Would you pay for a web browser?
-
@pheonix Would only to "Servo", so far.
-
context: I read that Brave is launching a paid version of theirs. One time fee.
-
context: I read that Brave is launching a paid version of theirs. One time fee.
@pheonix Maybe but definitely not for Brave. IMHO might as well use Chromium.
-
-
@pheonix@hachyderm.io Once. And I definitely wouldn't pay for yet another Chromium fork.
-
-
@pheonix browser or more privacy online?
I don't consider Brave a trustworthy option, TBH. -
@sstendahl @kagihq Kagi is doing some interesting things with their business model, but I'm with you, closed source for a browser is a tough pill to swallow in 2026. That said, the willingness to pay proves there's a market for 'user-as-customer' rather than 'user-as-product.' We just need that same model applied to a transparent auditable codebase.
Kagi is carving a very nice niche for itself, I would love for them to succeed.
-
... maybe?
-
@pheonix Maybe but definitely not for Brave. IMHO might as well use Chromium.
@CosmicCactus @shy_mia my thought process too. If I'm paying for a browser, I'm paying for the removal of bloat, not the addition of some shady crypto-wallet and an ad-network. If the 'Premium' version is just a standard Chromium fork with a few toggles switched off, the value proposition falls apart.
I'd rather pay for a browser that was built from the ground up to respect my CPU's main thread and offers me the knowledge that me supporting them directly helps in keeping the ecosystem alive without any privacy concerns.
-
@ftranschel I feel the weight of that frustration. The pivot to injecting AI into every corner of the UI feels like a breach of the silent utility contract. Especially in something as fundamental as a browser. Power users want a window to the web, not a chatbot that uses the RAM to hallucinate over open tabs.
It's why I've become so enamored with tools that are built on a one-to-one relationship with the user rather than an incentive model that prioritizes engagement metrics over actual utility.
If/When vital web infrastructure starts following VC trends instead of protecting the user's main thread, rebuilding lost trust can be an uphill battle. Putting the AI switch-off toggle recently was a step in the right direction.
-
@pheonix I would consider it if was open source, all the way. I would never pay for a closed source software unless there are absolutely no other viable alternatives.
I am willing to donate to projects I use regularly, which I also do from time to time. But for me to donate, it need to fill a need I have over time and I need to agree to the development path they're headed.
You could say I'm a fan of «vote with your wallet».
-
@pheonix Yes, but not for a subscription
-
@CosmicCactus @shy_mia my thought process too. If I'm paying for a browser, I'm paying for the removal of bloat, not the addition of some shady crypto-wallet and an ad-network. If the 'Premium' version is just a standard Chromium fork with a few toggles switched off, the value proposition falls apart.
I'd rather pay for a browser that was built from the ground up to respect my CPU's main thread and offers me the knowledge that me supporting them directly helps in keeping the ecosystem alive without any privacy concerns.
@pheonix @CosmicCactus @shy_mia My immediate thought was, if they're launching a paid version, then what extra crap are they going to force into the free (currently only) version from then on?
-
@pheonix Back in the day I paid for #Opera and in these recent times I have paid for #Horse and #Orion
https://browser.horse
https://orionbrowser.comI don't actively use any of them right now
but I went through phases of using them all. #WebBrowsers #Browsers #Internet #HorseBrowser #OrionBrowser #Kagi
-
R relay@relay.mycrowd.ca shared this topic on
