• chaotic_ugly@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    2 hours ago

    I’m not sure Firefox brings on this list. Google finances Mozilla’s operation to the time of $420M a year. It’s not profit, but it’s also not a the same as the others.

  • lordnikon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    2 hours ago

    What people don’t always remember about FOSS is they are just making it for themselves they are users as well as devs. The great thing about FOSS is if someone else happens to use it that’s great and maybe they will contribute to something they use.

    • mirshafie@europe.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Yeah and they get other devs contributing to their project. Nobody’s making Firefox or Blender as a solo project, but band together with some other nerds and this is what you get.

      • BartyDeCanter@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Never doubt the power of nerds arguing over their specific interests to make something amazing. Wikipedia is arguably one of the greatest achievements of humankind, entirely powered by nerd fights.

  • Redvenom@retrolemmy.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 hours ago

    When money comes in the picture, then profit is more important than the product, and this people really loved the product they are doing, if they have enough money to live comfortably they get to keep control of something they care and love.

  • Amberskin@europe.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    A big share of Linux contributions come from big tech companies, which are definitely making a profit from it

  • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Boredom mostly, if their lazy bosses worked them more then they wouldn’t have time to be productive at home.

    /s

  • hperrin@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    190
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Apache OpenOffice??

    Surely you meant LibreOffice. OpenOffice has basically been dead for years, with no significant work going on.

      • bestboyfriendintheworld@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        52 minutes ago

        It still looks and behaves like StarOffice.

        The templates they include look ancient as well. They do have a mediocre copy of Microsoft’s ribbon interface.

    • Naho_Zako@piefed.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Lmao I’ve been doing a digital forensics class online, and it’s always got VMs with ancient versions of software on it, so I got to discover what Apache OpenOffice was. Love that they have to use FOSS to teach us shit since Windows needs a subscription.

      Typo

      I almost wrote dogital forensics. Is that using dogs to find data? Sniff out that hard drive and get datadumping boy!

      • hperrin@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        4 hours ago

        OpenOffice was dead before it was transferred to Apache, so it’s not old enough to excuse.

    • SpikesOtherDog@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      4 hours ago

      To expand further on your point, here are the releases for Apache Open Office (OO). We are at 4.1.6. the page for 4.1 release was last updated in 2014. It’s been mainly small bug fixes since then.

      https://www.openoffice.org/development/releases/

      LibreOffice (LO) and Open Office were essentially the same application at OO 4.0 vs LO 4.1. LO had 3 major releases by 2023 before it went from 7 to 24. With the annual releases it is me difficult to gauge progress in the same way. But we are already at 26.2.

      https://www.libreoffice.org/about-us/libreoffice-timeline/

  • nieceandtows@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Where is FreeCad in this one? I’ve started using it after buying a 3d printer, and it’s awesome what that piece of software lets me create.

    • BlackVenom@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Got any links to learning? Ive gotten pretty far in fusion360 but am trying to transition and found f360 let’s me be too lazy or sketch centric/doesn’t require parametric rules

      • halfapage@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 hours ago

        MangoJelly Solutions on YouTube

        Freecad requires very different approach to design than fusion, try not to assume how things work

  • rtxn@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    5 hours ago

    So why is Mozilla shoving AI garbage nobody asked for into Firefox?

    • tempest@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Mozilla exec compensation aside (relative to other tech CEOs it is pretty low) the reason they do this is because they are trying to make money in some way that isn’t the Google search box.

      The other thing to consider is that even though a lot of people around here and AI skeptics loads is the general public are not and use it everyday and don’t think twice.

      I swear the Firefox users have no perspective whenever this stuff comes up.

      It’s always “why don’t they just work on the browser” or " I would pay for just the browser" ( they won’t, and even if they did most won’t and it won’t be enough)

      Web browsers don’t make money. It’s why only chrome basically exists and that’s a cost center to support Google’s Internet ad hegemony and they spend billions a year on it.

      I am watching ladybird and hoping they manage to coalesce the required amount of support to get something off the ground and keep it there.

      • rtxn@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Firefox isn’t used by the “general public”. The general public doesn’t give a shit about open-source or which corporate logo is stamped on their copy of Chromium.

        No, Firefox is used by the enthusiasts who care about not using Chromium; about actively choosing control over convenience. Now Mozilla Corp is pissing off that same audience by doing what Google does – shoving AI up everything. Being the lesser evil does not grant them a free pass for every boneheaded decision.

        • mirshafie@europe.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          I guarantee you that most Firefox users do not feel the level of emotions that you do on these issues, either about the AI prompt sidebar or the CEO’s salary. They also don’t use Firefox to spite Google. They use it because they think it’s better than Chromium.

          You’re unhappy with Firefox? Easy fork. Off you go. Want to convince me to be mad too? Okay, make your case, but don’t just assume that I’d just have to be mad if I just knew that there’s gasp an AI sidebar that I can use if I want to.

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Web browsers don’t make money. It’s why only chrome basically exists and that’s a cost center to support Google’s Internet ad hegemony and they spend billions a year on it.

        Yep. Well, I don’t necessarily agree it started exclusively for the ads, but they definitely wanted to create something that they control. Microsoft Edge and Opera switching to Chromium just means Google has more soft control on how the web operates. (Even saying “soft” there is pretty generous.) A majority of browsers are Chromium forms. Google can control how the web operates because of it.

        But to your point though, thwarting ad blocking is a huge part of it now. The manifest V3 changes (which severely limited what sorts of ad blocking extensions could do) came the same year they listed ad blocking as a significant risk to their revenue in their shareholder statement. Which, I just wanna mention for folks who might not be keeping up with this as much, isn’t some sort of conspiratorial statement. It’s a public document because they’re a publicly traded company.

    • LincolnsDogFido@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Because they also want to entice new users or appeal to users that for some reason do want that feature. More users means more money and despite being non-profit, people do enjoy having more money. They’re not immune. Which is why we need to pull the reigns back every now and then.