
Chrome is a Google Service that happens to include a Browser Engine - dredmorbius
https://ha.x0r.be/posts/chrome-is-a-google-service/
======
mooreed
Chromium Ungoogled repo [1] made it to the `top30` some days ago. I too have
switched back to Firefox with the release of Quantum and have been very
pleased.

Frankly, I am amazed every day that Ungoogled Chromium, Firefox, & DDG.co are
as good as they are. (aka: slightly inferior to Google regarding product
polish, but truly "good enough" 98% of the time - without selling my future
data down the drain)

(edited: to fix typos)

\- [1]: [https://github.com/Eloston/ungoogled-
chromium](https://github.com/Eloston/ungoogled-chromium)

~~~
eudora
I really want to use Firefox on Android, but I need a couple things:

Desperately need the scrolling in Firefox to feel like scrolling in the rest
of the apps.

And I would very much like easy tab switching by swiping across the title bar
thing, and the new tab/new incognito/back button behaviour.

Pls Moz pls

~~~
bad_user
Given that Chrome on Android doesn’t support extensions and thus no ad/privacy
blockers, it might as well not exist and Firefox is for me the only game in
town due to supporting uBlock Origin and Privacy Badger.

Scrolling is irrelevant for me.

~~~
largespoon
By any chance have you noticed Google serving ads on Firefox? I use ublock
origin on firefox and I have been getting ads occasionally on search.

------
sbr464
This update really broke a lot of things. There are a lot of services that
rely on the first logged in google account. I used to log into chrome with a
personal account, and log into gmail/etc first with my business account. That
way, my bookmarks and history would stay with me personally, but things that I
use a lot, work email/google cloud etc would open as default under the work
account.

One common issue is some sites (google’s gallery.io even), only really
associate based with the first account logged into chrome, or the OAuth flow
breaks.

Now if you log out of google, to set the base login to your work email for
example, it logs you out of chrome also, so there goes your password
manager/bookmarks/cookies etc.

I’m still figuring the best strategy, currently I just made a second chrome
profile to separate but it’s super time consuming/annoying.

I feel like it was a major change without any heads up.

~~~
sbr464
Also meaning you need to manage two piles of bookmarks, on new devices, add
the second profile, go through 2factor login processes twice during setup etc.
There doesn’t seem to be a central, personal identity any longer, separate
from google services, which they didn’t really think through.

The thought of switching between two windows just to copy a bookmark or a note
from another browser add on, seems crazy in 2018. You can’t have tabs from
different chrome profiles in one window, which is understandable, but wasn’t
really a concern before this change.

------
buro9
Many years ago I shared that I browse across several browsers, separating
usage depending on the site I am visiting.

\+ Gmail, Drive, Google Calendar = Chrome

\+ Sites I trust = Firefox

\+ Sites I do not know or trust = Firefox Private browsing (or Firefox Focus
on Android)

This involves cautiously copying links from browser to browser, and if I make
a mistake I have a scorched Earth policy of the history and cookies.

The only thing that is consistent is that they all have Pinboard so I can
bookmark as I go along.

Over the years this feels more and more like the safest thing to do, to
compartmentalise according to trust, and trust Google only with whatever you
want tracked.

~~~
djanogo
I used to this do exactly, but switching to Firefox containers made Chrome
redundant. Chrome uses too much memory to leave it running just for few
websites, and Google including analytics script as builtin library was the
last straw.

~~~
calcifer
> Google including analytics script as builtin library

Wait, what? Do you have a source for this?

~~~
djanogo
My bad, sorry, I was shown wrong in the below submission which I stopped
checking few days after I posted it.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16657472](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16657472)

------
crazygringo
I had an instinctual gut reaction against this, because it really does feel
like it crosses a line between browser and content that shouldn't be crossed.

BUT -- I know a lot of regular (non-technical) users who are terrified of
logging into shared/public computers with their Google accounts, because they
can't tell the difference between logging in/out of Gmail and logging in/out
of Chrome, and they've experienced/heard horror stories of people leaving one
logged in when they log out of the other.

I just tried it, and logging out of my Gmail also _clearly_ logs me out of my
Chrome (with a big message), which feels like a big win for peace of mind for
most users.

So as much as it bothers me as a "power user"... I actually think this is a
big improvement in conceptual simplicity for the average user. (And power
users can figure out how to use multiple profiles for multiple Google
accounts.)

There was a story [1] here just a few days ago where the culprit seemed to be
that Chrome Sync had been set up with the daughter's EDU account and it was
saving passwords for the parent's banking account, and presumably this will
help avoid that kind of mix-up.

[1]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18023737](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18023737)

