WELL I have no real love for Brave..
See: https://twitter.com/BrendanEich/status/850487614209572864
A review of Pale Moon
Re: A review of Pale Moon
Re "unpatched vulnerabilities"... if they didn't keep adding new features they would not have to fix them in a "next" version. Since Firefox 3-5 they went ballistic with version numbers, rotating the "major" version number when it was not a major update. I think that Chrome started this as a ploy subliminally suggesting that the higher version number is more advanced.
Chrome's new versions have always been about feeding their ad monster. The same ad monster lurks in YouTube.
Chrome's new versions have always been about feeding their ad monster. The same ad monster lurks in YouTube.
Re: A review of Pale Moon
The obvious.WilliamK wrote:Re "unpatched vulnerabilities"... if they didn't keep adding new features they would not have to fix them in a "next" version. Since Firefox 3-5 they went ballistic with version numbers, rotating the "major" version number when it was not a major update. I think that Chrome started this as a ploy subliminally suggesting that the higher version number is more advanced.
Chrome's new versions have always been about feeding their ad monster. The same ad monster lurks in YouTube.
Re: A review of Pale Moon
Isengrim wrote:How do you know this was also Sun-Glasses? Wayback machine has no history for that page.
I do not like Brave either. I have tried it - it was so much bare-bone that it was hurting to use it at all. Don't know if they have changed anything of that already.New Tobin Paradigm wrote:WELL I have no real love for Brave..
See: https://twitter.com/BrendanEich/status/850487614209572864
Last edited by Sajadi on 2018-03-12, 23:36, edited 2 times in total.