You are missing the point. They care when money is involved, and yet they failed to maintain a browser engine, which would have (for the better or for the worse) a central part of most people’s computing.

And yet, despite the browser being so important… They gave up and handed the cake to Google.

LMAO

Microsoft pays for a lot of opensource development, you may not like it but you still need its work, including Lennart Pottering’s salary (and don’t even start with “systemd bad”).

“Hyperv is the worst”… Shut up and come back when your hypervisor has proper GPU paravirtualization on all vendors.

Bad argument, Microsoft is among the three most valuable companies in the world, when something is important to them they get it done properly (e.g. hyperv is the best made part of windows, because they need it for azure). The settings page doesn’t get them money, only nerds care if it’s bad, a browser does.

Maybe if all the forks merge into a single project, and if that project becomes part of some foundation like the Linux foundation or most likely freedesktop, and if some folks from big tech companies get paid to work on it full time (probably google would, for obvious reasons, but it wouldn’t be enough), and if distros start shipping that in place of firefox, and if for some reason the less tech savvy get to know about this project…

…Then if all of that happens, forks might have a chance of still existing.

This is how most big open source projects (like Linux, gnome, mesa, etc) thrive. With the catch that while most tech companies have some stake in Linux and friends, no company other than google has any stake in Firefox existing.

They die. Full stop.

Not even Microsoft had the strength to maintain a browser engine, that’s why they moved Edge to Chromium, they gave up.