4 ms·
> Chrome at least would never be viable as a standalone product (as the fates of Mozilla and Opera have taught us). Firefox has been viable as a standalone pro
by majewsky 6y ago
> Chrome at least would never be viable as a standalone product (as the fates of Mozilla and Opera have taught us).
Firefox has been viable as a standalone product for over a decade because Google pays for being the default search engine. This is roughly viable with Chrome being around, it would be even more viable if Chrome was not around.
- est31 6y agoAnd Google pays far more to Apple because they have more users. This would probably be dwarfed by what they'd pay to a hypothetical independent Chromium Inc. that develops the browser.
- FreakyT 6y agoHard to say -- In Apple's case, there are so many potential users it's worth Google's money to get their search engine as the default. However, Mozilla doesn't have a massive userbase like that, which leads me to suspect that Google only pays Mozilla to stave off pressure form regulators who would otherwise accuse them of having a monopoly on browsers.
- gpm 6y agoIf chrome didn't exist, I'd say that it's more likely than not that Firefox would have the majority of windows uses...