[SUr3na]

You need around 70mb of sheer complexity to render a page fully correct and you need millions of dollars to build a competitor that would lose because level of complexity is increasing daily .By the time you cover what you thought the web was ,the most used browser chrome had already came up with more complexity to add to the web.Web sucks and this helps the monopoly.

[snaky]

What if some browser would exist that could render only 90% of pages fully correct, but would be twice as fast as Chrome and use 30% of memory?

[SUr3na]

I would use it and recommend it to people I know, as I already do. But how about no browser at all? How about I use my own video player to watch a file I received over network? We have essentially operating systems(web browsers) with pipelines, processes and sandboxing just to be completely ignored by websites which instead shove a message "install our app" down our throat.

[pcwalton]

Impossible. Look at what your memory usage in a browser goes to (about:memory). Most of it is DOM/JS, images, media, etc.: things that are used by well over 90% of pages.

[themacguffinman]

I think Safari fits that mold pretty well. It often trades features for simplicity and resource efficiency.

[eveningsteps]

You mean, Internet Explorer?

[snaky]

> twice as fast

I doubt it.

[wmeredith]

You just described my user experience with Brave.

[dest]

Huh, is'nt Brave built on libChromium?

[0-_-0]

What doesn't Brave render correctly? (Asking out of curiosity, not provocation.)