4 ms·

And why were these distro's (and their users) making the decision that they didn't want to use official Chrome, but would still use Google sync. And even if it

And why were these distro's (and their users) making the decision that they didn't want to use official Chrome, but would still use Google sync. And even if it made sense for the users, Google made Chrome open source and this has spawned many great (and some awful) projects and allowed even Google haters to use it, but this shouldn't mean they are also forced to provide related services.

rwha 6y ago
I like the blue icon more. Also, only chromium is available in my distro's official repositories.
eesmith 6y ago
Support for 32-bit builds and native BSD builds? That's two factors mentioned in the linked-to Hackaday piece. Following the links also shows things like disabling "some of the more intrusive Google features." Where did you get the idea that anyone thinks Google should be forced to support other browsers? The Hackaday piece even says "Google is going to run their business as they see fit. If they think allowing unofficial builds of Chromium to tap into their cloud services such as Sync isn’t worth it, it’s their prerogative to block them." The topic is more the annoyance that what had once been an official exception to the terms of service (which passed through legal and the VP level at Google) has not merely been rescinded, but treated as if it were never valid and its asserted mis-use "discovered" by an audit.
- tracker1 6y ago
  More likely it's to keep down the likes of Brave and Opera than Chromium on Linux/BSD, which are probably barely a blip by comparison. If MS were smart, they'd open up their alternatives to the Chromium community. They've done such a good job at building goodwill the past few years, and would be a nice gesture.
  - eesmith 6y ago
    FWIW, the thread at https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/embedder-dev/c/NXm7GIKTNTE https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/embedder-dev/c/NX... says: > The Brave project has built a Sync server for their Chromium-based Brave browser: https://github.com/brave/go-sync https://github.com/brave/go-sync and it is open source but uses Amazon Cloud for their database backend storage.
    - tracker1 6y ago
      Cool... thanks, wasn't aware of this... guessing Opera may have done the same... in which case Google are just being kind of a-holes about it.

rwha 6y ago

I like the blue icon more. Also, only chromium is available in my distro's official repositories.

eesmith 6y ago

Support for 32-bit builds and native BSD builds? That's two factors mentioned in the linked-to Hackaday piece. Following the links also shows things like disabling "some of the more intrusive Google features." Where did you get the idea that anyone thinks Google should be forced to support other browsers? The Hackaday piece even says "Google is going to run their business as they see fit. If they think allowing unofficial builds of Chromium to tap into their cloud services such as Sync isn’t worth it, it’s their prerogative to block them." The topic is more the annoyance that what had once been an official exception to the terms of service (which passed through legal and the VP level at Google) has not merely been rescinded, but treated as if it were never valid and its asserted mis-use "discovered" by an audit.

tracker1 6y ago
More likely it's to keep down the likes of Brave and Opera than Chromium on Linux/BSD, which are probably barely a blip by comparison. If MS were smart, they'd open up their alternatives to the Chromium community. They've done such a good job at building goodwill the past few years, and would be a nice gesture.
- eesmith 6y ago
  FWIW, the thread at https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/embedder-dev/c/NXm7GIKTNTE https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/embedder-dev/c/NX... says: > The Brave project has built a Sync server for their Chromium-based Brave browser: https://github.com/brave/go-sync https://github.com/brave/go-sync and it is open source but uses Amazon Cloud for their database backend storage.
  - tracker1 6y ago
    Cool... thanks, wasn't aware of this... guessing Opera may have done the same... in which case Google are just being kind of a-holes about it.