Brave has become my go to browser for Android, Mac, Windows, Ubuntu, etc. and keep my device synced.
Now I can’t leave my TV behind in this
I tried side loading on my Google TV but it didn’t worked as expected since the UI is not designed for TV and remote.
I am requesting for a basic port of Brave browser for Google TV would be great.
Saoiray
November 3, 2025, 12:50am
3
@sharukh.brav3 this is something they have long talked about and has been requested, but it’s been thought of as too much work overall. They still have a fairly small team working on it all and aren’t even keeping up with all they’d like to do with existing versions. Adding yet another for TV devices just isn’t viable, at least not yet.
I’m not sure the ETA for when/if they’ll get it done. But I think it was described before as just one of of those very low priority things that maybe they’ll work on when/if there’s spare time for it.
Thanks for the replies.
I have sideload the Brave apk arm7a.
It’s working as expected.
Few hiccups but it worth.
With Bluetooth mouse makes it usable.
1 Like
@sharukh.brav3 just a small follow-up. I decided to look at Github for a relevant issue. I see the one below
opened 12:42PM - 26 Feb 23 UTC
suggestion
priority/P5
OS/Android
OS/Desktop
## Description
Not only brave but the entire open source community has a numbe… r of problems with services like YouTube.
1. Ads. There are a number of way to blocks add on YouTube and brave is one of the better solution. However it is never going to always be flawless as YouTube keep changing and ad blockers has to adapt.
2. Heavy CPU usage. Content protection that no one really need uses up unnecessary CPU time and so does software codecs that often run instead of the hardware codecs that most devices are shipped with. And of course generally crappy code in everything from web interfaces to parsing a large amount of proprietary json code.
3. Lag/caching. The proprietary nature of such makes it so that either you have a good live connection to a proprietary server or you do not see the content. If 10 people in your household are watching the same video then there are 10 incoming streams with the very same data. If a million ISP users are watching the same video, the ISP are pulling a million streams from outside proprietary servers. While CDN:s somewhat mitigates this, it is a huge anti-pattern.
4. Offline storage and device usage. If you want to listen to the audio from proprietary video server on your mp3 player then good luck with that. Sure you can download it with youtube-dl and manually convert it if you so it on a day when the most updated version of ytdl actually works.
5. Platform support. There are many devices that can technically be IPTV clients such as the Raspberry Pi and even more low end devices. However without having proper client software for the specific hardware platform many devices are unable to access video services.
6. There are many other problems related to how these services are designed and implemented but they are generally side effects of the problems above.
There already are a few half-working solution to these problem. Brave can ad-block. There are various addons for chrome that changes the behavior of browsers. Also ytdl and other applications can download content that can then be played in a video player that runs well on the users platform. There are even NewPipe which is a decent replacement for the YouTube Android app.
During quite some time web browsers struggled hard to be compatible with Internet Explorer and every single one failed at this. No matter what they did they could never keep up with the proprietary variant of html and javascript that IE rendered. The solution were to make a clean break and completely ignore what was then 99% of the internet. The Firefox team created a completely new browser based only on open standards and it worked very well as they could spend their time on other things than IE compatibility. At first very few websites could be viewed with this new browser. Pretty much all open source projects that created HTML such as doxygen and javadoc immediately aligned with this new browser and step by step the internet converted to using these open standards. This is the solution to the problem of trying to adapt to ever changing proprietary internet protocols.
The core problem with is non-standard proprietary protocols for TV/Video being sent over the internet, further encumbered with useless content protection is quite simple. We create new open standards as well as clean non-proprietary software that follows our new open standards and invite users to come over.
These open standard can be directly implemented by web browsers instead of having to run a JavaScript client. This open standard begins with defining that no content protection is allowed and that the creation of custom clients must always be possible to maximize user experience and enable adaptation to hardware acceleration. Other features that must be supported is to be cache-friendly and also that the ability to download and store videos locally is mandatory. Content providers that are not happy with this can continue using other proprietary solutions.
With this implementation on clients can focus on other features than constantly reverse engineering and implementing new proprietary protocols. Both desktop and mobile clients can be created using efficient native code (or just written in python) and run as stand alone apps or become integrated in browsers. For maximum efficiency a binary format like hdf5 is suggested for data interchange. Compared to JSON (used by YouTube) this takes less storage space, lass bandwidth and less CPU time when extracting data from the file. There are libraries supporting hdf5 in C, Python, dotnet, Java, JavaScript and many other languages so it is rather "plug and play".
In a scenario where brave supports such a protocol this means that nothing from chromium WebEngine will have to be involved in rendering the content. There will be no html or javascript as part of the standard. However it will naturally be possible to write a client that act as a web server and includes html/javascript players. This may very well be what many users prefer to use. But the point being that this is an option, not something that is mandatory. I suspect that for many users a client that can run on a HTPC device is going to be well used, with support for using a remote control.
Will services like YouTube and Netflix switch to use such open standards? I don't know. But I know that I do need neither Flash Player nor Internet Explorer to view their website. I can view it in Firefox, Chrome and Brave using W3C-compliant HTML and JavaScript.
It was made in 2023 and no visible movement on it at all since then. But Brian Clifton, the VP of Engineering at Brave, did actually reference the Github back in June. So it’s to show they are aware of it and it’s not completely gone from sight or mind.
But it is still labeled as a P5, which is: Not scheduled. Don't anticipate work on this any time soon. So it’s kind of like I said, just one of those things where it would have to be more of a side project by a dev, something happens to make it easier for them, or something of the sort.
I pretty much gave up on it happening officially. Sideloading can work, as you mentioned, but not been flawless since it’s not built specifically for it. Hopefully works well for you as you try.
