it as somehow evil without seeming to care about the intents and purposes.
I think it reminds people of AdBlock Plus and it's "acceptable ads" policy that they seemed to think was so terrible. While I didn't even consider that particularly sinister, I see this browser as even less so.
It blocks trackers by default
It blocks Ads & replaces with Clean Ads! One can choose to turn off the replace functionality part
Some part to achieve this, it has implemented adblocker/tracker/httpseverywhere natively in the browser
Has some unique feature like Partitioned Sessions!!
First you can do with the default browser, second you can do with add-ons (and you can set it to have NO ads at all), the third one is a bit interesting but think how many partitioned sessions you would need; if you need it for just a few sites it is already easily applicable with add-ons.
What I see is offering a browser with some configuration tweaks and incorporated add-ons for a way to monetize already developed software.
Yes, 1 & 2 can be achieved through extension. But here in this case it is implemented natively.
Remember not all the extension are written with performance in mind!! So, i am interested how this browser plays out! And how it compares uBlock Origin! (this one is written/designed with performance in mind )
At-least i would need 2 partitioned sessions. Like use to login for 2 e-mail accounts simultaneously for the same provider. I am interested in its details. Maybe one can do sensitive transaction (like banking) with partitioned session and not closing the browser/other tabs (just guessing its uses )
For multi logins again there are add-on options available, to do banking you can open incognito mode. If for any reason you need more than 2 partitions then this may be useful (I don't know if any available add-on brings such function though, need to check)
As for speed and performance I agree with you in theory, but I think they will just port available extensions into the code so there won't be any improvements in that regard.
I don't think so. It was a rewrite. See here
Separate names with a comma.