Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Chromium browsers can't make that pledge and those that promised have red flags in my book.

1. These browsers can barely add their own functionality on top of upstream, and maintaining Manifest v2 compatibility may be expensive. Consider that the development of Chrome exceeds 1 billion per year.

2. They all use Chrome's Webstore as a distributing channel, except for Edge, but IMO, Microsoft has an even bigger interest in seeing uBO die.

Brave itself has ad-blocking built-in, which won't be affected, and it's fairly capable, but promising that they'll keep compatibility with uBO is a lie, if they ever made that promise.




I agree, and it seems like Brave agrees too. From https://brave.com/blog/brave-shields-manifest-v3/:

> For as long as we’re able (and assuming the cooperation of the extension authors), Brave will continue to support some privacy-relevant MV2 extensions—specifically AdGuard, NoScript, uBlock Origin, and uMatrix

I'm no fan of Brave, but it's nice to see that they at least somewhat acknowledge that they likely won't be able to support v2 forever. Only time will tell how long they're "able".


> Consider that the development of Chrome exceeds 1 billion per year.

1 billion what, LOC? Dollars? Downloads? Emails from the ad department demanding QoD improvements to Chrome?


Dollars, current estimates ranging between 1 and 2 billion.

Firefox is currently developed with half a billion, but IMO, that is why there are only 3 browser engines left, with all the “forks” depending on the upstream.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: