3 ms·
> We know that Chrome has proprietary parts, so pointing it out is pedantic and distracting, not informative. I honestly don't see how it is pedantic or distra
by azakai 15y ago
> We know that Chrome has proprietary parts, so pointing it out is pedantic and distracting, not informative.
I honestly don't see how it is pedantic or distracting. But I am glad we agree on the facts.
> Rather than complain, we give Google credit for the 99% of Chrome's code that is open source.
That supports my point, I think. I am being modded down in part because people want to praise Google for that 99%, just as you said now. However, that 99% - which is well and good - does not change that Google erred here (and elsewhere) about calling Chrome open source.
You are overlooking that because you like Google overall. But you don't need to always support or always berate Google. You should support it when it does good - which it often does - and berate it when it does bad - which it did right here.
- mkr-hn 15y agoYou're doing that thing where you challenge the character and motives of people who disagree with you. It's irritating.
- azakai 15y agoFirst, I apologize if I am irritating in any way. I don't intend to be, but I am told that sometimes I tend to focus too much on factual stuff and too little on how other people react to what I am saying. So, sorry about that if it is the case here. As to this specific thing - I did not intend to challenge character or motive. My point was that by saying "Rather than complain, we give Google credit for the 99% of Chrome's code that is open source", it is clear that Google is being given a pass on mistakes because of the other good things it does. There is a false choice implied in that quote - as if we must either like Google and praise it, or dislike Google and berate it. Instead, we should either praise or berate Google depending on what it actually does. And right here, it did do something wrong. I hope that clarifies what I was trying to say before.
- mkr-hn 15y agoThis seems to be a difference of opinion, not a mistake.
- wmf 15y agoIMO calling a program open source is not "doing bad" if an open source version (e.g. Chromium) is available that has 99% of the features of the proprietary version. At worst, I would call it an oversimplification. As for my motives, I don't think you know me.
- azakai 15y agoSorry if it seemed I was implying I knew your motivations. That was not my intention. You can call it an oversimplification, I am ok with that. We agree on the facts and that there is an inaccuracy here, the rest is semantics.