~~~
rahimnathwani
"terrified of logging into shared/public computers with their Google accounts"

I'm terrified of logging into _any_ site on a public computer.

~~~
antaviana
It will cost you around $5 each month that you actually need to use it (mostly
because of the Microsoft RDP license), but with AWS AppStream with an image
with a browser, you are not leaving any traces of your browsing on the local
computer.

~~~
rahimnathwani
This would help somewhat, but all keyboard input could still be logged, as
could all screen activity.

------
dredmorbius
Some of the Twitter threads and related links on this:

 _Wait, logging into a Google site on Chrome now logs you into the
browser?!!!?!_

[https://twitter.com/matthew_d_green/status/10432883138834513...](https://twitter.com/matthew_d_green/status/1043288313883451393)

[https://mobile.twitter.com/x0rz/status/1040537928127135744](https://mobile.twitter.com/x0rz/status/1040537928127135744)

 _Google calls the feature "Identity consistency between browser and cookie
jar" and a Chrome representative on the official Google Chrome Help Forum
confirmed that this is the intended behavior._

[https://www.ghacks.net/2018/09/08/disable-the-sign-out-
link-...](https://www.ghacks.net/2018/09/08/disable-the-sign-out-link-between-
chrome-gmail-and-other-google-services/)

Earlier HN discussion:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17942723](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17942723)

------
codedokode
I don't like that different Google services are linked together. It would be
fine if Youtube would remember what videos I prefer, but I don't want Google
to save my search phrases to the same account, don't want Google to know what
sites I visit (using Google Adsense and Google Analytics that are present on
most sites). That would be too much information and I don't want to share it
with Google.

So when I need Gmail or Google Maps, I have to open it in a private window.
Not very convenient, so I don't use them often.

By the way, if you use Chrome and haven't changed the default search engine
from Google, then your browser pings Google every time you open a new tab. You
can check it yourself with Developer Tools: a new tab page is loaded from
Internet and it sends cookies. It can be fixed by creating and choosing as
default a new search engine with Google's URL, but using other name (for
example, Gogol instead of Google). Then Chrome will load its start page from
disk, not from Internet.

------
user812
The new Google Chrome design with version 69 marked the beginning of a new era
– Google wants to portray Chrome as something that is way more than a browser.
They want you to see it as the primary interface of the web.

This is what the average user wants. All complex functionality has been put in
the background. Cross-platform integration has been perfected.

Give it a year and users around the world will no longer think of Chrome as a
browser, but simply as the interface to the (Google-)Web.

With Chrome Google has succesfully defeated Apple, MS and Mozilla.

And Google will continue to do everything to make people stop thinking of
Chrome as a browser. They want you to think of it like a window into your
online life, a window that is the same no matter where you are or what device
you use.

~~~
apatters
That might all accurately describe what they'd like to achieve, but
fortunately we still live in a free market society where there's room for
competition (and if there isn't, regulators often step in).

I don't find Google to be the best search experience anymore. It gives me too
many ads and partnership deals. I use searx.me and it gives me good old
fashioned organic web search with results that are just as good.

Plenty of alternatives exist to their other services as well which only get
better every year. I'm now convinced Google has a hard fight ahead of them
just to keep what they've already got.

~~~
dorgo
searx.me - I like, but no URL's for SERP's and browser navigation (back-
button) doesn't work.

------
JoshMnem
> [googlers] were wondering why the new behaviour might feel abusive to some
> people.

That says something about how out of touch Google is at the moment.

~~~
Karunamon
I daresay this comment might apply more to us than to Google. To 99% of
people, these features are useful and helpful, with the downsides being mostly
philosophical or theoretical.

~~~
706f6f70
> To 99% of people, these features are useful and helpful, with the downsides
> being mostly philosophical or theoretical.

