Re:Safari adopts the Chrome/Firefox extension model
by saagarjha on Friday August 28, 2020 @12:00AM
(#24301229)
Note that Safari Technology Preview and Safari share iCloud Keychain and occasionally share history as well.
Re:Safari adopts the Chrome/Firefox extension model
by skinnymuch on Friday August 28, 2020 @04:37PM
(#24309659)
Ah. Okay Keychain isn’t so bad. I use 1Password more than keychain. Sharing history occasionally is annoying, but if just occasionally, not so bad. Thanks for the heads up and info.
Re:Safari adopts the Chrome/Firefox extension model
by pankajdoharey on Friday August 28, 2020 @10:12AM
(#24305045)
I agree that's a big deal, but there are many good things in safari like it is very efficient, even with many tabs Safari ends up consuming very low processing power and thus longer battery life, chrome on the other hand is just a memory hog constantly recording every move and sending it to Google, it really feels like a spyware. Which is why I use Safari 99% of the time except when it is not supported or I need a special extension for which I use Firefox.
Re:Safari adopts the Chrome/Firefox extension model
by skinnymuch on Friday August 28, 2020 @04:38PM
(#24309677)
Yeah. Really happy I can stay on macOS 10 for at least two years with Safari 14 if macOS 11 continues the trend of new mac OSes slowing MacBooks down.
—-
For extensions, wont it be a while before enough preferred extensions move over to Safari? A solid amount might never? Unless there’s some initiative where some consortiums publish extensions on behalf of open source extension developers. Otherwise many made with no money in mind don’t have a good reason to pay $100/year.
Now for my bit of day dreaming and fantasizing:
(1) If this began a trend to begin charging for good extensions, I wouldn’t mind that. We pay for so much stuff, but extensions are assumed to be free. There’s less oversight on the data mining they do than almost any other niche. Then unfortunate part is how much of the revenue would be eaten by Apple’s 30% cut and $99/year. Since the developer fee is yearly, if this can also lead to yearly charges for extensions, but at very low rates, that would be awesome too.
(2) if some extensions are subscriptions at $1-5 a year or $1 for 2-3 years as the main price points for good extensions. It doesn’t come close to subscription saturation issues. At those low numbers, it would take a whole ton of extensions to get to $60/year. Which is a completely average price charged for apps these days that used to cost a fraction for one time payment.