5 ms·

> The extension is available for Firefox and Chrome. Unfortunately the extension is only available as a direct download for Chrome because I didn't bother payi

> The extension is available for Firefox and Chrome. Unfortunately the extension is only available as a direct download for Chrome because I didn't bother paying Google money to publish this extension. The Firefox extension is available in the official Add-On store. This is so sad... I knew they required a paid account to submit to google play, didn't realise that applied to the browser extension repo as well. Oh well, just another reason to stay on Firefox :p

rnotaro 5y ago
It's a single 5$ registration fee per account. Nothing huge. Once you paid the fee, you can publish as many extensions as you want. https://developer.chrome.com/docs/webstore/register/ https://developer.chrome.com/docs/webstore/register/
- late2part 5y ago
  Look at Mr. Moneybags over here, "a single 5$ ... Nothing huge."
  - PaulBGD_ 5y ago
    Relatively, they're correct. Compared to other app stores like Apple where the fee is $100/year, which personally I'd consider huge. To get on Steam, the fee is a one-time $100 with the ability to get it back after $1000 in sales. It's even low compared to Google's other marketplace, the Play Store, which has a $25 one-time fee. While $5 can be a lot for certain people, relative to the market it doesn't deserve the title of being "huge".
- bredren 5y ago
  This is probably a very light anti-spam measure?
  - tech234a 5y ago
    It is[1]. [1]: https://blog.chromium.org/2010/08/security-improvements-and-registration.html https://blog.chromium.org/2010/08/security-improvements-and-...
swiley 5y ago
Oof you have to pay Google to publish extensions (and they still can't manage the spam?) That's some brain damage.
berniemadoff69 5y ago
firefox now requires developers to 'sign' their extension with mozilla, and has disabled the ability to side load extensions manually for more than just temporary use, unless you are using some special developer version of firefox. chromium still allows users to side load their extension. it's ironic that google would allow more freedom to the user than mozilla.
- jlokier 5y ago
  I rarely use Chrome. About once a month to make invoices (Firefox PDF output isn't correct), or rarely for some site that's not working in Firefox or Safari, just Chrome. Even with that low usage I had to side load an extension recently to add some functionality. Thank goodness it's still possible.
luke2m 5y ago
Maybe that's good to reduce spam submissions.
andrewljohnson 5y ago
Seems like a good way to prevent a lot of bad actors spamming. Google has a lot of problems with people automating free signups for computing and distribution resources... if you give someone any amount of free computing power, abusers will come.

rnotaro 5y ago

It's a single 5$ registration fee per account. Nothing huge. Once you paid the fee, you can publish as many extensions as you want. https://developer.chrome.com/docs/webstore/register/ https://developer.chrome.com/docs/webstore/register/

late2part 5y ago
Look at Mr. Moneybags over here, "a single 5$ ... Nothing huge."
- PaulBGD_ 5y ago
  Relatively, they're correct. Compared to other app stores like Apple where the fee is $100/year, which personally I'd consider huge. To get on Steam, the fee is a one-time $100 with the ability to get it back after $1000 in sales. It's even low compared to Google's other marketplace, the Play Store, which has a $25 one-time fee. While $5 can be a lot for certain people, relative to the market it doesn't deserve the title of being "huge".
bredren 5y ago
This is probably a very light anti-spam measure?
- tech234a 5y ago
  It is[1]. [1]: https://blog.chromium.org/2010/08/security-improvements-and-registration.html https://blog.chromium.org/2010/08/security-improvements-and-...

swiley 5y ago

Oof you have to pay Google to publish extensions (and they still can't manage the spam?) That's some brain damage.

berniemadoff69 5y ago

firefox now requires developers to 'sign' their extension with mozilla, and has disabled the ability to side load extensions manually for more than just temporary use, unless you are using some special developer version of firefox. chromium still allows users to side load their extension. it's ironic that google would allow more freedom to the user than mozilla.

jlokier 5y ago
I rarely use Chrome. About once a month to make invoices (Firefox PDF output isn't correct), or rarely for some site that's not working in Firefox or Safari, just Chrome. Even with that low usage I had to side load an extension recently to add some functionality. Thank goodness it's still possible.

luke2m 5y ago

Maybe that's good to reduce spam submissions.

andrewljohnson 5y ago

Seems like a good way to prevent a lot of bad actors spamming. Google has a lot of problems with people automating free signups for computing and distribution resources... if you give someone any amount of free computing power, abusers will come.