4 ms·
> If you "diversify" now, though, you miss out on cool Chrome features, or you spend your weekend maintaining a web browser fork when you could be at the beach.
by fafner 13y ago
> If you "diversify" now, though, you miss out on cool Chrome features, or you spend your weekend maintaining a web browser fork when you could be at the beach.
Sorry but what you are saying doesn't make sense. It is your proposal (fork when Chrome turns evil) which could end up with him maintaining a web browser fork on the weekend. "[M]iss out on cool Chrome features" ... well you miss out on cool Firefox features if you don't switch now ... I think switching the browser is really the least complicated thing to do of all those things.
> This lets you defer the cost of switching until you actually need to switch. If that happens to be never, you win. If that happens to be tomorrow, you still win.
No. Because now you have the time to slowly migrate and adjust. When you are with your back a against the wall the "costs" can be much much higher.
- gwern 13y ago> No. Because now you have the time to slowly migrate and adjust. When you are with your back a against the wall the "costs" can be much much higher. How, exactly? In some cases, waiting seems to be cheaper. For example, I've always regularly backed up my Reader's OPML, so I could leave anytime, but I'm still on Reader because this way I am waiting out things like Feedly's downtime, letting them iron out import bugs and complaints from less patient Reader refugees, letting people try out the various options and blog about how they are working out over a period longer than a day, etc. When Reader shuts down in June and I finally leave, won't it be cheaper for me to switch to the next-best alternative because I have waited?