#Google chrome based browsers Patch
#Google chrome based browsers free
#Google chrome based browsers windows

#Google chrome based browsers Patch

font rendering, said developer might contribute the patch back to Chromium upstream, and all other Chromium-based browsers will profit from it. But if a Brave developer finds a bug related to e.g.

One example? Brave maintains its own adblocker, Google doesn’t control that adblocker at all, it’s part of the specific Brave patchset. You will find that Mozilla supporters on this website make a whole lot of fuss around the fact that Google is the biggest contributor to the Chromium codebase, and that Google devs are in charge of the repo – while completely ignoring that Blink is very much a collaborative effort akin to the Linux kernel, and ignoring that other Chromium browser developers (Opera, Microsoft, Vivaldi, brave) are maintaining their own patchsets and controlling their own repos just fine, while regularly contributing back patches, of which they think that other products might profit from them as well. I think Chromium will become a “grandfather project” of many different browsers, akin to what Debian is for various Linux distros, and yes, that wouldn’t be the worst outcome from the perspective of a web developer who is tired to optimize his / her website for a gazillion different engines, each with its own quirks and shortcomings. None of the major engine developers lack the financial capability to make a great engine, yet only one dominates the scene… The developers behind those engines (Apple and Mozilla) really only have themselves to blame, less important side projects are clearly taking precedence over the inclusion of necessary improvements over there, or so it seems. Blink has taken over the market because it is objectively a top notch engine, it has very good performance, is quick to implement new standards, and has mature security features.Īpple’s WebKit lacks behind in standard implementation, and Firefox still lacks security features like a real sandbox and site isolation. An open standard (Chromium) dominating the market is not a problem, as long as a single product (Chrome) is not dominating. Webkit is problematic as well, because Apple doesn’t care that much about security, even though they always advertise what I am always saying. As a result of Google’s manpower and focus on security, Chromium is already the most secure browser.Īnd the biggest security holes are all found in Mozilla’s Gecko engine due to the lack of manpower. So the question is to design chromium/Blink in a way as to prevent the most obvious attack vectors.

#Google chrome based browsers windows

Windows isn’t insecure because everyone is using it, but because it was built in an insecure way by design. But in reality, the more parties look at bugs in chromium, the more secure it becomes. People say multiple engines are more secure when it comes to security holes. Once Apple and Mozilla join, chromium will be organized as a framework independent of Google. Just like everyone today is using some variation of linux in the back-end.

#Google chrome based browsers free

So in a free market, the obvious solution is an open-source framework that is being used by everyone as a foundation, and everyone building on top of it to create their differentiated products. The problem is that it is not economical to keep up different engines. The best technical solution is a single engine.īlink will be the de-facto standard engine of the future.Įven Apple will probably migrate to chromium/Blink at one point.

Of course there are implications when it comes to Google’s influence on chromium, but these are political, and shouldn’t keep everyone away from collaborating. This example shows that collaboration is actually beneficial for everyone.