[HN Gopher] Show HN: Open source alternative to Perplexity Comet
___________________________________________________________________
Show HN: Open source alternative to Perplexity Comet
Hey HN, we're a YC startup building an open-source, privacy-first
alternative to Perplexity Comet. No invite system unlike bunch of
others - you can download it today from our website or GitHub:
https://github.com/browseros-ai/BrowserOS --- Why bother building
an alternative? We believe browsers will become the new operating
systems, where we offload much bunch of our work to AI agents. But
these agents will have access to all your sensitive data - emails,
docs, on top of your browser history. Open-source, privacy-first
alternatives need to exist. We're not a search or ad company, so
no weird incentives. Your data stays on your machine. _You can use
local LLMs with Ollama_. We also support BYOK (bring your own
keys), so no $200 /month plans. Another big difference vs
Perplexity Comet: our agent runs locally in your browser (not on
their server). You can actually watch it click around and do stuff,
which is pretty cool! Short demo here: https://bit.ly/browserOS-
demo --- How we built? We patch Chromium's C++ source code with
our changes, so we have the same security as Google Chrome. We also
have an auto-updater for security patches and regular updates.
Working with Chromium's 15M lines of C++ has been another fun
adventure that I'm writing a blog post on. Cursor/VSCode breaks at
this scale, so we're back to using grep to find stuff and make
changes. Claude code works surprisingly well too. Building the
binary takes ~3 hours on our M4 Max MacBook. --- Next? We're just
2 people with a lot of work ahead (Firefox started with 3 hackers,
history rhymes!). But we strongly believe that a privacy-first
browser with local LLM support is more important than ever - since
agents will have access to so much sensitive data. Looking forward
to any and all comments!
Author : felarof
Score : 268 points
Date : 2025-07-10 17:33 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.browseros.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.browseros.com)
| rpastuszak wrote:
| Congrats!
|
| How are you planning to make the project sustainable (from a
| financial, and dev work/maintenance pov)?
| patrickaljord wrote:
| my guess is it's just an electron app or chromium wrapper with
| an ollama wrapper to talk to it (there are plenty of free open
| source libs to control browsers).
| janalsncm wrote:
| "Just" is a four-letter word :)
|
| When someone in their infinite wisdom decides to refactor an
| api and deprecate the old one, it creates work for everyone
| downstream.
|
| Maybe as an industry we can agree to do this every so often
| to keep the LLMs at bay for as long as possible. We can take
| a page out of the book of the maintainers of moviepy for
| shuffling their apis around, it definitely keeps everyone on
| their toes.
| moscoe wrote:
| You don't have to guess, it's open source
| felarof wrote:
| We are a chromium "wrapper"
|
| But we are much more performant than other libs (like
| playwright) which are written in JS, as we implement bunch of
| changes at chromium source code level -- for example, we are
| currently implementing a way to build enriched DOMtree
| required for agent interactions (click, input text, find
| element) directly at C++ level.
|
| We also plan to expose those APIs to devs.
| lotyrin wrote:
| No wireless. Less space than a Nomad.
| felarof wrote:
| Thank you!
|
| plan is to sell licenses for Enterprise-version of browser,
| same as other open-source projects.
| eGQjxkKF6fif wrote:
| Whats the roadmap looking like for Linux?
|
| I don't have Mac or Windows.
| felarof wrote:
| this is on our radar, we plan to have it ready by early next
| week!
|
| still a team of 2 people, so bunch things on our plate.
| layer8 wrote:
| I would prefer this as a browser extension, not as its own
| browser application.
| felarof wrote:
| We would've preferred to build this as browser extension too.
|
| But we strongly believe that for building a good agent co-pilot
| we need bunch of changes at Chromium C++ code level. For
| example, chromium has a accessibility tree for every website,
| but doesn't expose it as an API to chrome extension. Having
| access to accessibility tree would greatly improve agent
| execution.
|
| We are also building bunch of changes in C++ for agents to
| interact with websites -- functions like click, elements with
| indexes. You can inject JS for doing this but it is 20-40X
| slower.
