Browsers have become the true interface through which most people experience technology today. They may not be the most useful or critical programs, but for the vast majority of users, their computer is just a wrapper for accessing the internet. That's not without good reason- the 21st century is built upon the understanding that our lives revolve around the internet. Our careers, finances, communications, and entertainment have all fundamentally changed as a result of having constant online connection. It's important for users to remain knowledgeable about the browser marketplace and the options available to them, as these choices can significantly impact their security, privacy, and overall digital experience.

Edge

For many, Edge is merely the program you use to install Chrome. In the future this will be regarded in hindsight as a bad move, for reasons we will discuss later. For all intents and purposes, Edge is actually a decent browser. In many ways, its likely the best option for a large amount of people.

Edge lives in the shadow of its older brother Internet Explorer. You could do worse than use Internet Explorer, but the choices of browsers were particularly slim during the height of Internet Explorer's popularity and many acknowledged the fact that they were forced to use it due to Windows's dominant operating system market share. Rarely will you see a product or service reach such dominance without some negative ramifications; they innevitably decay and bloat until a new paradigm is established. Internet Explorer was usurped by Chrome, and Edge was created in compromise of complete surrender.

Built on the same engine as Chrome, the experience is largely the same. If you're using Windows anyway, there's no major compelling force to reinstall Chrome outside of familiarity. Most importantly, it's more resource efficient, which is what the majority of users will care about anyway. Edges's privileged position in the Microsoft ecosystem allows Edge to better manage memory allocation and suspend background processes on Windows in ways Chrome's multi-platform approach cannot match. I actually respect the deep integration with Windows as it encourages users to interact more with their [1] system instead of renting their soul to Google's cloud.

[1] | By their, of course I mean Microsoft.

Chrome

Google, and by extension Chrome, is the main force propagating the "enshittification" of the internet [2]. Almost everything exists downstream of Google's mismanagement of search engine optimization, popularization of online advertisement, and blatant monopolization tactics. It should come as no surprise to anyone who knows me that I refuse to use Chrome on these principles alone, but how does it compare to other browsers in its functionality?

At one point in time, it was admittedly pretty revolutionary- it overtook Internet Explorer for a reason! It was faster, updated more frequently, and popularized extensions (though they existed before), all within a sleek presentation that echoed the minimalist zeitgeist of the time. Chrome was the inevitable conclusion to people's rebellion against Internet Explorer and a good example of how competition drives for higher quality products and services.

It now represents all the problems of unchallenged monopoly, having grown bloated and predatory with its collection of user information. For years now every "update" seems to cater more and more towards Google's interests as opposed to that of the consumer. This was most clearly reflected in the transition towards Manifest V3, which severely impacted community-driven privacy tools and ad-block extensions. The total assimilation of Google-centric authentication leaves users prone to a complete upending of their digital footprint in the event of account hijack. These insults are only possible because of Chromium's overwhelming monopoly on the webengine space.

Did I mention that it's slooowwwwww?

[2] | Microsoft certainly has its fair share of blame for steering us in the wrong direction as well. Dylan Beattie's The Web That Never Was presents an interesting, alternative account of the early development of the internet.

Opera

"No, no, its fine, I just didn't think it'd be Chinese." (Bloated and closed-source spyware) [3]

[3] | Fans of Opera might like Vivaldi, largely developed by former Opera employees and follows similar design principles. It's a bit too "feature-rich" for my tastes, and the fact they haven't fully open-sourced leaves me a tad skeptical, but man, do I admire tab stacks.

Brave

It's honestly impressive how hard Brave has fumbled being the most obvious solution for browser migrants- an important case study on how users will seldom forget and forgive when they are unknowlingly mistreated.

For those that don't know, Brave initially advertised itself as the "crypto browser" at the dawn of cryptocurrency's public spotlight into the public in 2016. The premise, simply, was that advertisements would pay the user for their viewership in the form of $BAT, Basic Attention Token. Users could in-turn exchange $BAT with each other easily online, with Brave providing easy front-end additions to popular social media. A commenable, novel, and radicle idea that challenged the industry standard for monetization online. However, crypto has since lost public interest in widespread integration with scandals like FTX and NFTs, but even before these Brave had its own scandal. It was discovered that Brave was pocketing user's $BAT tips on behalf of creators that hadn't fully integrated into the Brave suite.