There is something there that makes it comparable to the early nature
conservation movements. Fast forward a couple generations and nearly 99% of
the population is pretty convinced on climate change and that we've messed up
quite severely - but not enough to stop messing up.

------
david_ar
Chrome is a platform for client-side Google services.

As the article says, the web browser is the most obvious component, but it
also includes Google Cloud Print [0], Google Talk/Hangouts [1], Google Earth
[2], Google Music [3], Gmail Offline [4], etc.

In some sense it's the spiritual successor to Google Desktop [5], which used
to fill a similar role.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Cloud_Print](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Cloud_Print)

[1] [https://gsuiteupdates.googleblog.com/2014/10/notification-
re...](https://gsuiteupdates.googleblog.com/2014/10/notification-re-google-
talk-app-for.html)

[2] visit [https://www.google.com/earth/](https://www.google.com/earth/) in a
browser other than Chrome

[3]
[https://support.google.com/googleplaymusic/answer/4627259](https://support.google.com/googleplaymusic/answer/4627259)

[4]
[https://support.google.com/a/answer/139154](https://support.google.com/a/answer/139154)

[5]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Desktop](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Desktop)

------
Jaruzel
I am seriously considering rolling my own browser by embedding the Chromium
Embedded Framework into my own GUI (or WebKit, or Gecko).

A browser should just render pages (incl. JavaScript), and save cookies if you
need it to. Beyond that, there's nothing else it needs to do. Round about
Netscape 4 and IE6, browsers were functionally complete. Since then they've
just been gilding the lily and creating an artificial 'features race' between
the browser vendors.

Sometimes, simpler IS better.

~~~
jakeogh
With ya. Started modding suckless surf to my liking, got sidetracked but I
plan to keep working on it:
[https://github.com/jakeogh/glide](https://github.com/jakeogh/glide)

Still trying to figure out how to control animated gif's in webkit2.

~~~
tomxor
I liked the idea of those minimal vim like browsers, but webkit2 lib they all
used was always hopelessly out of date, insecure and slow.

I've been keeping an eye on qutebrowser[1] though which offers either up to
date [2]qtwebengine or webkit (qtwebengine is the browser engine of chromium
minus all the google services and other garbage).

[1]
[https://github.com/qutebrowser/qutebrowser](https://github.com/qutebrowser/qutebrowser)

[2] [https://wiki.qt.io/QtWebEngine](https://wiki.qt.io/QtWebEngine)

------
dredmorbius
The obvious problems and conflicts here are multiple.

1\. People may wish to not have activity on multiple services connected or
associated. This was certainly true for me when I found that G+ and YouTube
accounts, independently created, though sharing a common email address, were
conjoined.

2\. Google is put in a position of advantage as regards online identity. This
persists across several dimensions:

a). Google apps and services share an authenticator with the browser itself.
Other parties must implement their own authentication schemes, unless ...

b). Third-party applications utilise the Google Chrome authenticator, in which
case

i). Those third parties leak user identity, activity, and all but certainly
fraud and abuse detection, including both false negative and false positive
determinations, to Google.

ii). Other browser venders, including Mozilla, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Opea,
and others, are rendered as second-class citizens from an authentication
standpoint.

iii). Consequences of a loss or freeze of an account now extend to multiple
third-party services.

c). Loss or freeze of an account locks people out of their own web browser and
all that entails; cookies, bookmarks, history, extensions, configurations,
extensions-related data (say; Zotero).

3\. The centralisation, stakes, and attractiveness of attacking people's
Google identities rises yet higher. Data exfiltration, access to browser and
local system state, denial-of-access attacks, and more.

The privacy, anti-trust, security, conflict-of-interest, general risk, and
other implications simple boggle the mind. That this was quietly rolled out
with no apparent announcement or consideration tremendously reduces my already
greatly-diminished trust in Google, its leadership, and its stewardship of
critical Web infrastructure and protocols.

Chromium is likewise affected.

What were they thinking?

