This is a question that for some is easy to answer and for others may not be as easy to answer. So all input could help other people find and make a more knowledgeable choice and one that helps them towards their privacy goals.

    • TranquilTurbulence@lemmy.zipEnglish
      0·
      3 days ago

      On Chrome, UBO relies heavily a particular feature that is no longer available in the latest version. Google didn’t manage to get rid of UBO completely, because UBO lite was developed in response.

      Regardless, you can still run full UBO in a desktop Firefox. That didn’t change at all when Google started messing around with Manifest V3. Since UBOL exists now, the devs probably thought it might be light enough to run on iOS too.

        • chaos@beehaw.org
          0·
          2 days ago

          Safari on iOS has always had some pretty strict limits on what extensions can do. For example, content blockers don’t get to run code on the pages you browse, it’s more like they give the browser a list of what type of thing to block when you install and configure it, then when you’re browsing, the extension isn’t even doing anything, it’s just the browser using the list. Obviously that’s more limiting, there might be ads that are best dealt with by running a bit of code, so it makes sense that they’d consider it “lite”. (The benefit of those limits is that ad blocking extensions can’t run amok and kill your phone’s battery since the browser’s handling it by itself.)

        • porcupine@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
          0·
          3 days ago

          It’s not named a certain way just based on the browser it’s on, it’s named to reflect the features it has. The “lite” version isn’t as flexible because it was built to work on browsers that restrict the features of the full version. Given how restrictive mobile browsers are generally, on iOS in particular, I’m surprised the developer even got the lite version working.