this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2021
29 points (100.0% liked)
Open Source
32782 readers
573 users here now
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Useful Links
- Open Source Initiative
- Free Software Foundation
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Software Freedom Conservancy
- It's FOSS
- Android FOSS Apps Megathread
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yeah, Vivaldi is another one where I've been misled to think that it's open-source.
I don't believe it was ever officially communicated as such, but people have been claiming that it was open-source, presumably because open-source==good and they were fanboying for it.
I've made it a habit when I find a new open-source project to check whether it even links a code repo and what license it has.
Vivaldi is propietary with the exception of old released whose source code is released as a permissive FLOSS license, but only old versions.
Bit of a sidenote, but Vivaldi is just another Chromium browser. If I had to use Chromium, I'd rather use the Ungoogled fork, even if it's not perfect at removing everything Google because they've made themselves so damn pervasive in the codebase.
Ah ok, I think back then it was something weird, like most of the code being open-source (the Chromium portion), then the Vivaldi-specific code was source-available, except for the assets, but you could get a hold of those assets by extracting them from the official build.
Thinking about it, I guess some may have actually thought that open-source == source-available, but I also distinctly remember someone delivering the explanation above to argue that it's technically open-source, because you could compile it yourself, if you really wanted to.
...which is not at all the definition of open-source, but yeah, you linked it above, I don't need to go into that.
I have to fix something in which I was wrong, even older releases, they only free the changes made to the Chromium codebase but maintaining a part of their own code, for the interface, as review-only license. Source: https://help.vivaldi.com/desktop/privacy/is-vivaldi-open-source/
The concept of review-only is something I have seen mostly promoted as open source when it is not.
Ah, thanks for posting that. I guess that horrible bullshit it's-still-practically-open-source excuse actually came from their own website.
Yes, what they wrote there is technically correct and technically they did not claim that they were open-source. But they also wrote it in the most confusing, most misleading way possible. That whole response should've began with "No, it's not open-source".
Yes I was really into Vivaldi for the vertical tabs and ditched them after I heard their pathetic reason for not being open source, yet building on top of open source.
You are aware that you can get vertical tabs in Firefox, too, right?
Tree-Style Tabs is the most popular extension for that: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/tree-style-tab/
Tab Center Reborn is also neat (no tree-structure, but thumbnails): https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/tabcenter-reborn/
I had to abandoned Firefox due to a really horrific response issue (despite clearing caches etc) - I have about 20 tabs open per browser and it was slowing really badly obviously due to one or two of those tabs chewing up resources. But yes I certainly used its vertical tabs along with Vivaldi (until I discovered Vivaldi's abuse of open source).