 _Were_ they thinking?

~~~
mindgam3
This is very bad. There are so many reasons why I want to be able to use Gmail
without having google track all of my activity across search and maps.

I have been a loyal Chrome user since pretty much launch, because it was the
fastest browser and mostly seemed to stay that way over the years. I
understand why Google is doing this from a monopolistic “control all the
things” perspective, and this will probably increase engagement in the near
term, but I think this is a very poor strategic decision given the rising tide
of trust issues surrounding Big Tech these days. Privacy is such a hot button
issue now. Facebook is rightly getting raked over the coals in front of
Congress for its rampant neglect/abuse of privacy issues. Apple is crushing it
with its privacy-first positioning and hammering FB and Google publicly on
their tracking-based revenue models. I understand that Google can’t change its
underlying business model overnight, but why double down on more enforced
tracking? It makes them an even bigger target just in time for an oncoming
storm.

Time to start shopping for a new browser. Thanks for everything, Chrome.

~~~
jsnell
> This is very bad. There are so many reasons why I want to be able to use
> Gmail without having google track all of my activity across search and maps.

But I don't think this Chrome release changed anything with regards to that?
It's been the case for more than a decade that if you're logged into gmail
you're also logged into search, maps, apps, etc. And if you log out of one,
you log out of all of them.

Whatever workflow you've been using to keep logged into gmail while avoiding
being logged in to the other Google sites would still work exactly the same
way. (E.g. I'm always logged into gmail and chrome, but do 99% of my searches
and Youtube watching from incognito windows, so they don't get associated with
my account).

~~~
pastununtrium
The problem is that even most devs (I’m just gonna assume and pull this
assumption outta my ass) don’t have the time or energy to put into such jailed
browser windows. I think I used to a bit, but sometimes I’d forget and log
into a service in my non google windows, etc. It got to be too much work.
There has to be a better way to manage this.

------
k__
Switched back to Firefox with container tabs half a year ago and I'm pretty
happy with it.

~~~
jdeibele
Agreed. Mozilla has a special container just for Facebook and I use that.
Other people have made similar special containers for Google, etc. but I don't
trust them as much as Mozilla.

So I use one container for Google properties (gmail, YouTube, etc.), a
different one for social networks other than Facebook (Twitter, Reddit, etc.),
and a third for shopping (eBay, Amazon, etc.)

You can teach Firefox to always open certain URLs in a particular container so
smile.amazon.com brings up the shopping container, twitter.com brings up the
social one, and so on.

I've been a little sad about losing some of the old Firefox extensions but
Quantum has been great.

~~~
k__
Multi-Account Containers is from Mozilla too.

As far as I know, Facebook Container is just more comfortable to use.

[https://addons.mozilla.org/de/firefox/addon/multi-account-
co...](https://addons.mozilla.org/de/firefox/addon/multi-account-containers/)

~~~
tialaramex
For MAC you are responsible for curating the decisions about what's inside
each container.

That's a bunch of work. The more complicated or fast changing the sites in a
container, the more work.

Facebook Container comes with the curation done by its maintainers. This is
probably less trouble than it might be because it's not as though developers
who use Facebook are unheard of.

~~~
k__
You can pin every domain to a container. This is a one time action.

After one day I had it up and running.

\- Google \- Facebook \- Work \- NSFW \- Misc

------
esalman
[https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/2765944?hl=en&co=GE...](https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/2765944?hl=en&co=GENIE.Platform%3DDesktop)

Let Chrome scan your computer for malware? I wonder what is the cost for a
free malware...

------
dannyw
I'm very upset at this.

I use an ad blocker to block analytics and advertising beacons.

I want to be signed into gmail and google properties, but not Chrome. I don't
want my history to be sync'd to Google's servers for advertising.

Now you can't use Chrome if you want your privacy anymore.

~~~
hackinthebochs
Even worse: did they surreptitiously capture the browsing history of everyone
that has intentionally avoided signing into chrome over the last few years?
I'm glad I switched to firefox a year ago and have auto update on chrome
disabled.

------
CGamesPlay
Not totally true, you can pretty easily have a logged-in Chrome profile that
you use for Gmail, and an unauthenticated Chrome profile you use for
everything else.

~~~
nerdwaller
This is speculation on my part, however given the sophistication of their
tracking capabilities I would imagine they could correlate the source to (at a
minimum) a grouping of related users, if not the primary user.

(Edit: remove double negative)

~~~
Zarel
Yes, they certainly could, but this change doesn't change that at all.

------
throw2016
Increasing complexity in the browser and a number of other projects has put it
out of reach of small open source teams, it can now only be done by a well
funded corporates. This is a huge loss because now we can't have viable
alternatives put together by open source teams who don't need millions of
dollars to exist.

