privacytests.org VS Waterfox

No, https://privacytests.org/ is misleading, it shows only the results of the default browser settings - which absolutely nobody uses.

So as far as hardened chromium forks go brave is the best and all there really is. For Firefox based hardened browsers unless you feel like manually hardened stock FF yourself, librewolf and mullvad browser (mull on Android) which leads me to Tor but with the drawbacks that make it less practical for certaint things mullvad known for their VPN that is is very bignin privacy so much you have nothing that ties to it like 99% of anything now days as yoi have anonimity bcnyoinoau with cash-crypro-or use a voucher no name email address phone number bank etc to sign upso they partner with then tor project and made a clearnet version of tor hardened fingerprint resistant as well as cookies scripts ect multiple identity proxy and built-in security that tor has standard safer safest with no script uBo and and their VPN and dns to take the place of tors multiple relay and encryption that is the tor network with no telemetry you hide in plain site as all the other using it look like you. You can n use this browsers like you would brave or your "main' so history bookmarks passwords etc but that defeats the purpose IMO but librewolf is also very hardened fingerprint resistant focused but you can use it like were using brave and still have the privacy and security and convenience. I use all 4 with different search engines depending on what I'm looking for or doing and of in have to use chrome then ungoogled Chromium on desktop and cromite on Android (fork of bromite which lost support from the devs) mull brave and cromite on is what in use on mobile. This isn't a complete list as FOSS for mobile has quite a few to try these are my favorite, Firefox focus on Android is Worth mentioning too. Sorry for the incoherent book. https://privacytests.org/

you mean https://privacytests.org ?

librewolf https://privacytests.org/ for ios/android brave all the way https://privacytests.org/ios, https://privacytests.org/android

careful with brave https://www.ghacks.net/2023/10/18/brave-is-installing-vpn-services-without-user-consent/?amp https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/issues/33726 among other things like the most popular browser compare site being owned by brave employees https://privacytests.org/ i guess when they say privacy they mean it, keeping things private from you too

https://privacytests.org/ he eventually disclosed his employer in the back area of that website somewhere so thats better i guess.

another one is how certain settings on brave search always reverts back on. or just one the send analytics one. if you use search on a different browser not their own. and etc.

and firefox is funded in large part by google.. do you really think they dont share information?

honestly acting like your browser is superior because no tracking is so silly lol. just use whatever browser you want and tune settings to your liking. harden if you must and move on. is it that much of a hassel? would you rather pay subscription for no tracking?

This site is constantly updated, so there is no need to have the same question all the time. https://privacytests.org/

Something to get you started : privacytests.org

> [Monday](https://github.com/WaterfoxCo/Waterfox/releases/tag/G5.1.9),

With 4GB of RAM I would recommend that you use the ESR version or some lightweight fork like Waterfox that I've been testing these days. Is really lighter and can use Firefox Sync. But it has his problems. I would prefer to go with ESR and deactivating smooth scrolling if I was you.

> I wish Unity didn't die

Hi from Unity on Ubuntu 23.04.

I am running the Unity flavour:

https://ubuntuunity.org/

It uses the latest Unity 7.7, released earlier this year:

https://gitlab.com/ubuntu-unity/unity-x/unityx

I run it on 3 or 4 machines, one of which has 2 screens and one of which has 3. Works great, scales well, handles modern Ubuntu just fine.

I use it with the Waterfox browser, which integrates natively with the Unity global menu bar, without any addons or config. I am currently on -- (hits alt-H, A) -- version 5.1.9.

https://www.waterfox.net/

Post issues on Gihtub for reporting bugs. https://github.com/WaterfoxCo/Waterfox/issues

I've made sure security updates have now been available ASAP for quite a while now. G5.1.9 released on Monday, for example. This is a day before Mozilla, but mostly because Mozilla spend a day or two doing QA.

I've been a fan of Waterfox for some time now

https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/1201/extend-panel-men...

