Is there a valid reason why more than 50% of browser extensions that are free for Chrome/Firefox are paid for Safari?I'm setting up a Macbook (not for myself) and I'm a bit perplexed by the amount of paid shit on it that is completely free on other platforms.
>>108942718Developers realized that Apple fanboys are basically retards and will pay for everything so they are being extorted.
>>108942718apple tax. macos users will even pay for a taskbar, LOL!
>will par $200 for anime figurine>will not pay $5 for useful app that will have impact every day in his life
>>108942718because they can get away with it
>>108942727I've witnessed Windows users pay $59.99 for Brave Origin.
>>108942755The Anime figurine is not free in another shop homie.
>>108942718macs have been like this for a long timeliterally before macos ventura if you wanted every possible screen resolution, you had to buy a program or use its free version which still locks some optionsand so everyone with their nice 2560x1600 displays on their mac was actually using 720p via scaling until a few years ago
>>108942718Dark Reader is actually kinda shit. Causes quite a few problems on various sites. They should be paying me to use it.A lot of sites have dark mode now so we're almost at the tipping point where we won't need these any longer.
>>108942718it costs money to keep an app in the appstore and it's not charity for the devs
FF sucks on Mac so just use Brave. The extensions on Mac won't properly block ads on Safari.
>>108942755>cant even spellOH SAAR CANT YOU REDEEM
>>108942718actual answer: marketing research shows that apple fags will NOT use free software because they think free=low quality. They have been utterly potty trained to believe they must spend money at all times. So if you want them to use your free extension, you MUST charge something, even if it's $0.99 just to let them know it's for real
>>108942878>FF sucks on Macworks on my mac
>>108942718macfags have already demonstrated that they are willing to pay for silly shit therefore they are easy marks?
>>108942718Cause you need an apple developer program membership, it cost 99$ a year.Why should a dev pay apple to provide a free service to their clients?Old Microsoft took the opposite direction, and it went great for them.
you can't publish an app/extension for MacOS*/iOS/Safari without paying an annual fee*you can but macOS will block your app as you are uncertified and while users can still get your app to run, it filters 99% of normies
>>108943443You can but not on their store, and it will have scary messages for normies, and for browser extensions it won't auto update.
>>108942772Brave users aren't human that doesn't count regardless of the OS they use.
>>108943437Microsoft has never been free.
>>108943634Publishing extensions for edge and software inside the microsoft store is free (unless you are a company).And you can use whatever tools you want, you don't need to use paid IDEs to publish, unlike apple where you need to use xCode to publish to the store even if you are using some cross-platform frameworks like flutter.Not the same at all.
>108943634>Free toolsBait used to be...
shouldn't 2026 be the apocalypse for paid macos apps peddlers because any idiot can now vibe-code a free replacement for himself?
>>108943692You can vibe-code a free replacement, but if you want to publish it in the apple app store, it will cost you 99$ a year.
The formal reason is that (at least until recently) simply developing for Apple machines costs a yearly fee and publishing another yearly fee. So it didn't make sense to just make software and put it out for free. Maybe it changed recently, but the practice of having paid apps stayed on Apple devs.The straight-up reason is kinda this >>108942727Apple users are already overpaying for their technology, so overpaying for their software isn't out of character.
You also need an apple device capable of using xCode latest versions.So you need to buy a new one once yours gets to its eol, it takes a long time, but it's still a cost you have to add to the yearly fee just to publish on the apple store.
It costs $5 per lifetime to publish on the Chrome, Edge, or Firefox stores, each. It costs $100 per year or $10,000 per lifetime to publish on the Safari store.
>>108942718Apple users are good paypigs and as such people are taking advantage of them I guess.
>>108945155>It costs $5 per lifetime to publish on the Chromeif you want to dox yourself that is. darkreader isn't that stupid and set up a company to hide their personal information.https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/dark-reader/eimadpbcbfnmbkopoojfekhnkhdbieeh
>>108945206>This developer has identified itself as a trader per the definition from the European Union and committed to only offer products or services that comply with EU laws.You can have his personal information anyway same as with any EU registered company.His name is Alexander btw.
>>108942718It's because a fool and his money are soon parted.
tbf it would be nice if more people payed for software. ik I would be more motivated to improve my software for others if I could get away with selling it for 5$
>>108942727FPBP/Thread
>>108942718You can use whatever browser you want on Mac.Install a Chromium fork or Firefox.Alternatively, you can pirate Safari extensions. It sounds ridiculous but you can do it, there's a little scene that provides "cracked" extensions.
>>108942718because most Apple customers have more money than sensealso, i seem to remember reading that you have to pay to develop for Apple's platforms; i don't know whether that's true of Safari extensions, but i don't care enough to look it up given your low-effort throwaway question
>>108945822or you could just use free extensions for safari. those exist, too.
>>108942718you have to pay over $100 dollars a year to keep app in the appstore (idk if they didn't double that recently) so free software devs are not gonna put their own money for it
>>108942718Chrome and Firefox are on the Mac too. Just don't use Safari.