Without competition ultimately the user does not have choice and you get
invasive and arbitrary behavior like this, all pushed under the guise of
'helping' some mythical average user and it will keep getting worse.

There are professional security fud mongers always pushing 'no alternative'
solutions that somehow always end up benefiting centralized corporate
interests. The simple fact is the tech community have lost control of the web,
standards, privacy, user interests either by naivete or collusion to adware
and spyware companies masquerading as tech companies.

------
interfixus
Seeing its provenance, I have never considered Chrome or Chromium an option
for daily use. The same way I have never been tempted to create a Gmail - or
indeed any kind of Google - account.

Still mystified why such huge numbers of people - also among the well informed
- find it a worthwhile trade handing over the generality of their life to this
monolith in return for some perceived marginal gains in speed og useability or
whatever.

No, I don't use the search either, and I block their Analytics snooper,
whichever guise it appears in (font, tagmanager, gstatic etc. etc.).

It's eminently doable. So call me a luddite.

~~~
pastununtrium
Interesting. Do you mind sharing your browser setup (Firefox?) and extensions
setup , workflow?

~~~
interfixus
My setup and workflow are unremarkable and will bore you to tears. Linux &
Firefox on all my desktops. Firefox uMatrix'ed to within an inch of its life,
and with one of those extensions that kill all cookies from a given tab as
soon as you close it.. Every now and again I have to temporarily allow one
access or another - some sites break if not allowed use of Google TagManager,
for example. I keep a seperate profile for a few known sites which I
occasionally must use, and which absolutely refuse to function without live
access to all the evil empires of the world. My searches go through
DuckDuckGo, with a detour to Startpage whenever things don't work out. Oh, and
Youtube videos. I never stream. I go there, often via proxy, and I download
the thing before watching. For mail, I run all the boring stuff via FastMail,
and some personal correspondance through my own server, running on an old
discarded thin client with a usb stick for storage. It's a good thing I don't
really like the Go language, or I should find myself in a dilemma.

~~~
pastununtrium
No, it wasn’t that boring. Highlights were the email server running on a thin
client with usb stick for storage LOL. Proxyign YouTube manually rather than
vpn seems a little hasslesome though. Interesting setup, thanks!

------
eudora
I'd strongly suggest people create separate users in the browser, one for
daily, one for Google, one for Facebook.

This way in my regular browsing there's no Facebook or Google cookies
reporting on what websites I visit.

It's really easy and doesn't impact at all on workflow, if you want your Gmail
you just click the user button, and click Google. You could even set that
user's homepage to Gmail.

~~~
yellow_postit
Same browser and connection means those multiple accounts most likely share
more than enough of a fingerprint to beprobabilistically joined together.

~~~
eudora
True, I think it's almost impossible to be really anonymous without something
like Tor, and I suspect not even then

But if you want to be signed out of fb and goog in your regular browsing, I
think it's the way to go

That and I hear Firefox has a Facebook container, which is probably the same
approach

------
kentonv
I feel like there's some implied assumption here that this change lets Google
do something evil that they couldn't do before, but I don't really see what.

If you're logged into Google properties (independent of browser), Google can
already track you across most of the internet, via their Ads and Analytics
embedded in a rather large percentage of web sites. If you don't want Google
to track you on non-Google web sites, then you really need to use separate
browser profiles (or separate browsers). Have one profile for Google
properties and a separate one for other things.

Ironically, Chrome has really good multi-profile support. It's easy to have
different Chrome windows running different profiles, each of which has all its
own settings, storage, login state, etc. Give each one a different theme to
make it easy to tell which profile you're using.

Firefox has a concept of profiles but AFAICT you can only run one profile at a
time. :(

