The choice of Brave's enough to get me to replace Zorin

[zenzen]

If you search online you'll notice that it's always the same handful of articles being shared around, and always the same points that have all been addressed by Brave some time ago. At this point, I would really like to read some new material that doesn't try to appeal to the emotion.

What I find most irritating about those articles is how they criticize Brave for what Mozilla is now doing openly and at a much larger scale. It's simple: if it's wrong, then it's wrong when anybody does it. And if it's wrong anyway and the decision comes down to the lesser of two evils, then Brave wins without breaking a sweat.

@AssortedCorvids

Would, then, Mullvad's browser (repo here) be an option?

Here you have Azorin's thoughts on this:

The Buzz around Mozilla's New Terms of Use

We tested Mullvad Browser in our search for alternative browsers. Unfortunately, it appears that it also didn't support DRM content, which means that it doesn't meet our requirements as a full-featured general-purpose web browser (ditto). In addition, we found their APT repository to be unusually slow and unreliable while installing and updating the browser, which isn't ideal from an end-user perspective. It's only been around for less than 2 years as an ancillary product in Mullvad's lineup, s…

I would disagree also with using Mullvad Browser, but for a different reason.
Zorin OS aims to appeal to those who are looking for a way out of Windows, and who may not necessarily be particularly tech savvy nor interested in the utmost privacy.

Linux as a whole already has a (somewhat) deserved reputation of being difficult to learn. There really is no need to make the process any more painful than it needs to be, and using esoteric applications with strong privacy defaults is not going to help with that. Moving away from Windows already is a great step in that direction, and those who were already using things like Google or Facebook won't be gaining anything from using Mullvad Browser.

The choice remains there, but a gentle introduction is probably the best way to get people interested.

[nicocat]

@StarTreker

Firefox & Chrome should be what your worried about, their malicious privacy infringing nightmares!

I'm going to need to update my brain circuitry. I must have my wires crossed. What's the reasoning behind this statement of yours?

I think I know the story about why Firefox/Mozilla may have lost trust (deserved or undeserved) with some users recently, but that's not what I'm asking about.

Though, I'm seriously doubting if I've got my facts straight on this whole debacle at all anymore after reading comments like yours. Help clarify my misunderstanding if you wouldn't mind.

What is it that Firefox did that infringed on anyone's privacy?

[Forpli]

@nicocat

Frequently Asked Questions About the Change of Default Web Browser

[nicocat]

Thanks for this. I've re-read it and it's confirmed my understanding. I encourage any others who haven't read it to do so.

My question still remains. What is it that Firefox did that "infringed on privacy"? I see no evidence, and definitely no proof that anyone's privacy was infringed upon.

Brave maintains ongoing ties with people who have spent their hard-earned money on actively funding political campaigns.
This is another matter entirely and we won't touch on it here.
Funding the campaigns of politicians whose primary intention was to cause harm and infringe upon the rights of minority groups.
Completely unrelated facts that need bear no further mention.
That the Brave browser had to be modifed with the visibility of a fairly extensive list of its features turned off and hidden.
Didn't you hear me say that the lady's not for turning?
That edge and chrome were eliminated out the box because they don't respect privacy, but disrespecting the gays is apparently perfectly fine.
While Firefox has a proven track record of standing up loudly, and repeatedly, in defense of the rights of all users. Including this very subject and even this same guy!

The developers must have blinders on that allow themselves to care deeply about users' rights, provided they aren't gay users' rights' of course.
Or they must believe the link between brave and their CEO who financially funded homophobia, too tenuous an association to warrant further investigation. Exactly unlike their choices in the Mozilla discussion.

But all that's not subject of my question for the previous poster that I replied to. And now you as well.
I'm not passing judgement on the merits of the
Decision. Though I would love to hear how it's defensible to anyone with a modicum of understanding of the details.

I am asking why something that's objectively a false statement continues to be repeated on here.