Brave has since pivoted its branding towards being the "privacy browser." It's been a smart move, as it's largely the reason they're still relevant today. They've managed to screw this up too, by injecting affiliate links unbeknownst to its users. Privacy-focused folks don't take kindly to actions being taken on their behalf without their consent. Privacy-focused users additionally often take great care to only use software that fits within their ideals, for whom some of which Brave's CEO may call into question. Whether or not this is of importance to you is largely irrelevant- it stains the growth of the browser by impeding the recommendation of it. Go ahead, try and recommend anyone online to use Brave and you'll be met with an immediate barrage of links to privacy concerns, controversies, and a visceral distaste for anything crypto-adjacent in today's tech climate.

These are the hurdles of getting someone to install Brave- the first 10 minutes are exclusively spent having to explain how to fully disable ads, remove unwanted crypto features, and acknowledge the scandals surrounding the browser with a defensive "yes, but... it's not Chrome!" If these things don't matter to you it's a decent enough browser that remains open source, with a robust ad-blocker that works post-Manifest V3. However, I worry about its long-term support and developmenet as growth will innevitably stagnate. Additionally, much like Edge, Chrome, and Opera, Brave is built atop of the Chromium engine, which threatens the future of the web with a Google-controlled hegemony. Out of principle, I personal seek browsers built atop alternative webengines.

Firefox

As a longtime Firefox supporter, Mozilla's recent privacy policy update has significantly undermined my confidence in its future. Mozilla has had its ups and downs in the public eye throughout the years, but I can't imagine a single worse update in Firefox history. Even if the implications of these policy updates are more overstated than many are making them out to be, the fact that Mozilla would risk its last remaining competitive advantage of "privacy-first" principles severely calls into question the future of their organizational trust.

Additionally, we mustn't become complacent with mediocrity just because the alternatives are worse. It's no secret the development of Firefox has largely remained... stagnant? What was once the beacon of browser innovation now struggles to implement features Chrome shipped years ago. It may technically remain the best possible choice for privacy-conscious users at the moment, but that's less an endorsement of Firefox and more so an indication of the dystopian state of popular browsers in 2025.

Promised features remain in perpetual development hell, proper onboarding remains overly technical and complicated, and the mobile experience continues to lag so far behind the competition that correctly identified the market's needs for speed and accessibility. The browser's performance on resource-constrained devices remains cumbersome despite years of optimization efforts. In spite of these glaring issues Firefox has long been the default recommendation in privacy circles for anyone looking to venture away from Chrome, seemingly existing for that sole reason. It is a browser that has come to be defined not by what it is, but by what it's not- and for the majority of users, it's simply not a good browser; a reality painfully reflected in its steadily declining annual user base.

And yet, despite everything, Firefox still proves that there is a genuine demand for non-Chrome browsers, a demand that grows more urgent as Chrome begins to reach the same levels of market dominance that once defined Internet Explorer [4]. Firefox's continued existence provides us an opportunity to examine what features the next generation of browsers must prioritize, that being everything Firefox is not as a user experience while preserving everything it aims to stand for in principle. Users not only want a privacy-respecting browser, they want one that doesn't feel like a compromise in every other aspect of the experience. Firefox represents the right ideals trapped within the wrong execution. Where does this leave us?

[4] | Chrome's peak user base currently sits around 69%. Not nice. Internet Explorer's peak userbase was around a whopping 96%.

The Future

As the world has continued to gather online, we've unfortunately been left with worse and worse means of access. Browsers that once provided pristine environments now shovel slop into our faces expecting us to take it. The necessity for internet connection is being exploited to harvest unprecedented amounts of user information, while search continues to deteriorate under the weight of SEO-farming and algorithm manipulation. What was once a gateway to knowledge has become a gateway to surveillance, with each browser representing a different compromise we're forced to accept.

Despite this, I maintain an extremely optimistic view for the future of browsers for the simple fact that the internet is here to stay. I foresee a Cambrian Explosion of browsers, each tailoring themselves to specific flavors of users. Chrome proved that it was possible to overtake market majority with a well-designed product in-demand. As users grow increasingly frustrated with the status quo, there will be a wider market demand for alternatives that respect both privacy and user experience. Linux has already proved this year-on-year with its steady increase in user base, and I expect we'll see something similar with browsers in the near future.

My latest foray has been into the fresh Zen Browser, but many alternatives have been in development for years- such as Librewolf, IceCat, and other Firefox-based forks that prioritize privacy and performance without the organizational baggage. The next generation of browsers will need to balance privacy, performance, and personalization in ways that today's browsers remain too scared (or too greedy) to implement. Until then users should embrace and support alternative browsers that respect these tenants of browsing before its too late.

...oh yeah, people use Safari, huh?

<-blog
<-schark.online