[ianmcgowan]

If they don't Microsoft will, with Edge - they've already shown willingness to give it more privacy options than Chrome, and they can go further if it gives them more of an, uh, edge.

It's interesting that Apple and Microsoft are the original PC gang and they seem to be making a resurgence (just missing IBM) against the web upstarts.

I don't think anyone has any illusions about their motives being pure, but there is something more clear cut about "sell me useful hardware and software, I give you money in return" as at least a part of the relationship, compared with Facebook/Google where the value exchanged is my attention/eyeballs to advertisers..

[ffpip]

Microsoft's browser is worse than chrome for privacy.

https://www.scss.tcd.ie/Doug.Leith/pubs/browser_privacy.pdf

https://brave.com/ios-browser-first-run/

[Daho0n]

Using Brave as a source is like asking Apple about Google's ad business..

[ffpip]

These are stats.

And brave was the most private browser out of the box.

[Daho0n]

Brave was the best in Braves article? That was the point. No matter if it is true or not you don't ask Facebook how good Facebook so why use Brave as a source for how good Brave is?

[ffpip]

Unlike Facebook, which just claims it is the best, Brave provided stats and conducted first runs for all browsers. It was the least noisy browser.

You can run the first run test yourself and get the same results.

[phist_mcgee]

IBM has long since been a has-been software player in the 21st century. IBM is a global consultancy, and is in no way similar to the IBM PC company in days of yore.