Embed Notice

@ThePfromtheO@social.vivaldi.net @SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @Vivaldi@social.vivaldi.net [Vivaldi]'s important thing is the UI.Is it, though? Generally a browser's most important thing is their engine. Which ties in neatly with your...[Open sourcing] it all would still mean letting others take it, no matter of how it is with others.So just like what Vivaldi did with the engine they're using? It's somehow fine for them to take the work of others, but this doesn't go both ways? Does this not sound a bit weird to you?soon there would appear a “debloated Vivaldi” version forked by some peopleSimilar to how Firefox has it, then, who are also a profit seeking company and were doing this very well for a long time, until they started to sell out their user base for short term C-level bonuses. But even with Mozilla actively trying to make Firefox the worst it can be, the debloated forks are nowhere near as popular as the main thing, so your whole argument falls flat in reality.How would Vivaldi make money then, I ask you?The forks don't "take money away", people who use it were unlikely to use the shitty main release anyway. And like I stated in the previous paragraph, forks are unlikely to become more popular than the main thing to begin with. They'd have to really fuck shit up to make a fork suddenly take all their marketshare, and at that point its just the market working as intended.

Also hot damn that hashtag spam is a mental disorder.