Excuse me, which part is uneducated, and what’s there to read about? I’ve been a solutions architect for years, and I haven’t seen a “one size fits all” type of software. That includes browsers too, which have their technical quirks, compatibility, and inherent risks. I’m capable of creating my own browser, but I don’t believe that makes me qualified to be called a “browsers expert for Earth”, so unless you happen to be Linus Torvalds of browsers, please keep it civil by not being judgemental of folks just discussing. Being open minded is better than being John Firefox, or John Chromium.

What about solo projects? One person is the single point of failure. Small teams without past history? That’s a coin flip, you either encounter genuinely good people, or those who push spyware on you. Or their project becomes abandonware - browsers have thousands of lines of code, and dependencies to be maintained. It’s a very taxing task, which definitely takes away the time for other hobbies. Which leaves us with true community-led projects, which persist regardless of the fate of a corporation or another entity.

Mozilla being sustained by Google just so that Google can’t be sued for monopoly is a vicious circle on its own - Mozilla CEOs are quite unethical at their corporate politics, and very unfair to their employees. Typical 80-90s management style.

So how is mentioning Vivaldi bad? Chromium exists regardless of Google, you don’t need Google to exist for the code base to be intact and developed by people across the globe.

Besides the obvious second-class citizenship treatment from web developers, Firefox is still lackluster in site/process isolation. Its users trade potential privacy gain for a cybersecurity vulnerability & less crash resilience - and most people aren’t Team Blue or Team Red to be on vigil at all times.