by waldekm on 12/22/21, 11:56 AM with 167 comments
by cebert on 12/22/21, 12:01 PM
I use Firefox as my daily driver primarily for privacy concerns and control, and secondarily to avoid monolithic browser stacks controlled by Google. Firefox isn’t perfect, but I enjoy the experience and have no issue browsing the web with it.
by waweic on 12/22/21, 1:58 PM
This is only due to the failure (and unwillingness) of Mozilla to build a truly modular, expandable browser.
Mozilla isn't even trying to compete with Google anymore at this point. They are only implementing new features into Firefox that Google has first built into Chrome (and firing developers working on features that could actually set Firefox apart from Chrome). Also, they are quick to implement most "features" Google implements, no matter how user-unfriendly it may be.
An example for this is Mozilla implementing Manifest V3:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/11/manifest-v3-open-web-p...
by MrAlex94 on 12/22/21, 12:41 PM
* Will this be open source?
* Will this support WebExtensions? Assuming they'll have to develop their own implementation since they are using the operating system's own rendering engines, so they will most likely have to have their own implementation.
* Will this allow ad-blocking and tracking protection? Once again, seems they will have to develop this feature themselves. Will the ad-blocking whitelist their own properties or does the user have granular control?
* Will this allow usage of other search engines within the browser, or are you locked in to DDG only? (Of course, ignoring actually navigating directly to the relevant search engines own website).
Interestingly enough, from their blog post[1]:
> Instead of forking Chromium or anything else, we’re building our desktop app around the OS-provided rendering engines (like on mobile), allowing us to strip away a lot of the unnecessary cruft and clutter that’s accumulated over the years in major browsers.
On macOS, Safari is probably the most anaemic "major" web browser out there. Interested to see how it compares to that. I'm not convinced a more minimalist browser compared to Safari is actually useful?
by mariusor on 12/22/21, 3:08 PM
It's impossible that in the 10 or so years since people manifested desires to have a way to embed a browser engine which is not Google controlled in applications, nobody at Mozilla actually realized how good of an idea that is for their popularity, influence, and why not, monetization capabilities.
by dartharva on 12/22/21, 12:49 PM
>Instead of forking Chromium or anything else, we’re building our desktop app around the OS-provided rendering engines (like on mobile), allowing us to strip away a lot of the unnecessary cruft and clutter that’s accumulated over the years in major browsers. With our clean and simple interface combined with the beloved Fire Button from our mobile app, DuckDuckGo for desktop will be ready to become your new everyday browsing app.
It seems they are making the desktop equivalent of Firefox Focus.
by IceWreck on 12/22/21, 12:14 PM
So Chromium based Edge Webview on windows, Webkit on Safari and what exactly on Linux ?
QTWebengine ? Gecko ? No linux support ? Who knows.
by jdpedrie on 12/22/21, 1:18 PM
I'm not sold on the idea that convincing people to install a different browser will be easier than teaching them to install an extension or choose a different default search provider, but clearly the latter isn't paying off.
by drcongo on 12/22/21, 12:08 PM
by hestefisk on 12/22/21, 3:56 PM
(PS - I am and have been a Firefox user for many many years)
by anoplus on 12/22/21, 12:22 PM
by arendtio on 12/22/21, 3:16 PM
The key point 'Chromium fork vs. OS provided Webview' is somewhat non-relevant, because they aren't very different. Chromiums rendering engine 'Blink' is a fork of WebKit and most OS provided Webviews are either Blink or WebKit based.
The last major rendering engine that is different is Gecko/Quantum which is being developed by Mozilla for Firefox. Everything else is based on WebKit nowadays.
The only fun thing about the situation is that WebKit is a fork of KHTML which was developed by the KDE developers for their browser Konqueror for Linux.
by yawaworht1978 on 12/22/21, 12:56 PM
Rooting for the team, everyone used to say it's too hard to create a new browser from scratch, the monopoly is too overwhelming etc.
But we got brave, at least it's something fresh. And it appears duck has generated money or investments for following googles path. Next they could go for an email client, a good copy of the Ms suite and a video platform and google might become dethroned some day.
by mwcampbell on 12/22/21, 1:59 PM
I'm skeptical that this will give them enough control to fully customize all browser behavior. The platform-provided browser engine APIs (WebKit, the new WebView2 on Windows) are designed for simple HTML embedding scenarios, not a full web browser. I struggled with this when developing a browser based on the IE engine several years ago. I think Electron would be a better bet. Does anyone disagree
by yosito on 12/22/21, 3:21 PM
by ac130kz on 12/22/21, 4:39 PM
by hestefisk on 12/22/21, 3:57 PM
by pndy on 12/22/21, 12:02 PM
I'm bit concerned how things may look like after Manifest v3 will arrive, when it comes to privacy, ads and tracking. Another Chromium-based browser? Why not, I won't mind it but everything comes to what Google does thru Chromium project people hands. And I don't think it can be anything else but Chromium - despite what he says. If not immediately then they later switch to it - just like Microsoft abandon EdgeHTML in favor of Chromium and Blink.
by cloudengineer94 on 12/22/21, 12:23 PM
For work I use strictly Edge as it keeps everything from o365 together.
by 9387367 on 12/22/21, 1:43 PM
by Yizahi on 12/22/21, 1:27 PM
by ravenstine on 12/22/21, 3:18 PM
I can see it now... it's the year 2525 and there's DDG search, DDG browser, DDG email, DDG video chat, DDG social network... and they announce the addition of personalization features based on user behavior, restriction of ad-blocking for "helpful ads", and then they just get bought by Google anyway.
by sam0x17 on 12/23/21, 2:49 AM
by quiet_cool on 12/22/21, 2:32 PM
by jokethrowaway on 12/22/21, 12:43 PM
If you're ignoring established engines, it's a pretty good first step
I don't think the web is fixable as it is though. Performances are going to be terrible no matter what unless we pick a subset of functionality and provide native code to handle that.
EDIT: ooh, they're going to use the native engine on each platform! Wow! This is a non news.
by pleb_nz on 12/22/21, 1:19 PM
by shmerl on 12/22/21, 4:52 PM
by azangru on 12/22/21, 1:57 PM
by foxfluff on 12/22/21, 2:47 PM