| esafak wrote:
| Could you upstream that change in order to make it an
| extension in the future? I think people would not value it
| any less.
| felarof wrote:
| We don't mind upstreaming. But I don't think Google
| Chrome/Chromium wants to expose it as an API chrome
| extensions, if not they would've done this long time ago.
|
| From Google's perspective, extension are meant to be
| lightweight applications, with restricted access.
| jazzyjackson wrote:
| I'm not really interested in AI agents for my webbrowser,
| but it would be pretty cool to see a fork of chromium
| available that, aside from being de-googled, relaxes all
| the "restricted access" to make it more fun to modify and
| customize the way you guys are. Just a thought, may be
| more of a market for the framework more than the product
| :)
|
| See Sciter. A very cool, super lightweight alternative to
| Electron, but unfortunately it seems like a single
| developer project and I could never get any of the
| examples to run.
|
| https://sciter.com/
| felarof wrote:
| Yes, we want to do this too! We'll expose much more
| richer APIs.
|
| What use-cases do you have in mind? like scraping?
| Imustaskforhelp wrote:
| I always wonder about what sort of js engine such
| projects use since at the end of the day imo, it is all
| just a dance b/w js engine, html and css. Html & Css
| feels a little solved problem but the problem is of the
| js engine.
|
| Sciter uses quickjs and I just checked and its like
| 35-36x times slower than V8 JIT
|
| Also another interesting rabbit hole is that I found
| Duktape in the quickjs benchmarks and I saw
| https://blogcpp.org/ as one of the projects within
| Duktape but I can't even see the project on github. We
| really need some better way of preserving open source
| stuff I guess
| nicoburns wrote:
| I'm making a new sciter-style webview
| https://github.com/DioxusLabs/blitz
| layer8 wrote:
| Would this be possible for Firefox?
| felarof wrote:
| IIRC, Firefox's web extension API does not provide access
| to accessibility tree as well.
| dotancohen wrote:
| I'm not GP, but I agree that if your goal is to empower
| the end user and protect him from corporate overlords,
| then Firefox is a more logical choice to fork from.
| axus wrote:
| I wonder if someone on the Chromium team will upstream
| all these BrowserOS changes, or "Not Invented Here" and
| re-implement it all for Gemini / Google Assistant.
|
| Can't imagine Firefox acquiring a Firefox fork!
| dotancohen wrote:
| The hooks needed for integration will probably be
| implemented in Chrome, not Chromium. Nobody else should
| have them.
| esperent wrote:
| Isn't the Firefox code notoriously hard to fork and work
| with? I'm sure that nearly all of these Chrome forks
| would prefer to fork Firefox, but there's a reason they
| don't.
| layer8 wrote:
| The reason they usually don't is for better compatibility
| with more web pages.
| arjunchint wrote:
| I mean you could build the agent with a first principles
| understanding of the DOM instead of just hacking together
| with the accessibility tree
| tunnelfx wrote:
| How is that accessibility tree different from the
| "accessibility snapshot" that you can get from Playwright for
| example?
|
| I was tackling a similar problem few weeks ago and I found
| that playwright MCP was the most usable solution in my case.
| It doesn't use an extension but it debugs the browser tabs (I
| guess using dev tools protocol) but I agree the experience
| was suboptimal
| arjunchint wrote:
| We had this exact thought as well, you don't need a whole
| browser to implement the agentic capabilities, you can
| implement the whole thing with the limited permissions of a
| browser extension.
|
| There are plenty of zero day exploit patches that Google
| immediately rolls out and not to mention all the other features
| that Google doesn't push to Chromium. I wouldn't trust a random
| open source project for my day-to-day browser.
|
| Check out rtrvr.ai for a working implementation, we are an AI
| Web Agent browser extension that meets you where your workflows
| already are.
| felarof wrote:
| Brave Browser (70M+ users) has validated that a chromium fork
| can be viable path. And it can in fact provide better privacy
| and security.
|
| Chrome extensions is not a bad idea too. Just saying that
| owning the underlying source code has some strong advantages
| in the long term (being able to use C++ for a11y tree, DOM
| handling, etc -- which will be 20-40X faster than injecting
| JS using chrome extension).
