3 ms·

>Meanwhile, the complaint here is basically "they made our annoying and stupid notification not true". What? I am so lost. The complaint is that video accelera

>Meanwhile, the complaint here is basically "they made our annoying and stupid notification not true". What? I am so lost. The complaint is that video acceleration is being disabled, perhaps intentionally, resulting in loss of battery life. That is a bad thing for users, regardless of this whataboutism nonsense. If there was some reason the empty tag was added, Google PR is free to let us know. The fact that they did not is quite telling. How can you support something blatantly bad as this unless you work for that company? Oh wait... And Chrome is full of dirty tricks of it's own. For example they paid Gigabyte to add Google Chrome to show up as an 'update' to system software. http://puu.sh/CjVYU/804038501f.jpg http://puu.sh/CjVYU/804038501f.jpg So lets stop this, which company is worse thing and work towards fixing bugs and making users happier.

justin66 8y ago
> How can you support something blatantly bad as this unless you work for that company? I tend to agree with the point made in a different part of the thread that arguing against people based on the company they work for is not productive. People are more than just cogs in a machine and have a right to be regarded as such, even if it's just for the sake of argument. The correct question for DannyBee might be How can you support something blatantly bad as this even if you work for that company? I'm sure there are plenty of Googlers who would have a problem with deliberately adding a misfeature to a site to slow down a competitor's browser, plenty would fix a bug like that if it were reported and it was really just a bug, etc. Those guys aren't all in leadership positions...