~~~
pcwalton
Firefox has containers that allow you to effectively run multiple profiles at
once.

~~~
kentonv
Oh, nice! I failed to discover "containers" when I searched for "firefox
profiles"; maybe someone should add a link from
[https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/profile-manager-
create-...](https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/profile-manager-create-and-
remove-firefox-profiles) and [https://developer.mozilla.org/en-
US/docs/Mozilla/Firefox/Mul...](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-
US/docs/Mozilla/Firefox/Multiple_profiles) ...

------
jamedjo
Chrome lost all my browser history, bookmarks, settings and extensions when I
let someone else log into chrome and log out again. I now try to use Firefox
for non Google services but still use multiple gmail/docs accounts in chrome
for performance.

Even if I hadn't already had a terrible experience with their login feature,
it is a privacy violation. I haven't agreed to have my browser history and
other private data uploaded to an advertising company. The argument that most
users want this is flawed: many would object to giving Google access to this
without permission. Maybe the EU will step in?

------
yakubin
Years ago I sniffed packets sent by Chrome and found that it sent loads of
data to Google servers when it was completely unnecessary for it to serve its
function (as a browser). Haven't used it ever since.

------
etatoby
I've been using Brave on Android for some time. It's great, like a slimmed
down, privacy conscious Chrome.

After this latest folly from Google, I may replace Chromium with Brave on the
desktop too.

------
skybrian
I assume multiple profiles still works? If so, could give Google its own
profile and only use it for Google stuff.

(And while you're at it, do the same for Facebook.)

------
thought_alarm
I don't really understand the outrage at this change. I happily and regularly
use Safari, Chrome, and Firefox simultaneously for different things.

If you don't trust Google, don't use Google services. If you need to sign into
different Google accounts, use a different browser.

Apple makes Safari to sell its Macs and iPhones.

Microsoft makes IE/Edge to sell its Windows licenses.

Google makes Chrome to sell its advertising.

------
fiatjaf
Actually, you don't need to believe that to have incentives to move to
Firefox. Read more about some of Firefox benefits here (besides, obviously,
the ungoogle side of it): [https://fiatjaf.alhur.es/entulho/firefox-vs-
chrome.txt](https://fiatjaf.alhur.es/entulho/firefox-vs-chrome.txt)

------
fencepost
I'm going to need to check whether this behavior is overriding the group
policy we put in for a client to not log into the browser. We previously
hadn't bothered with that until someone almost got fired after signing into
Chrome with their shared family account. Someone else at down at the shared
desk and saw a porn video in the bookmarks.

------
estevaovix
I'm very happy with Vivaldi:

\- It has amazing features like tab stacking;

\- super fast and lightweight;

\- also uses the Blink rendering engine;

\- is compatible with most of Chrome extensions; AND

\- takes privacy seriously.

Give it a try: [https://vivaldi.com](https://vivaldi.com)

------
tannhaeuser
Is it possible to run Chrome in a sandbox on Linux? I no longer trust Google
enough to run with regular permissions. I'm only using Chrome for testing web
apps anyway, and haven't been using it for web surfing for almost three years
now.

~~~
yjftsjthsd-h
Firejail. I actually run Firefox in it as a security measure, but it works for
containing almost anything with a little tuning.

------
EastSmith
Using Brave and DuckDuckGo on Mobile for a long time now.

Converted a friend too and I am anoying some other people to start using it.

------
niutech
You can disable this behavior in chrome://flags/#account-consistency.

------
jwilk
Can someone explain what does "logging into Chrome" mean? (I'm not a Chrome
user.)

~~~
satysin
You can login to the Chrome browser (think profile) using a Google Account.
Doing so allows you to sync bookmarks, settings, passwords, etc. as well as
remain always logged in to Google sites even after deleting all cookies (which
would normally log you out obviously).

------
krmbzds
My only concern is how fast security updates are released.

------
rundell1x
What's the flag that disables this behaviour? Because I would really like to
keep using Chrome.

~~~
clear_dg
chrome://flags/#account-consistency

------
pishpash
Syncing Chrome across devices has long rendered the point moot. If you wanted
syncing you were already logged in to the browser. If you didn't want syncing,
there was no reason to use Chrome.

~~~
giancarlostoro
And yet Firefox has sync too.

~~~
vxNsr
I'm actually kinda upset at firefox, because I wanted to switch, but when I
tried the syncing (from one firefox instance to another) it didn't seem to
work for like 90% of my bookmarks, history, passwords so I kinda gave up.

~~~
pastununtrium
Firefox and Firefox focus come with the anonymous stats tracking enabled. That
kinda pissed me off, but as long as that’s the only thing they are doing to
track, I’ll move back to Firefox over chrome happily.