| arjunchint wrote:
| Honestly excited to see the benchmark result and
| comparison!
|
| Our benchmark results [https://www.rtrvr.ai/blog/web-bench-
| results] show that we are 7x faster than browser-use so
| curious to see if your claims live up to the hype
| esperent wrote:
| > I wouldn't trust a random open source project for my day-
| to-day browser.
|
| Given that you're working on a direct competitor, this
| comment reads as fearmongering, designed to drive people over
| to your product.
| arjunchint wrote:
| I personally talked to another agentic browser player,
| fellou.ai, in the space asking them how they are keeping up
| with all the Chromium pushes as you need a dedicated team
| to handle the merges, they flat out told me they are
| targeting tech enthusiasts that are not interested in the
| security of their browser as much.
|
| As an ex-Google engineer I know the immense engineering
| efforts and infrastructure setup to develop Chrome. It is
| very implausible that two people can handle all the effort
| to serve a secure browser with 15+ million lines of
| constantly changing C++ code.
|
| A sandboxxed browser extension is the natural form factor
| for these agentic capabilities.
| felarof wrote:
| Also, ex-Google engineer here :) Rtrvr looks like great
| product too!
|
| Definitely understand that keeping up with security
| patches is important. And this is an engineering
| challenge and not implausible to do -- Perplexity is
| 1/1000th the size of Google and they could be build a
| better product. So, "you can just do things".
|
| We are still on day 1 of launch. We will only get better
| from here. And we won't be 2 people forever. We plan to
| hire, expand team and take on the engineering challenges.
| Imustaskforhelp wrote:
| Conflict of interests at its heart.
|
| I mean, I have no skin in the game but I mean, there are
| people who are using Dia (browser company) and Dia is
| closed source so it would be nice to see those people
| jumping to browser OS atleast.
|
| I personally would prefer it as an extension but there are
| some limitations as the author of browserOS noted within
| extensions but I just wish that google/chromium can push
| those changes upstream I guess.
| felarof wrote:
| Thank you for your support! Yes, we want to do some cool
| things that we can't do as extension.
|
| C++ APIs for dom tree, a11y. We eventually want to ship a
| small fine-tuned LLM and package with browser binary too.
|
| Just getting started!
| casslin wrote:
| try https://github.com/nanobrowser/nanobrowser
| Imustaskforhelp wrote:
| Exactly my thoughts when I saw nanobrowser being mentioned
| here.
| daureg wrote:
| > our agent runs locally in your browser (not on their server)
|
| That's definitely a nice feature. Did you measure the impact on
| laptop battery life in a typical scenario (assuming there is such
| a scenario at this early stage)
| felarof wrote:
| The agent running by itself shouldn't impact battery life, it
| is similar to a lightweight chrome extension and if you think
| about it, it's an agent browsing the web like human would :)
|
| If you run LLMs locally (using Ollama) and use that in our
| browser, that would impact battery life for sure.
| zebomon wrote:
| This is very exciting given the rumor that OpenAI will be
| launching a (presumably not open source) browser of their own
| this summer. I've joined your Discord, so will try it soon and
| report back there. Congrats on launching!
| felarof wrote:
| Thank you!
|
| Browser wars have begun.
|
| > that OpenAI will be launching a (presumably not open source)
| browser of their own this summer.
|
| For sure, won't be open-source. I bet in some parallel world,
| openAI would be non-profit and actually open-source AI :)
| mrweasel wrote:
| > Browser wars have begun.
|
| Kind of a sad browser war. The majority of these Chromium
| forks should exist, nor are they particularly viable.
| Sniffing out which one is going to be successful is obviously
| the hard problem.
|
| Ideally we'd get an extensions API for AI agents and various
| companies could just release their own plugins. Sadly I don't
| think the majority is interested, they want to control the
| "experience".
| closetkantian wrote:
| This looks like a great project.
|
| What are the system requirements? And shouldn't they be listed on
| your website?
| felarof wrote:
| we support Mac (apple silicon and intel) and Windows.
|
| hardware requirements are minimal, same as Google Chrome, if
| you BYOK API keys for agents and are not running LLMs locally.