Of course, GNOME broke it in a later release. This is why no amount of extensions are an answer: they break. Extensions do not work from one release of GNOME to another, and when they fail, the whole desktop often fails.

> Also, it’s not really Gnome’s fault that linux doesn’t have as great metadata from apps to be able to display the apps’ menubars (unity could do it).

False. Gtk exposes this; Unity didn't have stored metadata on lots of apps, it just displayed the existing controls' contents somewhere else. If you run brand new Gtk apps on Unity today, they get panel menus. This was not some clever hack.

Unity is still around:

https://unityd.org/

The distro is back again:

https://ubuntuunity.org/

Brand new apps, like Waterfox, integrate with it fine although they did not exist when it was written.

https://www.waterfox.net/

> With all due respect, that is bullshit reasoning. Selectively displaying useful things is the whole point of UIs.

I disagree.

1. I want to choose what is shown or not. In order to choose, I have to be able to see it. In other words, it needs to be there at first, and then I can choose whether I want to show it or not.

If I can't see it in the first place, then how am I to know it's there?

It's the users' choice what is shown or not. It is not up to the developer to say "they don't need to see this and I'm going to hide it away."

Any piece of software that does that is user hostile.

> Otherwise why would you roll up your window?

Again: it's my choice. I get to choose. It's my computer. They are my windows. I choose if they are shown or not.

That is the point of free software: Choice.

GNOME says it's free, but it takes choices away from me. I object to that.

> Why do you have menus in the first place that hide their content until clicked?

To save space for my document. You can't show everything all the time: that is why you leave it up to the user to choose what they show and when.

(Incidentally, this is also why in my opinion the Microsoft ribbon based fluent interface fails. It tries to show far too much all at once, and the result is that it wastes a huge amount of screen space, and is actually more difficult to hunt through for what I need when I need it.)

> That is no longer the corner, so it doesn’t benefit from this law at all.

False.

Fitt's law is about target size.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitts%27s_law#Implications_for...

It is not about corners. It is about edges too.

By the way I do have a clue about this stuff... for example here is a screenshot of a piece of software which I designed about a dozen years which makes use of Fitt's Law.

https://twitter.com/SimplicityComps/status/54085863397497241...

> The super key is the same as the windows, or the mac command key.

So, yes, but those environments don't suddenly change your entire screen.

> Also often called Meta.

That is a different key. Meta and super are not interchangeable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta_key

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_key_(keyboard_button)

> What’s the problem here exactly? Is alt+f4 written over the screen? Or ctrl+c? Especially that the same behavior is expected from the windows start menu.

The problem here, as I'm attempting to spell out, is that there were existing conventions for this stuff, and GNOME does not respect them.

> It’s a community for its users. You clearly don’t use it nor contribute to it either by work or financially, so it is not really fair to ask someone else to work for you specifically..

No. What I do is, I write about it for a living. I analyse this stuff, I draw comparisons, I point out weaknesses and strengths. That's my job.

In my professional capacity, the GNOME foundation invited me to its GUADEC conference about six or seven years back. I asked a lot of awkward and difficult questions, because that's my job, and I didn't get invited back.

> Literally every OS and distro suck at it.

False. For example, using most other interfaces, such as XFCE, I can treat a multiscreen desktop as one big space. I can have one panel at the far left, and one on the far right, of the entire multi-monitor desktop.

But GNOME doesn't let me do that.

Why not?

> Nonetheless, I feel you are reasoning from a very biased point

Because I disagree with you, you think that I'm biased?

Do you think that everyone who disagrees with you is biased?

Have you considered that perhaps I have opinions, and can draw upon years of knowledge and experience, and make reasoned arguments based on evidence, and that is not the same thing as being biased?

> I don’t think it is as fruitful a discussion.

So because I can counter your arguments with examples and reasoning, you don't think that it's fruitful discussion?

Personally, I think that the arguments where people can defend their points, and produce evidence to back them up, are the most fruitful kind.