> I wouldn't seriously consider using a non-free application for something as es...

prange · on Oct 14, 2022

For clarification - if you either contribute code or money to Firefox, you are clearly supporting the existence of a free browser.

I don’t see how just using it does. So if you aren’t contributing to it you may as well use the browser with the best feature set for your use case.

sfink · on Oct 14, 2022

Using Firefox definitely supports the existence of a free browser. Loss of market share is the #1 threat to the continued existence of a free browser. Beyond the obvious (if a tree falls in a forest, crushing the last copy of the code for a browser that has zero users, then was it a browser at all?):

    lower market share =>
    nobody testing against the free browser or fixing site breakage =>
    quirks (bugs, underdefined specifications, nonstandard features) of other browsers becoming required for a functional Web =>
    free browser is no longer a browser of the actual Web.

prange · on Oct 14, 2022

I agree that submitting bug reports or patches is an important contribution.

I don’t see how that relates to market share, since regular users won’t do that.

ipaddr · on Oct 14, 2022

Marketshare is important, default search engine revenue is based on usage.

prange · on Oct 14, 2022

It’s not really ‘free’ if it has to produce ad revenue.

seba_dos1 · on Oct 14, 2022

It is irrelevant to it being free.

prange · on Oct 14, 2022

No it isn’t. The direction of development is controlled by the need for funding.

seba_dos1 · on Oct 14, 2022

The direction of development is irrelevant to it being free.

prange · on Oct 14, 2022

If it is controlled by corporate interests, it is not free.

seba_dos1 · on Oct 14, 2022

Being controlled by corporate interests is completely orthogonal to being free. A lot of Free Software is being controlled by corporate interests and there's nothing wrong with it.