| paul7986 wrote:
| So would this or any AI browser go out and fetch a list of the
| best deals for my trip to Iceland? After Show me all the options
| it has found for flights, hotels, car rentals and show
| cheapest/best prices with all details (fly out of and into with
| times) to even allow me to pay for each item on same page I asked
| it to do so? As well it could group the overall best deal with
| details and then i can just click to pay instantly and or make
| some edits.
| felarof wrote:
| We just started cooking, very soon you should be able to do
| this!
| dotancohen wrote:
| It seems that the next evolution of SEO will be too skip the SE
| and simply O for the LLMs.
| flymasterv wrote:
| Orbitz.com has done this for 20 years.
| paul7986 wrote:
| I can ask Orbitz with one question without going to Orbitz to
| say create me a full itinerary with the best prices for my
| Iceland trip?
|
| That's advantage of LLMs you dont have to go to the websites
| and soon you can just talk to your LLM like chatGPT or an
| advanced Siri to do this and boom it does all the research
| and shows you the top deals for you to purchase with a click
| (after you reviewed the prefered one and or talk to the LLM
| who makes the updates/edits you need before u do one click
| purchase).
|
| If I was Orbitz I would be begging to work with Open AI /
| chatGPT (use Orbitz API) before Open AI does it themselves.
| Website visitation is and going to be dropping precipitiously
| along with the field of web design and development. That's my
| own field but it's so clear to me as technological evolutions
| that get adopted are the ones that reduce steps and make
| things easier to more magical.
| ivape wrote:
| What is the default BrowserOS model? Is it local, and if so, what
| inferencing server are you using?
| felarof wrote:
| The default model is Gemini.
|
| You can bring your own API keys and change the default to any
| model you local.
|
| Or better run model locally using Ollama and use that!
| ivape wrote:
| The default is a remote Gemini call?
| felarof wrote:
| Yes, right now using Gemini API on our liteLLM server (we
| can't expose API key on client side).
|
| We are working on smaller, fine-tuned model too, which will
| be the default soon! It should be much faster and precise
| at navigation tasks.
| o_____________o wrote:
| Would love to see this show up on homebrew!
| felarof wrote:
| Oooh, that's a nice idea! We'll look into doing that!
| mh- wrote:
| Making a homebrew recipe is super easy, and you can
| definitely find an example to draw from that's "shaped" like
| your app. Highly recommend.
| mdaniel wrote:
| > --- How we built? We patch Chromium's C++ source code with our
| changes, so we have the same security as Google Chrome. We also
| have an auto-updater for security patches and regular updates.
|
| So you rebuild your browser on every Chromium release? Because
| that's the risk: often changes go into Chromium with very
| innocent looking commit messages than are released from embargo
| 90 days later in their CVE reference
| felarof wrote:
| Good question, so far we have been building on top of chromium
| release that Google Chrome is based on.
| mdaniel wrote:
| I feel as though you overlooked the "every" word in my
| question. I appreciate you built once, that's a solid
| accomplishment. If I'm going to be riding your custom build,
| with your _custom_ C++ changes that introduce their own RCE
| risk, I want to at least know I 'm only vulnerable to _your_
| RCE and not your RCE plus the 'just disclosed' RCE for
| Chromium itself that was actually patched 3 weeks ago but
| that you didn't bother to track because you don't track
| Chromium release tags
|
| Yes, I'm acutely aware of exactly how much compute pulling
| off such a stunt requires; what I'm wondering is whether
| _you_ are aware of exactly how much RCE risk you 're running
| by squatting on someone else's C++ codebase that ships what
| feels like a vuln-a-week from one of the best funded security
| research teams in the world
| paulirish wrote:
| You build from the release branches yeah? So, right now
| that'd be the 7204 branch.
| https://chromiumdash.appspot.com/releases?platform=Mac
| arjunchint wrote:
| Do you have any benchmarks to share like Halluminate's Web Bench?
| felarof wrote:
| We working on it! Should have pretty soon!
| darkmuck wrote:
| This is similar to the chrome extension nanobrowser.
