Added Vivaldi Browser in place of Brave #717
No reviewers
Labels
No Label
🔍🤖 Search Engines
approved
dependencies
duplicate
feedback wanted
high priority
I2P
iOS
low priority
OS
Self-contained networks
Social media
stale
streaming
todo
Tor
WIP
wontfix
XMPP
[m]
₿ cryptocurrency
ℹ️ help wanted
↔️ file sharing
⚙️ web extensions
✨ enhancement
❌ software removal
💬 discussion
🤖 Android
🐛 bug
💢 conflicting
📝 correction
🆘 critical
📧 email
🔒 file encryption
📁 file storage
🦊 Firefox
💻 hardware
🌐 hosting
🏠 housekeeping
🔐 password managers
🧰 productivity tools
🔎 research required
🌐 Social News Aggregators
🆕 software suggestion
👥 team chat
🔒 VPN
🌐 website issue
🚫 Windows
👁️ browsers
🖊️ digital notebooks
🗄️ DNS
🗨️ instant messaging (im)
🇦🇶 translations
No Milestone
No Assignees
1 Participants
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: privacyguides/privacytools.io#717
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
No description provided.
Delete Branch "add-vivaldi"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Description
I added Vivaldi Browser in place of Brave. If the sites going to feature a Chromium based browser, Vivaldi checks far more boxes than brave, and without trying to sell you Cryptocurrency along the way. Much more control over privacy settings, extensions, and the browser itself is really customizable.
Vivaldi browser is Proprietary Freeware:-
https://vivaldi.com/privacy/vivaldi-end-user-license-agreement/
Vivaldi is mainly (if not 100%) non-free software.
Therefore does not meet the software criteria.
https://vivaldi.com/privacy/vivaldi-end-user-license-agreement/
If you like Vivaldi try Dooble or Otter Browser.
I am totally okay with this being denied, but I would say even though not open source, it's still more secure than Brave. I think having a Chromium based browser could be a good thing for the site as it seems a lot of people do prefer it. Giving them a privacy focused version would be key here.
Please reopen https://github.com/privacytools/privacytools.io/issues/2206 (more recent) or https://github.com/privacytools/privacytools.io/pull/717 , since no one has said a why not to include it. I have researched Vivaldi, and have written up my findings in this article and I don't see a why not to include it.
The only thing that has been said is that it is closed source, and this issue is explained by Vivaldi here.
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator