Would you pay for low-bandwidth text browser?

Question

I saw brow.sh became popular again. Would you pay for a service that did this?This might not be the right forum to ask, but I imagine people in remote sites (like mining or offshore energy), and people in low-infrastructure areas, or people over satellite links or on aircraft wifi could be interested. Despite that, I've never seen such a service advertised.I worked on this as part of my remote browser ~ 2 years ago, but stopped progressing the text-only mode due to complexity and apparent lack of interest. If there are people prepared to pay for such a service, I might get back to work on it. In any case I'll probably throw up a demo later on to whet people's interest, but who wants this bad enough to pay for it?I like to think it's a no-brainer, save bandwidth to save money, but perhaps the loss of convenience of clunky text mode, or possibly cheaper and better remote site network infrastructure, makes it not worth it.

kvakvs · Accepted Answer

As you love your creation, look critical at the actual proposed "savings" of money. This will be totally uninteresting to broadband and local mobile users, but think different countries and most expensive data they offer to users, tourist and roaming mobile data plans, or satellite internet (remote territories and open sea vessels), what would they potentially save? How large is this audience? Will they be interested? Base your fee on this data.

kstenerud · Answer

I think you need to take a hard look at your target market. The only people who would use a text based browser (or even know what that is), would be developers and techies, who could just as easily rent a vps for dirt cheap and run browsh on that.A tiny market segment with a cheap BATNA is probably not going to be lucrative.