| https://github.com/nanobrowser/nanobrowser
| casslin wrote:
| thanks for the mention!
| Imustaskforhelp wrote:
| Hm just saw this.
|
| I think if something can be done as an extension then there is
| no need to do it as a fork of the existing software.
|
| Are there any differences b/w nanobrowser and brwoserOS? like
| some functionalities that only browserOS could do and not
| nanobrowser which are worth mentioning?
| DANmode wrote:
| Is BrowserOS-OS on the roadmap?
|
| (Will you ever make a better FydeOS, or if you're laser-focused,
| perhaps be open to sharing some with them, so they could?)
| felarof wrote:
| Yes! We are excited to build BrowserOS-OS! I think with agents
| the whole UX can be re-imagined.
|
| I'll check out FydeOS!
| azinman2 wrote:
| The demo buying toothpaste shows the difficulty of these tasks.
| Toothpaste itself was very underspecified, and it essentially
| randomly chose from a huge list. Some tasks may have past actions
| that could help guide, others won't have any to inform. Failure
| cases abound -- maybe the toothpaste you previously bought is no
| longer available. Then what? Ultimately how much time did this
| particular example save since you need to double check the result
| anyway? This is what doomed Alexa for the purchasing experience
| that Amazon assumed it would enable in the first place.
|
| I think it'd be better to show more non-trivial examples where
| the time savings is clear, and the failure cases are minimized...
| or even better how it's going to recover from those failure
| cases. Do I get a bespoke UI for the specific problem? Talk to it
| via chat?
|
| This whole world is non-trivial. Good luck!
| felarof wrote:
| Great points! For sure, the whole agentic browsers space is
| still super early.
|
| We are also just getting started and trying to narrow down on a
| high-value niche use-case.
|
| There are few repetitive, boring use-cases where time saving
| could be meaningful -- one example: Walmart 3rd-party sellers
| routinely (multiple times a day) keep checking prices of the
| competitor products to price their products appropriately. This
| could be easily automated with current agentic browsers.
| byteknight wrote:
| But in reality, would much more consistently be automated by
| a single playwright script.
| felarof wrote:
| True, there are plenty of libs already available to do such
| an automation if you are (or can hire a) dev.
|
| But for non-technical folks, agentic browsers seems like a
| good UX to build such and many more automations.
| bkyan wrote:
| Is there a way to hook BrowserOS up as a sub-agent for an
| orchestration agent/system?
| felarof wrote:
| Yes! We want to do this.
|
| We were thinking of implement MCP protocol into the browser, so
| the browser can be an MCP server (that exposes bunch of tools
| -- navigation, click, extract) and you can connect that to your
| agent, would that work?
|
| What is your use-case? Happy to chat on discord!
| https://discord.gg/YKwjt5vuKr
| bkyan wrote:
| Yes, that works for me! My primary use case is automated
| testing of updates to websites that I maintain.
| bkyan wrote:
| Thanks for the discord invite! My username is Mindcast on
| discord.
| felarof wrote:
| thanks for joining! DMed you.
| 5xpB7n8tdbtoP wrote:
| The windows .zip shared on your github release page gets flagged
| as a Trojan by windows defender. Why is it a zip in the first
| place?
| felarof wrote:
| It is just a warning. We working on getting Microsft Windows
| signing set up.
| thegeek108 wrote:
| The name is confused. I think it is a web-based OS in the first
| place.
| felarof wrote:
| Hmm, what do you mean? Could you elaborate? Thanks!
| thegeek108 wrote:
| I mean the name "BrowserOS" made me think it is an Operating
| System. Congrats to your achieved.
| msephton wrote:
| How does the competition do with the same demo tasks?
| rvz wrote:
| > But we strongly believe that a privacy-first browser with local
| LLM support is more important than ever - since agents will have
| access to so much sensitive data.
|
| How does this make money? Surely this will have a cloud offering?
|
| But if it doesn't make money, I can only assume that the team
| will be acqui-hired to answer that question.
| felarof wrote:
| > How does this make money? Surely this will have a cloud
| offering?
|
| Our plan is to make the consumer version of the browser for
| free and sell licenses for enterprise version.