[Aravisian]

@nicocat,

When it comes to browsers, there are no good choices, in truth. We are caught between a rock and a hard place and no browser is really on the end users side.

As you read the linked thread, you see the very narrow parameters that the ZorinGroup needed to tightrope walk in order to replace Firefox.

The statement is not "Firefox infringes on privacy."
Rather, that the change to the Mozilla privacy policy allows Mozilla far greater and more far reaching power and freedom with users data.
When this resulted in public backlash, Mozilla doubled down on their policy, while simultaneously trying to mislead as to what the policy now states.
This erodes trust for many.
What is stark about this is how drastic that this Privacy Policy was changed - and then both denied and adhered to by Mozilla. Had they backpeddled it or created a new less invasive privacy policy, the matter would have been resolved.

You are referring to Brendan Eich who was the Mozilla CEO. It was during his time at Mozilla that his repugnant comments and personal questionable ethics came to light.
He resigned, later creating Brave.
However, it is untrue to state that Brave Browser "maintains ongoing ties with people who have spent their hard-earned money on actively funding political campaigns." I challenge you to find evidence that the company has. Even Eich has been infamously silent since his Prop 8 fiasco.

Your reference to Crypto: I fully agree.
In fact, this is one of many reasons that I do not use Brave Browser.

The ZorinGroup needed to make a choice of the lesser of evils. We end users face that same choice. For me - it is not Brave Browser.
We have the freedom to install any other browser. The default - is just what comes in the box. Use the power granted to you as the End User. Choose what you support.

The Zorin OS Forum is welcoming to all. Where ever you stand in politics, gender, gender identity, preferences, race, religion, or any of our diverse natural ways. We support Human Rights for all. Not for some but not others.
We do ask that users not argue or fight politics on the forum; but remain respectful that differences are the very thing that makes humanity great - and always has.
It is not about being agreed with.
But accepting that disagreement helps us learn, develop and grow.

[nicocat]

First, thank you for a thoughtful response. I appreciate the time you've spent outlining your own view on browsers, and ZorinGroups' as well. I agree that there are no perfect choices when it comes to browsers. What I'm suggesting is that there are more decent choices and that one of those has been tossed aside for a less decent alternative.

There are a couple points that I'd like to ask you about further.

@Aravisian

The statement is not "Firefox infringes on privacy."

@StarTreker

Firefox & Chrome should be what your worried about, their malicious privacy infringing nightmares!

That was the exact statement. This was the statement that I was initially responding to, asking for greater clarification. You've thoughtfully responded to many of my points. I haven't, however, seen any evidence that this statement is true. I trust that we're all in agreement that Firefox is not a "malicious privacy infringing nightmare". Far from it, in fact.

A change in the TOS doesn't represent actively harming anyone. I agree that a poorly communicated change does breed distrust. That's the extent of the harm that Firefox has caused its users at this point.

@Aravisian

You are referring to Brendan Eich who was the Mozilla CEO. It was during his time at Mozilla that his repugnant comments and personal questionable ethics came to light.
He resigned, later creating Brave.

You are correct about who I was referring to. I was also referring to his ouster from Mozilla as evidence of them as an organization not backing down. Brendan was revealed to have made donations to the pursuit political enforcement of homophobic ideals which included at it's front and centre, stripping equality rights from a minority group. His forced resignation was largely driven by Mozilla employees and their internal actions.

@Aravisian

However, it is untrue to state that Brave Browser "maintains ongoing ties with people who have spent their hard-earned money on actively funding political campaigns." I challenge you to find evidence that the company has. Even Eich has been infamously silent since his Prop 8 fiasco.

You'll have to excuse my confusion about this portion of your statement.
It is absolutely true that Brave maintains ongoing ties with their own CEO. I trust you don't need me to provide evidence of such. Please allow my refusal to extend any forgiveness to Brendan Eich for his ongoing silence about his past homophobic speech - Quite literally, the least he can do.

