Money in the terms of resources. Browsers are huge and complex codebases so maintaining one (even if "just" a fork) is quite expensive.
> How are the many forks/variants of Chromium and WebKit not affected by this "money" factor in the same way
They are, but the main Webkit/Chromium forks are either large companies (microsoft) or companies trying to make money off of their forks (Brave, Vivaldi).
This here is trying to do the exact opposite. Vivaldi has ~50 employees, Brave has 150 and tens of millions in investments. Even if not all of them work on the fork management, that's a lot more resources than a dozen peeps doing that in their spare time.
Google, Microsoft, Apple and Brave, are some of the corporations who fund Chromium/WebKit-based browsers. The ones who fund Firefox (Gecko)-based browsers do not have nearly enough money to dedicate to their own fork.
stapled_socks|4 years ago
That's incredibly vague. Can you explain? How are the many forks/variants of Chromium and WebKit not affected by this "money" factor in the same way
masklinn|4 years ago
> How are the many forks/variants of Chromium and WebKit not affected by this "money" factor in the same way
They are, but the main Webkit/Chromium forks are either large companies (microsoft) or companies trying to make money off of their forks (Brave, Vivaldi).
This here is trying to do the exact opposite. Vivaldi has ~50 employees, Brave has 150 and tens of millions in investments. Even if not all of them work on the fork management, that's a lot more resources than a dozen peeps doing that in their spare time.
ajvs|4 years ago
revolvingocelot|4 years ago
More seriously, is the suggestion that FF is too complex to properly fork without full time devs?
dralley|4 years ago
The same is true of Chromium, btw.