|
| This is similar to how many open-source projects sustain
| development.
|
| And enterprise browsers are picking up -- Island browser, Talon
| browser.
| rvz wrote:
| > Our plan is to make the consumer version of the browser for
| free and sell licenses for enterprise version.
|
| Makes sense and the software license chosen (AGPL-3.0) also
| makes sense as well.
|
| Sounds like a clear path to monetization and much better than
| some of the VC backed browser-first companies out there.
|
| Good luck.
| felarof wrote:
| Thank you!
| tzury wrote:
| This is not Open source _alternative_ to Perplexity Comet
|
| This is the real thing, the original if you will.
|
| As for Perplexity, to me this company and line of product are
| seemed as the alternative to anything great in AI.
| felarof wrote:
| Haha, thank you!
|
| As a small startup we cannot outspend Perplexity Comet in
| marketing, so we just said open-source alternative so that
| people get what we are building.
| dxroshan wrote:
| What a joke project! Chromium has a over 35 million lines of
| code. These people applied a few patches on it, and then
| advertising it as if they have developed a new browser. The same
| goes for Comet also.
|
| From their GitHub readme:
|
| > but Chrome hasn't evolved much in 10 years
|
| Really?? It is not true. You guys please go and check release
| notes and commits log for Chrome/Chromium project for the past 10
| years.
| Ey7NFZ3P0nzAe wrote:
| Maybe they're only refering to the frontend/UX. It's true that
| in 10 years it has not changed much compared to the diff with
| browserOS.
| dxroshan wrote:
| First of all, they didn't say they are referring to the UI.
|
| The main element in a web browser's UI is the web view where
| web pages get rendered. It may look the same 'rectangle' as
| it used to look 10 years ago. But the way chrome renders web
| pages and execute JavaScript have undergone a lot of changes
| over the years. Also they have added a lot of new standard
| and nonstandard HTML, CSS and JavaScript features. Then,
| there is WebGL 2.0, WebAssembly, WebGPU, etc.
| nsonha wrote:
| > joke project
|
| Is Chrome an agentic browser at 35 million lines of code?
| That's what this project does. Whether they're successful at
| that or not is another story.
| matheist wrote:
| _> We are also building an LLM-based ad-blocker after Chrome
| blocked uBlock Origin._
|
| Since it's a Chromium fork, why not re-enable uBlock Origin
| instead?
| Daedren wrote:
| Chromium will remove the Manifest V2 APIs, and none of these
| forks want to maintain them. Brave also chose to have their own
| built-in adblocker.
|
| The real question is, why not opt to fork Firefox who is doing
| that work for them.
| felarof wrote:
| +1, enabling uBlock origin could be a short term solution.
|
| But we are working on adding built-in adblockers just like
| Brave + enhancing it to detect more ad formats using
| lightweight local LLM.
| askl wrote:
| The demo looks like a mediocre solution looking for a problem. I
| can order toothpaste without an LLM faster and more reliably.
| whatevsmate wrote:
| I want to see the mouse cursor moving and clicking, and keys
| typed by the AI appearing onscreen in realtime like you see in
| software product tutorials.
|
| The jumpiness of pages switching and things changing when an AI
| is driving is extremely disorienting. I find it hard to follow a
| thread of continuity in the page flashes and ui changes as the
| bot acts.
|
| Right now it's like watching a screen recording with no hint as
| to what I'm "supposed" to be focusing on.
|
| Regardless - I have use cases for this in the mcp/browser
| automation vein another user mentioned so super interested to see
| where this goes.
| cobalt60 wrote:
| Want you really want is a caretaker ai
| whatevsmate wrote:
| I'm unclear what it is you're describing. I'm describing UI
| affordances.
| felarof wrote:
| This is very useful feedback, thank you!
|
| We will look into add a cursor movements; key typing should
| already appear like a human would (but probably we can slow it
| down a bit).
| anupj wrote:
| Love the direction here. Local-first, open-source agentic
| browsers feel inevitable as AI gets more deeply embedded in our
| workflows. Watching the agent actually click around (vs. black-
| box cloud APIs) is both reassuring and fun. Curious how you're
| handling Chromium's relentless update pace with such a small team
| -- Does patching ever break in unexpected ways? Rooting for you;
| privacy-centric infra like this is long overdue.
