I really enjoy brave on desktop and mobile. Other mobile browsers turn every internet interaction into chaos with all the popups and ads (even let’s you use YouTube in the background with its playlist feature on mobile). I read the article and I didn’t understand why the product itself was bad? CEO did some stuff that the writer (and me) doesn’t agree with, doesn’t make it a crappy product though?
Honestly, I’m with Brave just for easy of use and out-of-box usability. I did modify built-in settings though.
No account, I can sync my bookmarks even between mobile and desktop.
Built-in security/ad blocking, no extra plugins and permissions.
I will probably give Firefox a try in the future but a few years back it was so bloated and I hate having to install things from 3rd parties I feel should be included.
The article should be called “Brave is not for gays” lol. That will be correct, it is good browser, used it for almost a year, than back to Firefox. Each person may have own opinion, Brendan sure has and I see nothing bad here.
Corbin Davenport has been writing tech articles for a long time. Veteran tech journalist at PC Mag, Android Police, How-to Geek, other sites. It’s his new newsletter.
I agree that you shouldn’t use Brave browser cause of things they’ve done in the past but, oh Jesus, that article is so stupid it reminds me the Hogwarts Legacy boycott.
Between browsers it’s really “what is the least shit”. I don’t like how Brave is full of crypto shit, and well remember how they hooked their own promo links as well. But, it is the best Chromium browser than has cross platform sync built in I have found. And no, I’m not going to use Firefox.
It’s definetely better than using normal Chrome but is the most shit of the better ones so I don’t have reason to use Brave if I can use Librewolf or other more private browsers. I can’t understand why so many downvotes on your comment though.
Add comment