Yes, but your initial comment was kind of a strange way to phrase a cost complaint. After all, Google insists that extensions be published in the Chrome Web Store, and that requires Google's approval, a process that can often take much longer than App Store approval.

I suspect that the difference in extension availability is mostly due to desktop market share, since Safari is nonexistent on Windows and Linux.

▲

argsnd 7 hours ago | parent [-]

There’s quite a difference between a one time $5 fee and an annual $99 fee for the economics of publishing a free browser extension.

Given almost 100% compatibility with the same Web Extension APIs that Chrome uses, I think you’d expect near-parity in extension availability between Chrome and Safari if that barrier didn’t exist.

	▲	lapcat 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> There’s quite a difference between a one time $5 fee and an annual $99 fee for the economics of publishing a free browser extension. Yes? I didn't deny that. I said your initial comment didn't mention cost. > Given almost 100% compatibility with the same Web Extension APIs that Chrome uses, I think you’d expect near-parity in extension availability between Chrome and Safari if that barrier didn’t exist. It feels like you ignored the points I made in my last comment. Why would you expect near parity in extension availability when you can't even develop Safari extensions on Windows and Linux computers?