4 ms·

I really don't understand this perspective. Google has lots of resources. Google has lots of projects. A particular team may not have more or less resources the

by campnic 15y ago

I really don't understand this perspective. Google has lots of resources. Google has lots of projects. A particular team may not have more or less resources then Grooveshark. There is no 'fallacy of logic'. You build the broadest support you can with the resources you have. I don't think their lack of support of Opera for a beta project suggests anything about their support of Opera besides they consider it a lower priority then the four browsers listed. Its not a personal affront. They just don't have unlimited people. Would you be surprised to learn they don't yet support text based browsing using lynx? I wouldn't.

Wilya 15y ago
If I am using lynx, chances are high that I know some things are not going to work anyway. I don't need google to tell me this. And in many cases (not for Google+, I think they rely too much on js.), some things will work. Plus, there is a middle ground between blacklisting lynx and blacklisting cutting-edge or almost cutting-edge browsers.
Indyan 15y ago
If this was just happening with Google+ then your point of view would have been understandable. But, this has happened in the past with Google Search, Google Docs, Picasa and pretty much every Google product. In each of those cases masking Opera as Fx solved the problem, but Google took months to officially solve the issue, if they at all did.