I like your comment about us as users being free to make our own choices. It glosses over a very critical part of this conversation that I took for granted as browser cannon. We know well from the money Google paid to Mozilla in order to secure google search's spot as the default search option in Firefo - for decades - that there is immense value to that position. While we have the freedom to change to whatever browser we'd like, many users won't. As long as the product's revenue source scales with users, there is immense value in being the default choice.

Brave browser's token-based source of revenue does scale with users. Yes, it's turned off by default in Zorin, though it can be turned back on. Speaking of least-worst options... I really don't want to be so cynical as to suggest there must be some sort of revenue kickback here. I simply can't understand Zorin group's thinking here though. It surely can't just be a change in wording of Firefox's TOS. There must be some other as-yet-unspoken influence.

Why else would you give that coveted top spot to the crypto-advert-token-homophobe who runs Brave?

@Aravisian

Rather, that the change to the Mozilla privacy policy allows Mozilla far greater and more far reaching power and freedom with users data.
When this resulted in public backlash, Mozilla doubled down on their policy, while simultaneously trying to mislead as to what the policy now states.
This erodes trust for many.
What is stark about this is how drastic that this Privacy Policy was changed - and then both denied and adhered to by Mozilla. Had they backpeddled it or created a new less invasive privacy policy, the matter would have been resolved.

We need to talk about Balena Etcher.
Which is, as of right now, still not just a recommended option, but the option new users are told to utilize while installing Zorin, as per the ZorinOS installation guide.
The user privacy issues that were revealed have been discussed on this forum before (how I first learned of them too - and then promptly decided to stop using Balena software).
What similar or dissimilar actions did Zorin Group take when that actual real-life privacy infringement occured?
For what reasons did Zorin Group arrive at the conclusion that privacy infringement didn't warrant any action at all that might alter new user behaviour and safeguard those Zorin users who are arguably the most vulnerable of all?

@Aravisian

The Zorin OS Forum is welcoming to all. Where ever you stand in politics, gender, gender identity, preferences, race, religion, or any of our diverse natural ways. We support Human Rights for all. Not for some but not others.

I love this! I'm happy to be a part of such a place and I look forward to hopefully assisting other new forum members as so many of you have done for me (albeit unknowingly) in the past year since I first switched to Zorin OS. Thank you to everyone whose contributions I've pored over while troubleshooting. The bits of knowledge I've gleaned from your words have been invaluable.

I simply wish that Zorin, the OS, would uphold the same virtuous standards of freedom and acceptance as the ZorinOS Forum does. It's my belief that in making Brave the default browser, they are failing to do so.

[hopelessdecoy]

For me I was happy Brave is the default, I turn off all the Crypto stuff but the browser has pretty good protection and privacy by default. There will never be a perfect browser and the browser is a threat vector by default. So pick whatever one makes you skin crawl less, for me it is Brave.

[StarTreker]

@nicocat

What is it that Firefox did that infringed on anyone's privacy?

Please keep in mind, I've been using Firefox, ever since Opera went to garbage, so quite a long time, since the 2000's. My new opinion of Firefox, was based on the TOS changes that Mozilla made.

I value my privacy, and I don't want my data sold to the highest bitter. Mozilla has proven, (like many corporations) that money means more to them, then a person. Firefox began its life with, its better then Internet Explorer, that it protects your data, and doesn't sell it. I guess all we had to wait for, was a good 20-years, and now Firefox is no better then IE.

In essence, they've proven to me, their word means nothing. All it really took, was somebody in Mozilla, to contaminate their organization with corruption, and thus, now its about money, by selling your data, like just about every corporation does today. Their word means nothing, they insult me, and yes, as a long time user, I take it personally.

Please keep in mind, I am in no way telling you what browser to use. We all have the freedom, to choose what we wish to use. Please note, I never brought up political topics, or social topics revolving around orientation, you have done that sir.

I know very well to not bring up such heated debate topics, and they are against the rules of this site. Infact, after talking about a terrible video game, I got moderated hard by @Aravisian & I'm a mod as well! I learned my lesson, keep politics, religion, and orientation based social issues, off the board.

