6 ms·

The issue is building a browser is not profitable by itself. You’d need to sell an annual subscription of 150$ to like 10 million people to get a browser that’

The issue is building a browser is not profitable by itself. You’d need to sell an annual subscription of 150$ to like 10 million people to get a browser that’s actually developed for users and not in some bizarre exploitive fashion.

stephen_g 15d ago
The current spend on Firefox development is only about $290 million per year, not the $1.5bn you're talking about... But at the end of the day, it's not the amount of money that matters, it's the goals of the people running it.
- mmooss 15d ago
  > it's not the amount of money that matters I think that matters quite a bit. Otherwise, if you've got a spare $1,000, build us a browser. Maybe vibe code it?
- 999900000999 15d ago
  If you sell it on Steam or the Mac App Store we’re talking about a minimum of 30% gone off top. Marketing costs money. Taxes, etc. Not everyone is going to pay the full 150$. Various discount programs would probably exist. Anyway, even if my numbers are off not enough people will pay for a browser for this to be a viable business. If you disagree you can start today and I’ll gladly subscribe. Not a fork, no build a new browser from scratch with feature parity to chrome
  - eviks 15d ago
    > Not a fork, I guess you know you're wrong because why else would you need this bizarre requirement?
    - 999900000999 15d ago
      Because otherwise you can git clone Firefox , change it's name and call it a new browser. I guess if we really get technical we could say you can fork, but need to independently implement updates going forward.
      - eviks 15d ago
        > you can fork Progress! > but need to independently implement updates going forward. That's not needed either? But since you've provided no rationale, it's hard to point out where the mistake lies. What's wrong with using known code updates as long as you remove the anti-user parts?
        999900000999 14d ago
        Because you have no control over the future of the project. If Firefox or Chrome starts going down a route where they deprecate features you need you probably won't have the expertise to keep them going. Anyway modern browsers are too hard to build profitably I guess without anti-consumer weirdness. Might have to switch to a cli RSS reader...

stephen_g 15d ago

The current spend on Firefox development is only about $290 million per year, not the $1.5bn you're talking about... But at the end of the day, it's not the amount of money that matters, it's the goals of the people running it.

mmooss 15d ago
> it's not the amount of money that matters I think that matters quite a bit. Otherwise, if you've got a spare $1,000, build us a browser. Maybe vibe code it?
999900000999 15d ago
If you sell it on Steam or the Mac App Store we’re talking about a minimum of 30% gone off top. Marketing costs money. Taxes, etc. Not everyone is going to pay the full 150$. Various discount programs would probably exist. Anyway, even if my numbers are off not enough people will pay for a browser for this to be a viable business. If you disagree you can start today and I’ll gladly subscribe. Not a fork, no build a new browser from scratch with feature parity to chrome
- eviks 15d ago
  > Not a fork, I guess you know you're wrong because why else would you need this bizarre requirement?
  - 999900000999 15d ago
    Because otherwise you can git clone Firefox , change it's name and call it a new browser. I guess if we really get technical we could say you can fork, but need to independently implement updates going forward.
    - eviks 15d ago
      > you can fork Progress! > but need to independently implement updates going forward. That's not needed either? But since you've provided no rationale, it's hard to point out where the mistake lies. What's wrong with using known code updates as long as you remove the anti-user parts?
      - 999900000999 14d ago
        Because you have no control over the future of the project. If Firefox or Chrome starts going down a route where they deprecate features you need you probably won't have the expertise to keep them going. Anyway modern browsers are too hard to build profitably I guess without anti-consumer weirdness. Might have to switch to a cli RSS reader...