[theshrike79]

Brave is still Chrome, just with a different skin.

I'm against Chromium the engine's monopoly, not just Chrome. Monoculture is bad for the internet.

If it weren't for (mobile) Safari, we'd have a new IE situation on our hands.

[grepexdev]

I'll push back and say Brave is far more than just Chrome with a different skin. Remember, it is a fork. That description is better suited for Edge or Opera.

I hear you on the concern about the browser engine monoculture. It's a concern of mine as well.

I guess what I should say is - _if_ you're going to use a chromium-based browser, you should probably use Brave.

I'm currently looking into Mull browser as it seems to be to Firefox what Brave is to Chrome.

[theshrike79]

Yea, Brave is a fork. And I might actually use it if it weren't for the "we change affiliate links to our own" and the crypto stuff.

Might actually give it a second chance now that Google is clearly hamstringing non-chromium browsers on Youtube. Both Firefox and Safari on macOS have weird loading issues - and I pay for Premium so it can't be adblock related.

[Yizahi]

Fork term is too vague as to become almost meaningless. Technically cloning software and changing a single letter anywhere is "a fork". It's just pointless for endusers.

So going by a letter of definition Chrome Brave is a fork, but by spirit of a definition it is not. Example - this topic right here. If it was a fork they would have forked the code and maintained Manifest V2 instead of V3, autonomously, like software forks do. But since it is not a real fork (in spirit of the word), they can't and don't want to do it, and simply accept every change the real code owner does, Google in this case.