| felarof wrote:
| Thank you for the support!
|
| So far our patches have not conflicted with chromium updates.
| But there are viable ways to do patching and keep up with the
| pace (Brave Browser has pretty example infra setup to do this).
| MasterYoda wrote:
| If this is a privacy first browser, why wasn't Firefox used when
| it is much better out of the box for this approach? All security
| and privacy focused webbrowser use Firefox. Like Tor Browser,
| Mullvad Browser, LibreWolf etc.
|
| Also, I think it is super important we have different "webbrowser
| engines" and that are independent from big tech companies. If we
| only have chromium it would be really bad and hurt use consumer
| really bad and also stop inovation.
|
| We really need to support independentCbrowsers like Firefox more.
| lelanthran wrote:
| I had exactly the same question.
|
| You're privacy focused but use chrome as the engine?
| felarof wrote:
| This was definitely a hard choice.
|
| We spoke to folks who had built browser on top of webkit and
| they spent nearly 2years just fixing random bugs and getting
| sites to work. I'm sure firefox/gecko engine would probably
| work better than webkit, but the point still is: if we don't
| use chromium, a lot of work does have go into fixing website
| compatibility issues, adding support for extension. We're 2
| person startup and chromium codebase was easier to build on top
| of and provides a solid baseline.
|
| And Brave has shown that you can build a privacy-focused
| browser on top of chromium still.
|
| In the agentic browser era, I think there are so many low
| hanging fruits on privacy which are more important to address
| -- sending all your sensitive data to Perplexity Comet to sell
| ads is a pretty bad option right now. Supporting local LLM,
| letting folks bring their own API keys is crucial.
| jerrygenser wrote:
| What is your future revenue model?
| felarof wrote:
| Sell licenses for enterprise browser
| anto_pp wrote:
| nice one! post it to https://peerpush.net/ so more people can see
| it and try it
| dockercompost wrote:
| I didn't realize you all had changed your name and I'd already
| installed Nxtscape and thought something was wrong when I opened
| up BrowserOS and saw the same UI and fox emoji icon in the chat.
| btw I'm not gonna lie, I liked your old name better. I'm guessing
| you changed it for legal reasons?
|
| I tested it out asking it to summarize the comments of an
| Arstechnica article and at first it said:
|
| > I am unable to summarize the comments as the provided page
| content only contains the article itself, not the comments
| section. The extract tool does not appear to be able to access
| the comments on this page.
|
| I had to tell it to click on the "comments" link for it to
| actually start going through the comments. For reference, there's
| 3 pages of comments and it's taken more than 20 minutes and
| performed around 100 actions, with lots of those actions being
| scrolling down a very specific 1074 pixels. I am currently
| sitting here still waiting for the actual summary while it says
| "Validating task completion..."
|
| Seems like it could be powerful, but the hand holding required
| and extremely slow speed make it unusable for me at this point.
|
| Since I had Nxtscape installed, I tried the same experiment and
| it successfully did it in less time with fewer actions. Not sure
| if that's just random chance or if there's different logic
| running under the hood.
|
| One final note: There's a Chrome extension that lets you use your
| iCloud passwords in Chrome and it doesn't work in either Nxtscape
| or BrowserOS. I'm not likely to use a browser that requires
| regularly having to go into my password manager to manually
| retrieve usernames and passwords, and I'm not changing my
| password manager for this.
| felarof wrote:
| Yeah, decided to change the name to avoid any troubles. Also,
| previous name was hard to pronounce :)
|
| Thank you for the feedback. Would love to chat more on discord
| (https://discord.gg/YKwjt5vuKr) and help you with your use-
| cases! we are shipping daily and improving things fast, agent
| should get much better in a few days.
|
| > There's a Chrome extension that lets you use your iCloud
| passwords in Chrome and it doesn't work
|
| Will check it out! We definitely want to make onboarding and
| password mgmt much easier!
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-07-11 23:01 UTC)