Both are good.
Librewolf is more like vanilla Firefox, just configured way better by default.
Mullvad Browser is like a port of the Tor Browser (also based on Firefox) for the clear web (or for use with Mullvad’s VPN, or whatever). Also configured very well by default.
Mullvad Browser has better anti fingerprinting stuff built-in but as a result of its unusual configuration some sites might be broken.
Librewolf is kind of the opposite in that regard - sites won’t be broken but you’ll be easier to fingerprint.
In any case, they both are at the top of the best Firefox variants I’d say.
The “opposite” was just referring to those 2 aspects - Mullvad has stronger anti-fingerprinting which leads to more breakage. Librewolf has that aspect reversed. Of course, both browsers are similar overall. That’s just one detail where they prioritize differently.
I think “reversed” and “opposite” makes no sense here.
Librewolf copies the Torbrowser or Arkenfox patches, maybe adding their own ones, maybe not. Arkenfox is a 1:1 copy of Torbrowser to my knowledge, without using private browsing.
As you dont have Cookie Containers, the “being more private” or “anti fingerprinting” is a very vague statement. If you use your browser for a single website then yes maybe.
Both are good. Librewolf is more like vanilla Firefox, just configured way better by default. Mullvad Browser is like a port of the Tor Browser (also based on Firefox) for the clear web (or for use with Mullvad’s VPN, or whatever). Also configured very well by default. Mullvad Browser has better anti fingerprinting stuff built-in but as a result of its unusual configuration some sites might be broken. Librewolf is kind of the opposite in that regard - sites won’t be broken but you’ll be easier to fingerprint. In any case, they both are at the top of the best Firefox variants I’d say.
Librewolf and Torbrowser both include hardening and privacy optimizations.
Kind of separately, but Librewolf, Mull (Android) often take the configs of Torbrowser.
So calling them opposite makes no sense. They may just leave out some settings.
The “opposite” was just referring to those 2 aspects - Mullvad has stronger anti-fingerprinting which leads to more breakage. Librewolf has that aspect reversed. Of course, both browsers are similar overall. That’s just one detail where they prioritize differently.
I think “reversed” and “opposite” makes no sense here.
Librewolf copies the Torbrowser or Arkenfox patches, maybe adding their own ones, maybe not. Arkenfox is a 1:1 copy of Torbrowser to my knowledge, without using private browsing.
As you dont have Cookie Containers, the “being more private” or “anti fingerprinting” is a very vague statement. If you use your browser for a single website then yes maybe.
Yeah, they’re like 80% the same idea at the very least
TYSM for this info!