this post was submitted on 01 Mar 2025
57 points (91.3% liked)

Firefox

4558 readers
240 users here now

A community for discussion about Mozilla Firefox.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
lightbeam24
57
Firefox alternatives comparison - asking for advice/opinion (self.firefox)
submitted 4 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) by Takapapatapaka to c/firefox
39 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Meta note : am not sure if this is on topic for this community, please tell me if it is not. I could not find rules, so I assume it's okay, but i'll remove it if its not.

So, after the recent Mozilla privacy drama, I saw multiple recommendations of alternative browsers, each one with their pros and cons. I was trying to get a better understanding of which one was good/bad for which reasons, and I thought i might share it here so people with more knowledge can correct my takes.

Here is what I could get so far, based mostly on Lemmy comments and Wikipedia pages. This is aimed at browser that share some of Firefox values (foss, independency, (maybe) privacy, etc), so I excluded Chrome, Edge, and others. I'm open to any feedback/infos/browser suggestions to get a more accurate summary !

Browser FOSS Privacy Features Engine Platforms Notes
Firefox ✅ ❌ ✅ Firefox WMLAI AI interest
Brave ✅ 🟠[^braveprivacy] ✅ Chromium WMLAI Crypto interest[^bravecrypto], bigot CEO[^braveceo]
Vivaldi 🟠[^vivaldifoss] 🟠[^vivaldiprivacy] ✅ Chromium WMLAI Aims to be a better Opera
Ungoogled Chromium ✅ ✅ ✅ Chromium WMLA Removes Google tracking and specific components
Cromite ✅ ✅ ✅ Chromium WLA Removes most Google tracking and keeps some specific components
Zen Browser ✅ ✅ ✅ Firefox WML
Librewolf ✅ ✅ 🟠[^lwfeatures] Firefox WML [^lwsecurity]
Waterfox ✅ 🟠[^wfprivacy] ✅ Firefox WMLA
Floorp ✅ ✅ ✅ Firefox WML
GNU IceCat ✅ ❓ ✅ Firefox WML Firefox without copyrighted content and with a bit more privacy
Tor Browser ✅ ✅ 🟠[^torfeatures] Firefox WMLA
IronFox ✅ ✅ ❓ Firefox A
Mullvad Browser ✅ ✅ ❌[^mullvadfeatures] Independent WML Made by the Tor team and Mullvad (VPN providers)
Ladybird ✅ ❓[^lbprivacy] 🟠 Independent ML Very early development stage, bigot devs[^lbdev]
Orion Browser ✅ ✅ ✅ Independent MAI In beta, claims to be top browser in terms of tracker blocking, considers making a Windows version, AI interest[^\orionai]

Notes : Privacy is based on Firefox level, which I considered "bad" for the sake of the comparison. Engine is the browser on which each is browser is based, if there is. Features is to identify barebones browsers and how much risk there is to find websites not compatible with those browsers. Question mark is for when there is a debate or I could not find infos. Platforms is for the platforms on which the browser is available. To keep it tight, only one letter per platform : W for Windows, M for macOS, L for GNU/Linux, A for Android, I for iOS.

contributors : [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

Edit 1 : added Vivaldi, Floorp and Ironfox, clarify 'Engine dependency' column, add 'Platforms' column, add bigot warning for ladybird.
Edit 2 : added [email protected] table (Tor, Ungoogled chromium, Cromite) and IceCat, updated info on Vivaldi
Edit 3 : add Orion Browser, corrects lines to group browser together by engine, added users whose infos I used via edits
Edit 4 : corrected Brave and Opera Privacy rating.
Edit 5 : removed Opera since both Privacy and FOSS would be bad. Updated Vivaldi Privacy rating.

[^braveprivacy]: they have a lot of optional data collecting, from their Privacy Policy [^bravecrypto]: from Brave's Wikipedia page. [^braveceo]: from his personal Wikipedia page. [^vivaldifoss]: some parts are open source, but the UI is proprietary [^vivaldiprivacy]: they collect data for statistics, from their Privacy Policy [^lwfeatures]: some websites may be blocked due to stricter privacy setups, according to LinuxSecurity's article cited on Wikipedia. [^lwsecurity]: some users seemed to fear that having a small team, Librewolf would be late on security patches, but their FAQ seems to say it's ok. [^wfprivacy]: from Waterfox's Wikipedia page, linking to Exodus report stating that android version of Waterfox uses same trackers as Firefox. [^torfeatures]: some websites might block tor network [^mullvadfeatures]: lemmy users said it is barebones and their FAQ says it has little features by design to prevent fingerprinting. [^lbprivacy]: could not find infos on their website or wikipedia page. Probably not that bad, but since it is in early development, it may evolve in better ways than other. [^lbdev]: from their github, considering gender neutral wording is politics and does not belong in ladybird. [^\orionai]: from the Kagi Wikipedia page and lemmy comments.

all 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] rheuz 1 points 19 minutes ago* (last edited 17 minutes ago)

Is using Firefox w/ a hardened user.js file, like arkenfox, viable for mitigating some of these privacy concerns or are the changes far more fundamentally baked into the browser? My point being, privacy enthusiasts have always been advocating hardening FF over vanilla, so I'm wondering how much has really changed.

