Appreciate the detailed response. Over the past few years I've seen a couple of similar remote browser services and was curious who actually need it, glad you shared firsthand knowledge.

Now I can see that while this would probably be an overkill security-conscious individuals, it might make sense for organizations because there are always employees who can be easily tricked into clicking anything. I do wonder whether it's more effective and productive to instead enforce host-based blocking + browser-level content blocking + lightweight virtualization (like Windows Sandbox? Not sure how well it works since I'm a Mac user for the most part), but I'm in no position to evaluate for organizations.

Having checked Symantec's website, they seem to advocate falling back to a remote browser when the site is potentially risky, which sounds reasonable.

> then for clients with browsers that support WebP (chrome) I switch on WebP since the quality increase is a LOT

Yeah, I first tried the service on my iPad Pro, image quality was terrible. I have since tried it again in desktop Chrome and it's definitely passable. That's unfortunate.

Anyway, I'm probably not in the target market, but best of luck to your business.