Hacker News Reader

Comment by niutech | Hacker News Reader

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.

View on HN

I guess its easy to be a profitable company when you're getting into predatory payday loans! https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/opera-defends-its-android-a...

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...

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

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.

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.

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.

Ignorance is bliss, I'm here to bring enlightenment:

https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/wiki/Deviations-from-...

https://brave.com/privacy-updates

Konqueror, Servo and Ladybird have their own web engine.

Servo isn't a web browser, its just an engine. Ladybird isn't close to usable and Konqueror well, feels like 2005...

What's wrong with 2005 where desktop user experience goes? Why is the new sexy only 'let us remove all user choice and customization, throw decades of stable desktop UI features like menu bars, tooltips, keyboard shortcuts and mouse optimized icons, simply stretch a mobile touchscreen onto a widescreen display with gigantic fonts and dumbed down icons and call it a day'?

Because you can only browse pages from 2005 with KHTML (Standards evolves and KHTML hasn't been kept up to date in that respect)

Technically Servoshell is a browser bundled with Servo engine.

Opera is not a browser at this point but a chrome skin. Yes, there is some engineering still going on, but they don't run as much engineering as would be needed to build world-class browser software.

Opera is the fifth contributor to Chromium: https://www.igalia.com/assets/i/news/ranking-chromium.svg

Reply on news.ycombinator.com