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.
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.
So it’s the same as if your were using a fork nah? The only difference is that mozilla does know that you use a Firefox browser because telemetry is disabled
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 users of 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 still benefits because it builds up the numbers and that’s what attracts 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 still have as many sponsor deals with that creator who now gets very few views on their sponsored content?
I understand completely your point of view but I wouldn’t use the stock Firefox as it’s not private enough and it has really bad features
And do you think that most Firefox users donate to Mozilla?
Using Firefox (even a fork) supports the work of Mozilla, like using chromium browser support the work of google
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.
So you recommend people to use the google search engine? :(
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.
So it’s the same as if your were using a fork nah? The only difference is that mozilla does know that you use a Firefox browser because telemetry is disabled
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 users of 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 still benefits because it builds up the numbers and that’s what attracts 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 still have as many sponsor deals with that creator who now gets very few views on their sponsored content?