[–] gedaliyah 4 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Couple quick corrections:

The Firefox engine is called Gecko, although it is pretty closely associated with Firefox, so not sure it needs to be changed. Mullvad is built on Firefox (Gecko engine). Orion is built on Safari (WebKit engine).

Great list!

Personally, I'm happily sticking with Firefox. It's pretty clear that this legal change is to facilitate new browser features and Firefox (as is their tradition) bungled the rollout and explanation. Browsers are changing and we need Firefox more than ever. It can't really be considered a privacy browser anymore, but that is covered by the forks that depend on Mozilla development.

[–] Takapapatapaka 1 points 50 minutes ago (2 children)

Thanks for the clarification. If i'm not mistaken, Chromium is not an engine either, but a browser forked to create many other, like firefox. That's what I was trying to show with this 'engine' column : would you have an idea for a better name? Maybe Browser Family? Fork of?

Yup, in the end I think I'm going to stick with Firefox family for a while too, there really only seem to be chromium based, firefox based or tech enthusiast (as in either hyper focused on privacy or in early development) options.

[–] gedaliyah 1 points 15 minutes ago (1 children)

Yes, Chromium-based browsers technically run on the Blink engine. I like family, although I think it's fine to call it the "Chromium engine" or "Firefox engine" for general comparison purposes. WebKit is the Safari engine.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 12 minutes ago* (last edited 10 minutes ago)

Worth noting that WebKit is open source also powers some great alternative browsers on Linux, such as Gnome Web/Epiphany. :)

Other than Gecko, Blink, and WebKit, Ladybird and Servo are the two new engines currently being developed.

[–] BananaTrifleViolin 12 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

You have a bizarre notion of "privacy". Have you read the terms and conditions, and privacy policies of Brave, Opera and Vivaldi? Have you read Firefox's?

Mozilla have also made clear the data licensing terms:

UPDATE: We’ve seen a little confusion about the language regarding licenses, so we want to clear that up. We need a license to allow us to make some of the basic functionality of Firefox possible. Without it, we couldn’t use information typed into Firefox, for example. It does NOT give us ownership of your data or a right to use it for anything other than what is described in the Privacy Notice.

And the term that has been causing such concern:

You give Mozilla the rights necessary to operate Firefox. This includes processing your data as we describe in the Firefox Privacy Notice. It also includes a nonexclusive, royalty-free, worldwide license for the purpose of doing as you request with the content you input in Firefox. This does not give Mozilla any ownership in that content.

A lot of the posts on social media about this is just noise and overreaction. They're making explicit something that has been implicit for decades and is exactly the same with other browsers (and if anything more murky and opaque)

Edit: and if the concern is the AI chatbot stuff (which is optional) then Brave has the same kind of stuff in its privacy policy alongside a myriad of other commerical uses of your data.

[–] Takapapatapaka -4 points 1 hour ago

Yup, I'm totally eyeballing things here, I did not read any ToS or Privacy Policies, this is just based on whatever vague feedback i can get. If I don't see negative feedback on Lemmy and Wikipedia and the website says they are doing "privacy", i go for the top note. But if have info to share, i'll gladly update it !

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I've never tried Brave, but given their "ethics" I wouldn't trust its privacy

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_(web_browser)

[–] Takapapatapaka 1 points 1 hour ago

Some people are indeed bringing up that Brave does shady stuff, so I updated their privacy score.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Ladybird considers gender neutral pronouns to be a personal political issue that has no place in their project in case that is worth a bigot warning for you.

[–] Takapapatapaka 4 points 2 hours ago

Thx, info added

[–] dojan 3 points 2 hours ago

I've been on LibreWolf for a year. Honestly I've run into very few issues, the biggest being that certain functions require canvas access for some reason, I have a different browser for edge-cases where things don't work and I need to use it.

Anything Chromium based for me goes out the window immediately, because it is still subject to the whims of Google, as Google owns the Chromium project and does whatever they please. I'm not okay with Google owning the web.

There is also Orion, which is currently Mac, iOS/iPad OS only but there's discussions about it coming to Linux and Windows in the future. It's WebKit based, and the development is funded by the Orion and Kagi subscriptions. Kagi does do a bunch of AI bullshit, and started off as some AI BS company so that's perhaps something to keep in mind.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Ironfox is worth a mention even though it is Android specific.

It's too bad that mull browser is not planning to support an android release according to issue #24

Perhaps it would be good to add a column of which platforms each browser supports?

[–] [email protected] 21 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

Opera is a terrible idea these days. Vivaldi picked up where Opera got bought up, and it might be the best Chromium based browser at the moment. @[email protected]

I wrote a post here for those seeking engine independence. For those hesitant to stick with Gecko/FireFox forks, WebKit is the best bet right now.

It seems premature to suggest Ladybird when the alpha is set to release next year.

[–] Takapapatapaka 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I'll add Vivaldi or replace Opera with it, thanks for the info!