Please note however, my post was in no way shape or form, to attack you. Anyone can read my previous post, and see it was only about Mozilla's change in TOS, for which I personally, consider a data privacy nightmare. If you spend the time to get to know me, you might find we share some things in common.

And lastly @Aravisian has a way of explaining things better then I do. I have a brain disability, and I do the best I can, but I realize that I lose people sometimes, because I fail to establish context properly. What I say is perfectly understandable to me, but might not be understood by other's.

I'm not here to fight, argue, and surely not to call names, thats all against the site rules. I am here to help people with their computer issues, keep the forum safe against bad actors, and occasionally provide philosophical discussion.

---

[Aravisian]

@nicocat

You'll have to excuse my confusion about this portion of your statement.
It is absolutely true that Brave maintains ongoing ties with their own CEO. I trust you don't need me to provide evidence of such

It is forgivable - primarily because it is a leading statement. The key word is "ongoing."
Neither Eich nor Brave Browser as a company has been donating to or participating in any of the above since Brave Browser was founded. It is not ongoing ties to people who are doing so.

Rather, one time in the past, Eich endorsed denying the rights he enjoys having, to other human beings. To me, personally, this is more than enough reason for some of us to refuse to patronize Brave Browser.
But it is not a choice we can demand of others. We can only speak our piece and hope they understand.

@nicocat

That was the exact statement. This was the statement that I was initially responding to, asking for greater clarification.

Fair, I leave that between you two. I was referring to The ZorinGroup's reasons for the switch, only. A great example of how miscommunication can happen when two different people are focused on different things.

@nicocat

I agree that a poorly communicated change does breed distrust.

See... Here is the thing about this...
Mozilla tried to downplay the Privacy Policy change as "poorly communicated." In reality - that was a dodge.
And I refer to this earlier in this thread. It was not poorly communicated. It was a drastic change in their privacy policy that allows them to collect and sell users data. Due to much floundering at Mozilla, I can see why they may feel that this transition is needed in order to bolster funding. Perhaps they should have made better decisions sooner, though, instead of alienating their users and refusing to listen to feedback for years.
They lost a great deal of the market due to poor handling and now try to recoup losses with our data.
The only reason many users still lend support to Mozilla is to ensure that there is not a browser frame monopoly. Not because Mozilla is the hero.

@nicocat

While we have the freedom to change to whatever browser we'd like, many users won't

I find this to be a very valid point.
Defaults are powerful. This is why vocal critics like you and me are important.
Undeniably, your comment here refutes my statement about using what browser you want ably.
I do find that users tend to be pickier with browsers, however. More so than with other apps. I think the trend of sticking to the default is lower on browsers than with other things.

@nicocat

I simply can't understand Zorin group's thinking here though. It surely can't just be a change in wording of Firefox's TOS. There must be some other as-yet-unspoken influence.

Why else would you give that coveted top spot to the crypto-advert-token-homophobe who runs Brave?

The ZorinGroup publicly outlined all of their criteria in the linked thread that you said you read.
I see no point in repeating them, as you did not take their reasoning to heart the first time around.

I find it interesting. You refer to Balena Etcher as well.
This has been a thorn in my paw for years. For years, I have encouraged the ZorinGroup - and the members of this forum to avoid Balena Etcher. For many valid reasons.

You point out that if privacy and data were the impetus behind Firefox, then why not BalenaEtcher.
Valid.
I speculate the reason is actually due to popularity, not privacy. The ZorinGroup think in business terms. BalenaEtcher, for reasons I cannot fathom, remains popular.
But I am not going to spread rumors or speculate nefarious motives without any evidence whatsoever.
Your feedback is reasonable and asks the hard questions without the need for speculation - other than to drive home the point of the impression it gives.

@nicocat

I simply wish that Zorin, the OS, would uphold the same virtuous standards of freedom and acceptance as the ZorinOS Forum does. It's my belief that in making Brave the default browser, they are failing to do so.

