3 ms·
It seems to me that you're conflating "open source" with "developed for free". I don't think GP has any issues with Vivaldi being developed by paid developers
by parenthephobia 10y ago
It seems to me that you're conflating "open source" with "developed for free".
I don't think GP has any issues with Vivaldi being developed by paid developers per se, but if Vivaldi Technologies decides to stop development there is no guarantee that anyone else will be able to take over development. Firefox wouldn't have that issue if it started today.
- Touche 10y agoI'm not conflating anything. I don't disagree that it would be better if Vivaldi were open source. I just don't think that reason is all that compelling to Vivaldi the company. Who thinks about "what happens when my company folds"? There are other advantages to being open source than just that.
- lucideer 10y agoI think, in this case, it would seem the company founder(s?) might be likely to care, given their apparent reasons for starting the company. Jon left Opera when it started to go south in terms of serving it's existing user-base, and very clearly started Vivaldi explicitly to serve that orphaned user-base. It does seem like he would/should care if history repeats itself with Vivaldi the company.