Yeah, Ladybird is in very early stage, but it may still be useful in a 'keep an eye on this one' way I think. I should maybe make it clearer.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

While Vivaldi isn't open source, but some source available after release, they do avoid the AI and crypto interests in their blog.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

I also find it neat that they run an open Mastodon instance (vivaldi.social) and seem dedicated to the social web in opposition to mainstream social media.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Might also want to include GNU's IceCat

[–] ijon_the_human 16 points 4 hours ago

Thanks for making the post! I'm sure many will find it helpful.

Myself I'm inclined to trust old school (f)oss projects much more than these new "privacy focused" solutions that seem to have the half life of a fart.

I'll probably stick with a firefox fork for now, there's plenty of them and it allows me to keep all of my addons and configs.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago

I want LibreWolf with tabs on top!

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I think Floorp is probably worth a mention. Not my thing but some people dig it.

I don't really understand the engine independence column. Why are LibreWolf and WaterFox "Other" instead of "Correct"?

IDK if you're determined to exclude chrome based browsers, but ungoogled-chromium and thorium might be worth consideration. I run both LibreWolf and ungoogled-chromium as daily drivers because some sites I interact with just arent compatible with Gecko (firefox engine).

[–] Takapapatapaka 1 points 2 hours ago

Thanks for the floorp mention, I added it.

Yeah, the engine independence really was not clear. I changed it. I'll also be adding ungoogled-chromium from another advice, and i'll look into thorium.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Engine independence should really be titled "Not Chromium"

[–] Takapapatapaka 3 points 3 hours ago (3 children)

It was at first x) but then I had another column for firefox based and decided to merge both

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 hours ago

Maybe just a column for enigine, listing which engine the browser is using? Seems easier. :)

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 hours ago

It might be less confusing to simply list the engines being used. It ruins the check mark aesthetic but I think the info is more important.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

Why are some Firefox based browsers yellow?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 31 minutes ago) (1 children)

Imma additionally mention some browsers

Browser FOSS Privacy Engine Independence Features Notes
Tor Browser ✅ ✅️ ❌️ ✅ websites are known to block tor network,Firefox fork
Vivaldi 🟠 [^\notfullylibre] 🟠 [^\bing] ❌️ ✅ A chromium fork
Ungoogled chromium ✅️ ✅️ ❌️ ❓️ A chromium fork,Removes Google tracking and specific components
Cromite ✅️ ✅️ ❌️ ✅️ [^\cromitefeatureset]: A chromium fork,Removes most Google tracking and keeps some specific components

[^\notfullylibre]: The ui of the browser is proprietary: https://vivaldi.com/blog/technology/why-isnt-vivaldi-browser-open-source/

[^\bing]: Uses bing as default search engine can be changed [^\cromitefeatureset]: Adds some features like userscript and adblocking etc

[–] Takapapatapaka 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Neat, thanks for all that info ! Do you mind if i append your table to mine ? Also, I think Ungoogled Chromium depends on the chromium engine ? I'll try to make a Engine column stating the engine explicitly anyway.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Do you mind if i append your table to mine

Sure why not i thought they meant search engine not browser engine

[–] woelkchen 5 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

Engine Independence is based on the engine used : Chromium is “bad”, Firefox based is “correct” and others are good.

That doesn't make sense. If people leave Firefox for a Firefox fork and eventually Firefox may go down, all its forks are fucked as well. So these browsers don't have Engine Independence.

[–] Takapapatapaka 2 points 3 hours ago

Yes, it's just to make the difference between Chromium (dependent on already bad dependency) and Firefox based (dependent on maybe bad dependency in the future). I agree that both are technically at the same level of straight up independence which is bad, its just to use the 3-tier notation

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Why would the forks be fucked as well?

[–] woelkchen 10 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

Why would the forks be fucked as well?

Because nobody but Mozilla is developing the actual rendering engine. A fork that only changes a few defaults, the branding, and pre-installs uBlock is not a proper fork that can live on without the originating project developing.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Couldn't they start asking for donations to continue the work?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 hour ago

The issue is, do they have the know-how for developing/maintaining a browser/engine?

If they manage to get ex-Firefox devs on board then they might be fine, but otherwise if they're on their own then that's like asking electricians and painters to build/maintain an entire house. They might not have the knowledge/experience to do so.

[–] dojan 0 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

The problems with Firefox isn't Gecko, it's the data harvesting, advertising ID, and selling of data that's a problem. LibreWolf patches that all that crap out. It's tenable for now, but it's very possible that Mozilla will take things further in the future.

It's nowhere near as fucked as Chromium is.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

You could add links to their donation pages and whether donations go to the browser development or not. Donating to Mozilla for example doesn't mean any of the money will be used on Firefox or even anything related to it.

Edit: it doesn't seem like any browser on that list has a dedicated donation page :O That seems quite sus to me. How do they fund their development? My "if it's free, you're the product" senses are tingling.

[–] Takapapatapaka 2 points 3 hours ago

I think Ladybird has donations, and Librewolf and Waterfox are small teams basing most of their works on firefox so they maybe don't need that much ressources.