← Back to context

Comment by niutech

5 days ago

Browsers can be profitable, see Opera: https://investor.opera.com/news-releases/news-release-detail...

But not everything must be for-profit. Free/Libre/Open Source Software is a prime example. Projects like GNU, Linux, GNOME, KDE, WebKitGTK, LibreOffice are sustainable for a long time.

14 comments

niutech

Reply
dismalaf  5 days ago

Every browser also gets a significant amount of money from Google. Mozilla is profitable too. But when Google is forced to stop paying browsers to use their search, it'll put Apple and Microsoft at an even wider advantage since they're the ones that can afford to push their own browsers at a loss...

  • niutech  5 days ago

    Not every web browser gets money from Google - Brave, Vivaldi, Pale Moon, Konqueror, Epiphany, Ladybird, Servo, to name a few.

    • dismalaf  5 days ago

      Vivaldi's business model is primarily revenue from deals with search providers. they don't exclusively get money from Google, they get money from all their search partners, including Google.

      Brave is into crypto scams and advertising scams, so I guess you're right there. Their revenue is also tiny.

      The rest aren't what I'd call "real" browsers, most don't have the same level of functionality and compatibility as Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge... Servo for example is literally just the rendering engine Firefox gave up on.

    • madeofpalk  5 days ago

      Do Brave and Vivaldi fund actual browser (engine) development, or are they just using open source Chromium (as they're able to)?

      Konqueror and Epiphany are Webkit based, so presumably benefit from Apple's funding of Webkit.

      Ladybird and Servo aren't real browsers yet, and have so far been funded by grants which doesn't seem to be long-term stable.

    • ryho  5 days ago

      Brave is just Chrome in a trench coat. I am pretty sure all the others are based on something else or are not actually a fully robust browser.

      6 replies →