I believe that this is a reasonable stance.
"Actions speak louder than words."
I am more forgiving about Brave Browser - simply because i was there. Both here in the public forum and in the Private Moderator Forum. The discussions could be heated. And the divisions sharp. A decision needed to be made- that met the criteria of the Masses.
I think it is indicative of broader problems in society when our choices are so limited.
The ZorinGroup was unhappy with Brave Browser fitting the bill. They did not implement it right away. Instead, they opened the discussion, then opened it publicly, seeking feedback. It took a lot of back and forth - listening to many opposing views - before Brave Browser was solidified as the pick.
The future may change this.
Just as it did for Firefox.
And this is why companies need to stay out of politics.

Please avoid Personal Attacks (ad hominem) such as speculating about financial kickbacks, however.

[0Picass0]

Welcome to our forum, @hopelessdecoy ! What you say about using the browser which makes your skin crawl less made me laugh. I can't say I'm 100% happy with Brave, and I strongly believe we need Mozilla, as an alternative to Chromium based browsers. I breathed a huge sigh of relief when Google was allowed to continue funding, even if that means they get to be promoted. Personally, I use several forks of Firefox, and Brave.

@nicocat, I empathise with your position, however, I stand by the right to choose for everyone. Two wrongs do not make a right, and just because there have been terrible injustices, does not mean we can remove Brave as a viable, safe option for Zorin_OS users. That would actually be hypocritical in itself. As has been mentioned before, the Zorin brothers reached out to us, the community, consulting us, asking for opinions and options well before making the move to drop Mozilla. Everyone was included in the consultation.

Regarding Balena Etcher, I've been quite vocal on this issue too, as have many. As soon as new users find their way here, often because of issues with BE, they find support and suggestions of other, much better options. This does not excuse the continued promotion of BE by Zorin, or that there is a detailed guide on using it to install Zorin_OS, which suggests to new users that they actually need to use Balena Etcher. I can only think that they've prioritised other things, like switching the default browser (whether or not you like that change), and getting Zorin_OS 18 ready for launch to coincide with support for Windows 10 being withdrawn, amongst others.

What I believe we all need to keep in mind is that here in Linux, we are in a free society, and that freedom has both positive and negative aspects. Overall, we have the freedom to choose which browser to use, which OS we prefer, which desk top environment we like best, and ultimately, which of the available choices "make our skin crawl less". If we take those choices away from users, we are just as bad as those we despise, and we need to recognise that. Let's not throw the baby out with the bath water.

[preetganet]

YOU can not uninstall it, but it's easier to just say wait some time with it.

[Thor]

[Frog]

@Aravisian

We have the freedom to install any other browser. The default - is just what comes in the box. Use the power granted to you as the End User. Choose what you support.

That is the most profound statement of this entire thread .... I don't know why all the blame on the Zorin's for choosing Brave Browser it's not like it is locked in and no other browser can be used .... if that was the case I would tend to agree with a lot of the content above .... but it isn't .....

This is why Howard Johnson's used to advertise they had 28 flavors of ice cream so you could choose your favorite one .... JMHO ....

[Solrac]

Hi everyone!

This is my first post in the forum... I could not resist it! Such a triggering subject!

I discovered Zorin 17 (or was it 16?) after taking the distrochooser questionary more than once, once I knew about M$ decision to kill W10 in my Surface Pro 6. Now, I have 4 different machines with Zorin 18, and quite happy about it!

Every time, the installation process was smooth, looked reasonable easy to deal with, and made me feel increasingly more at ease with its incrementally polished UX/UI.

Not because of Zorin, these four installations required different levels of tinkering for a full year (upgrading from 17, is not the same as installing 18 in a Surface Pro 6, later on installing the bespoke kernel, and trying to make most of it to "work", and reach a reasonable outcome, you know). So lots of time invested reading, finding my way through tutorials... and re-installing.

