| What I personally don't understand is why there are literally tons of Firefox forks out there, each on their own claiming to be open without an accessible codebase. And not only that, but also limiting users sometimes even in what they can do with it when they don't pay up. I understand that money is necessary to survive, but if you claim to be open at least communicate what the money is used for. Personally I tried to go with foundations and applied to a lot of them, whereas I wasn't accepted anywhere...so now I have to build a company, too, in order to guarantee the project's survival - without accepting foreign money to guarantee its moral baseline, which makes it hard, very hard to bootstrap. [1] Coming up with a viable working business model for a web browser is harder than someone might think, especially if you need funds to keep your stomach fed. I'm not saying that it's a good thing what they did, I'm just saying that I understand their problems. The difference to myself (being seen as a competitor) is that their project will be abandoned once investors get unhappy with their growth, which is a compromise I am never gonna accept if I really care about the "openness" of the web. [1] https://github.com/tholian-network |