Brave Browser Introduces 'Origin', a Pay-Once 'Minimalist' Browser (nerds.xyz)
- Reference: 0181770010
- News link: https://slashdot.org/story/26/04/20/0423212/brave-browser-introduces-origin-a-pay-once-minimalist-browser
- Source link: https://nerds.xyz/2026/04/brave-origin-browser/
> The stripped-down browser is available either as a separate browser download or as an upgrade to the existing Brave install, unlocked through [2]a one-time purchase that can be activated across multiple devices. The idea is simple on paper: pay once, and you get a cleaner, more minimal browsing experience without the add-ons that fund Brave's ecosystem. What makes the move unusual is the pricing model itself. While paying to support a browser is not controversial, charging users specifically to remove features [3]raises questions about whether those additions are seen as value or clutter.
>
> The situation gets even stranger [4]on Linux , where Brave Origin is reportedly available at no cost, creating an uneven experience across platforms and leaving some users wondering why they are being asked to pay for something others get for free.
[1] https://www.slashdot.org/~BrianFagioli
[2] https://account.brave.com/?intent=checkout&product=origin
[3] https://nerds.xyz/2026/04/brave-origin-browser/
[4] https://brave.com/origin/linux/nightly/
Suggestion for setup (Score:2)
Whether they charge something or give it away, what Brave should do is have customers enter a list of e-mails and phone numbers that get covered by that purchase, so that one can use the same subscription on various devices
apple will now remove from the app store unless th (Score:1)
apple will now remove from the app store unless they get that 30%
One time purchase (Score:3)
One time purchase meant something else twenty years ago. Now a 'lifetime' license tends to mean the lifetime of the current version number or even the lifetime of the product (look up '4kdownloader bait and switch'). At this stage, offers like that need to be very clear what they mean, upfront.
Re: (Score:3)
right, not to mention that right now the regular-sized-text terms as they're written state
> One-time purchase, covers up to 10 activations per license, across all your devices
so that's one-time-until-you-reinstall-OS-11th-time, isn't it? And some chucklefuck was just telling me that my ailing Windows 11 are simply ripe for reinstall because that's what Windows apparently regularly need to this day.
One-time-purchase really doesn't mean anything unless it's also at the very least "lifetime" to me as a person but I guess it's still more appealing wording than calling it a ten-install-license.
Re: (Score:2)
I have never personally reinstalled Windows because it "needs" it. Only when reformatting a laptop for another user etc. Manage your OS properly and these things don't happen. It's not Windows's fault if you click "yes" to every installation popup and enable web notifications from every website your visit.
10 activations (Score:2)
I won't pay for this because of the activation limit. I don't have a problem supporting a good browser like brave and would happily pay that price for a lifetime license. I use Brave a lot because of google endpoint verification when I can't use Firefox.
Pay once... for 10 activations. (Score:2)
So it's pay once, then pay again if you need to reinstall 11 times.
10 activations vs devices (Score:1)
Im fine with supporting Brave and do not particularly care whether those features are present and active or not, I can disable plenty of them in the Settings already.
What seems weird, apparently these activations are per installation! So, if you setup a new OS on the same machine it eats up one more activation, unless you haggle with their support about it.
This seems like a stupid and impractical model, especially for something titled lifetime.
They should rather give you a fixed amount of active devices/lic
Pay to remove what we added model (Score:2)
This kinda reminds me of youtube, getting paid to show ads on one side, then getting paid to not show ads on the other side. Except this time, they skipped the firsts part.
I can see the appeal though, make something, then make it annoying, then get paid to remove the annoyance. Seems like an easy path to get some money from fools. Thankfully, brave is already known for being scummy all around; I hope people will not fall for this too much.
ooera oldschool? (Score:1)
ive payed for opera before back in the day but why oh why would they call it origin ea already ruined that name with a worthless unwanted service
So ... (Score:2)
They're going to enshittify Brave with unremovable ads to sell Origin like Economy Plus.
What? (Score:3, Insightful)
Why would anyone pay for a web browser? Seriously, why? In 35 years of web browsers, only dopes paid for them.
Re:What? (Score:4, Informative)
Netscape wasn't free
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think I ever heard of an end-user paying for it, even once...
Re:What? (Score:4, Informative)
Back in the day lots of people did. Because there was no built in browser to use before IE came out. And pirating it would require getting a cd from someone else, and cd burners weren't a thing yet. Your options were use AOL with whatever they had built in on their cds, or use Netscape which you'd need to buy.
Re: (Score:3)
NCSA Mosaic predated Netscape Navigator and was free for non-commercial use.
Re: (Score:1)
I know lots of people who used Netscape (and Mosaic before it), but I don't know anyone who paid for it back in the day. To be completely upfront, I don't remember how I received a copy, whether it was from a swap-meet, from my ISP, or from my circle of friends, but it certainly wasn't from a shop. That was just how things were back in those days.
Re: (Score:3)
DoN't CoPy ThAt FlOpPy!
Re: (Score:2)
I can't remember either. I'm pretty sure I had access to NN on the university SPARCs, and I suspect I must have downloaded the Windows version from there and saved it on a diskette. I somehow think that the browser was free but you had to pay for the email client extension, but I could be wrong. Trumpet Winsock was definitely shareware, but it was the only way to do proper TCP/IP at the time.
Re: (Score:3)
Me either because there were so many ways to get it for free. I recall the Netcom dial-up ISP came with Navigator for free as a new customer perk.
Re: (Score:2)
Paid for IBrowse and I think AWeb back in the day too. But that was two decades ago.
There is Firefox Focus, which is minimal and free.
Re:What? (Score:4, Funny)
Note that it is free for Linux users. Seems fair to have users pay for a superior browser since they pay for an inferior OS.
Re: (Score:2)
Opera provided enough functionality that I do not regret buying it circa 2000. If memory serves me correctly, it offered a clean and fast UI, a local email client that allowed you to block tracking pixels, and their implementation of RSS is something I got a lot of use out of.
The major alternatives were as I recall, IE 6, which was about 5 years old at the time and would gladly allow websites to open browser windows when you closed browser windows, and Netscape, which was somehow MORE abandoned than IE. I f