@RL_Dane
You could close some web browser with vim commands and key bindings. There's a couple of web browser that use vim keys by default, the first one that comes to mind is Qutebrowser, but there's others too. In this way you can avoid the disappointment and being confused why my keybindings doesn't work⁉️ 😅😜
I've used luakit and vimb in the past, but I kind of rely on some of Firefox's features. I do have vimium C wich gives vi-style navigation, but not actual vi-style editing.
I like qutebrowser, but don't want to add to the Chrome hegemony by making a Blink-based browser my daily driver. :'(
@RL_Dane
I get it I myself strongly prefer Firefox because it have some features that I like. I use tridactyl for vi-style navigation it can do more but I only really want the vi-style navigation.
I have used in the past Luakit, I have nothing against it but wanted to try out other browsers too with vi-style navigation.
I use nowadays Qutebrowser, neither I like it too much that it's based on Chromium, but at least it uses WebKit that based on Chromium it's not directly uses Chromium.
Qutebrowser is based on Blink now (QTWebEngine). All of the QT-based browsers are Blink, because that's all that QT supports now (which is a sad irony, since Konqueror is a KDE project).
@RL_Dane
Oh I see, I looked up the github page of Qutebrowser, your right it uses QtWebEngine now. In their github there's a section about that alternatively it can use QtWebKit but it's not recommended due to known security issues in QtWebKit.
If I'm not mistaken Qutebrowser have used QtWebKit in the past.
@RL_Dane
With some searching around trying to find out more about why QtWebKit was dropped from Qt6, the reason being it's not maintained and even stopped being developed about 4 years ago. But it seems it was poorly maintained even before that according to this issue from Qutebrowser's GitHub page. https://github.com/qutebrowser/qutebrowser/issues/4039
And the reason it's not recommended to be used according to the QtWebKit GitHub page, there's a warring for being incredibly dangerously unsecure.
@RL_Dane
Look I have found this old article in Qt Group's (from Qt Company formerly Trolltech and Quasar Technologies) website that states what was the reasoning behind they stopped developing QtWebKit and started work on QtWebEngine. It's a quite reasonable and understandable decision from their perspective.
@RL_Dane
WebKit still being actively developed and maintained, only QtWebKit is deprecated. So we still have at least WebKit, although only a small number of web browsers using it, a good example of a web browser that based on it is Luakit.
Yesterday I installed it out of curiosity to see how well it works, it's still being maintained but nothing really noticeable have changed about it since the last time I used it and that was about 4 or 5 years ago.
@RL_Dane
I have no objections against QtWebEngine it's still not exactly the same as plain vanilla Chromium, yeah it uses some code from it but not that much to be simply equivalent of Chromium.
My beef is upon the basis that using the same underlying technology (blink) is functionally the same as using the same browser where extending and maintaining googles control over the web is concerned.
I mean they just singlehandedly put jpeg xl out to pasture as a web standard by utter fiat.
@RL_Dane
I understand the concerns, I'm not trying to argue that google dictating the web standards is a good thing. I'm just as much not in favor of how much power google have over the web, but sadly there is not much that anybody can do anything about it.
I'm not going to be mad at projects that use some google code, because it's more feasible to reuse code that already works good, not having to reinvent the wheel that would take more time and resources that are already being scarce.
I get it, and yes, I definitely tend to err on the side of tilting at windmills 😆
I kinda wish the FOSS world would get off its collective butts and tell "open source" corps like MS & Meta where to park it, but if it were as easy as saying it, unions in the U.S. would be busting corps, rather than the other way around.
I just wish people would consider the ramifications of their choices a little deeper.
But I'm not really talking about QtWebKit anymore at this point, just to be clear
@RL_Dane
💯 agree. Yeah I know it's a broader problem, that's why FLOSS should be used whenever is possible instead of just using the more mainstream software form big corps. 😄
The thing is people can't always avoid using those 'open source' corpo software, anybody kinda need to use for example either an Android or iPhone smartphone. And even if there's the option on some Android phones to flash a custom ROM on it, there's still some google code running on them, it's just unavoidable. 😑
Oh, I get that. I mean I use zstd almost every day, and that was written by FACEBOOK!! AAAAAH!
But if it's FOSS, there's a good chance that it's going to get properly vetted at some point, and won't get away with doing anything obviously evil like phoning home.
I too use de-googled Android (#CalyxOS), and while it's technically running Google code, it's not running proprietary google code (except for the camera app, which is firewalled off ;)
Add comment