5 ms·
It is difficult to get people to pay for it. People happily pay for 10€ beer but asked ”friends” about how to bypass WhatsApp’s 0,99 lifetime licenses.
by nicce 1y ago
It is difficult to get people to pay for it. People happily pay for 10€ beer but asked ”friends” about how to bypass WhatsApp’s 0,99 lifetime licenses.
- skinkestek 1y agoSome did. Some like me lined up eagerly to pay the $1 yearly license and would have been happy to pay for my family too.
- yjftsjthsd-h 1y agoAnd it's impossible to get people to pay for it when you give them no way to pay for it.
- CivBase 1y agoYou can donate, but who's going to pay $10 for beer when the same stuff is being given away for free?
- yjftsjthsd-h 1y agoNo, you can't. You can donate to the Mozilla Foundation, but you cannot donate to the Mozilla Corporation to actually fund Firefox development.
- LtdJorge 1y agoExactly. You can donate to a bunch of management people with multiple million dollars compensation that are running the company into the ground.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- AuthAuth 1y agoI'm sure there are plenty of people who will pay for it even though its being given away for free. Maybe not enough to replace the income from google but its worth a shot trying a fund raising drive.
- argomo 1y agohttps://www.mozillafoundation.org/en/what-you-can-do/?form=donate-menu https://www.mozillafoundation.org/en/what-you-can-do/?form=d...
- yjftsjthsd-h 1y agohttps://www.mozillafoundation.org/en/donate/help/#frequently-asked-questions https://www.mozillafoundation.org/en/donate/help/#frequently... > How will my donation be used? > These funds directly support advocacy campaigns (i.e. asking big tech companies to protect your privacy), research and publications like the *Privacy Not Included buyer's guide and Internet Health Report, and covers a portion of our annual MozFest gathering. Notice what donations aren't used for: Firefox.
- uncircle 1y agoI've heard the same thing about monetising search engines. Kagi didn't get the memo, and last I've heard they're turning a profit. Sure, only nerds would pay for it, but not all products have to capture 100% market share.
- danelski 1y agoBut independent browsers need this metric. Good luck convincing website owners to test against your non-chromium browser with 0.3% market share.
- rollcat 1y agoTwitch randomly blocks Chromium. (They don't even block the streams, only logins. I can watch, but not spend money. Perfectly reasonable.)
- tux3 1y agoHuh? That's crazy, I've never been blocked on Firefox, which is much smaller. And packed with privacy addons.
- WD-42 1y agoOkay but if everyone building the websites are using the browser with 0.3% market share it won't matter.
- nicce 1y agoThey don’t. Most of the common web developers do what the managers and users require. Otherwise you are not providing value and using your time efficiently.
- drdaeman 1y agoI'm not tracking what's currently going on with the underwater portion of frontend iceberg. Are things still like it was in late '00s and early '10s, where browsers still had plenty of their unique implementation quirks and non-standard features, and plenty of sites were relying on those? Back in the day, it was not entirely unheard of having two significantly different frontend implementations - one for IE, another for Netscape, with quite unhealthy amounts of parser hacks to hide code from the browsers. Possibly naively, but I think it's not that bad nowadays? (At least it wasn't so in late '10s.) Some things are Chrome-only, or Apple-only, but I rarely see "not supported in your browser" - the majority of features is generally standards compliant, and all those newcomer engine problems (like in the article) are mostly because there's a lot to implement.
- bowsamic 1y ago> People happily pay for 10€ beer I would not be happy to pay that much for a beer