No I did not say that. Do you recommend people to use their browser on default settings?
Mozilla gets paid for having it be the default, regardless of whether the user switches it. They get to make money from it because of the number of users alone being already something interesting to target for their partners. So just you using the browser is beneficial for Mozilla, even if you turn all the sponsored features off.
And do you think that most Firefox users donate to Mozilla?
No, most don’t donate directly, but some do use some of the features that indirectly do provide funds. Like for example, would a search engine be willing to pay Mozilla to have them be a default search engine if it had no users?
I feel the weight of Firefox being a popular browser has allowed them to have some partnerships and carry on some strategies that are likely to have been a source of funds. I expect many people do not turn off sponsored links and other features that are likely to help them support the browser and that are likely not available in the forks.
The thing is that it’s not very common for people who use a fork of Firefox to donate or encourage contributions to Mozilla… most of the people who go for forks do it because they do not trust Mozilla in the first place or don’t agree with the decisions they take. They are not willing to let Mozilla make profit out of their use of the browser, even when done through an option that can be turned off in the browser, they don’t like it even existing.
So if enough people did that, I don’t think Mozilla would keep developing Firefox, at least not at the level that they are now. In fact, I think even today Mozilla is not seeing much gain, since they keep starting side projects to raise funds in other ways.
If there were a separate foundation that was started by all these forks to maintain a base from which to build on (sort of the Chromium-equivalent but in Firefox world) that isn’t connected to Mozilla and that can fully sustain itself… then that would be good in my book. But as things stand, those projects don’t look like they would survive without Mozilla.
I feel like it makes more sense to support an alternative project entirely, like Ladybird or so.
The biggest part of people use Chrome-based browsers.
Also… the point is that it’s thanks to those people who use stock Firefox that the codebase stays maintained. So admitting that having those people is a good thing is kind of against the idea of encouraging people to move away from stock Firefox.
It’s ironic that GTK actually used to stand for GIMP ToolKit.
They were the first ones to use Gtk ever… and it’s looking like they will be the last ones to migrate to the newer major versions :P
Just because it entered RC phase doesn’t mean it won’t take long to release. It’s not unlikely that a lot of bugs and problems could have been reported in the RC phase, specially for such a big changelog in a popular program that many people are likely to be interested to test during the RC phase.
To be honest, I expected it would take at least 4 months (specially given how it took them years to reach this far). I’m pleasantly surprised that it was this fast.
No, it’s not the same. Firedragon users have a different default. I’ll repeat the question that you didn’t answer yet:
“would a search engine be willing to pay Mozilla to have them be a default search engine if it (upstream Firefox) had no users?”
And this is just an example. There are many other forms of partnership possible beyond search engines… the point is that the number of users that actually are exposed to the default browser settings (ie. the ones using upstream Firefox, whether they change the settings or not) does give some leverage for making funds out of, while still giving options/freedom to the users who can freely change the setting.
When you watch a video article with sponsored content, even if you skip the sponsor, the creator benefits from your views indirectly because it builds up the numbers and that’s attractive for sponsors… but if someone starts re-posting the videos with the sponsor bits cut out and the re-posting channel becomes MORE popular than the original to the point that the original gets much less views… do you think companies are gonna want to have sponsor deals with that creator who gets very few views on their sponsored content?