Although I enjoyed the learning curve, and that I am certain that still don't know nothing but 0.01% about Linux, that's what makes me happy about Zorin!

Zorin surely knows that most of us use a different browser than the one that comes in the bundle. As far as Zorin keeps us within Ubuntu GNOME, I would like to propose a very old, very familiar option to those in the know, but that I've only just discovered: Epiphany should be the default browser! The Software App identifies it as "Web" and says that it takes just 2,2 MB of my disk! For me, it being a program that is almost unnoticeable when you need to make some disk space, and that you can rely on is almost as useful as not needing to learn how to compile a kernel to make a distro work! Yes, I feel as if I've discovered sliced bread.

Of course, a reason why Zorin might have chosen Firefox back then and Brave now might be the need to find income and publicity sources, so perhaps a non-profit option wouldn't sound as the most seductive choice to their structure.

All in all, all I said so far is to argue that it seems that any browser Zorin has chosen lately -and would choose in the future- would bring a "bad rap" that would add-up to the "they charge you for free software!" chosen narrative in many Linux circles that swear by the unwelcoming, abstruse, utterly demanding and unforgiving distro they prefer as so much better, because it is like a maze that makes you hurt at every turn and therefore is so much better principled than our choice of a noob distro (looking at you, Reddit, once again, thanks distrochooser!) Not to mention the new fad: I paid good money (or not) but this is not Windows, and you promised a Windows replacement (for my PC that struggled to run Windows Vista)!

TL,DR: I am sure that nobody would hate Epiphany bundled as the default means to download your favorite browser.

[0Picass0]

Hello, @Solrac, welcome to the forum! Sure, I'll give it a go one day, when I have time, and get back to you with how I get on with it. Thanks for the recommendation.

[Solrac]

Thanks for your welcoming!

Have in mind that Epiphany is a very basic chrome-like browser. I think it would be a neutral default, and that is as far as I would consider it suitable.

I've uninstalled it, as I did with Brave.

Cheers!

[Aravisian]

@Solrac

Of course, a reason why Zorin might have chosen Firefox back then and Brave now might be the need to find income and publicity sources, so perhaps a non-profit option wouldn't sound as the most seductive choice to their structure.

No, the ZorinGroup do not get any money at all from Mozilla or from Brave.

Rather, it is primarily driven, from their point of view, by broad function and compatibility.

They needed a browser that is:

• general-purpose, full-featured and supports the most common use cases (including streaming DRM content like Netflix and Prime Video)
• Free and Open Source Software Privacy-respecting
• Popular and recognizable
• Mature and well-maintained (important for the quick availability of patches for any security vulnerabilities)

The above is based on Artyom's own words. As you can see, Epiphany checks some of those boxes.
Where it falls short can actually be summarized in one word: WebkitGTK

WebKitGTK is actively maintained, but it lags behind most things. This is problematic in that software that relies on WebKitGTK often is locked into older versions and cannot be installed on swiftly releasing distros.
WebKitGTK also has skeletal support of DRM and hardware acceleration. Users wanting to watch Netflix often struggle the most.
Epiphany is solid - but not popular and immediately recognizable.

@Solrac

Zorin surely knows that most of us use a different browser than the one that comes in the bundle.

I think that this is the most important line.
I also do not use Brave.

[swarfendor437]

What I don't like about Mozilla is the Google link and now the fork of Firefox, Zen, no longer allows the removal of Google, Bing, or DuckDuckGo you can only turn them off. Whatever browser I install I always replace the default search engine with Mojeek because it is what DuckDuckGo used to be like before they started censoring your search criteria, Mojeek does not do that. And if you come from Windows and were hoping for Ecosia, then that is not available as they only support Mac and Windows, but ... the beauty of Mojeek is, that if you don't find exactly what you were looking for with their search engine they offer all the other alternatives, including Ecosia's search engine.

Just looking forward to see what ladybird browser will bring to the table when it finally gets released.