Brave is based on Chrome and, for privacy reasons, the user agent is identical to Chrome so it's basically just a vote for Chrome.

> Are chrome "dialects" like brave enough to foster innovation?

Edge probably the others less likely.

All those "dialects" including Microsoft's Edge and Apple's Safari use the same Chrome's rendering engine underneath called "Blink", so no.

Only Firefox has a different engine (Gecko), so it qualifies.

Safari uses WebKit and Nitro, Blink is a fork of WebKit and there has been a fair amount of divergence.

Also, V8 isn't even a fork of Nitro/JavaScriptCore, it was made from scratch.

There is no reason why diversity in the market should depend on diversity in engines, other than this is frequently used by engineers as an argument.

Engines are about as relevant to diversity in the browser market as semiconductors are to diversity in the phone market. It's irrelevant for the end user experience, and arguably a waste of resources and time.

Browsers which can't compete on actual features and services that matter to users and instead try to distiniguish themselves through technical implementation details will probably die out, as the marketshare of Firefox shows.

The problem is that it's bad for standards. We're currently in a situation where standards are basically completely irrelevant, and the only thing anyone cares about is support in Blink. This is basically where we were with IE6 a few years ago.

These days the engine authors push through features as standards, not a committee specifying features on paper that are then implemented by engine authors. So yes, more than one engine would mean the "living standard" is not specified by a single engine, whose quirks then become "standard".

Safari does not use Blink