Harsh Words From Google On Linux Development

jeevesbond writes "The alpha version of Google Chrome is now available for GNU/Linux. Google Chrome developer and former Firefox lead Ben Goodger has some problems with the platform though. His complaints range from the lack of a standardised UI toolkit, inconsistencies across applications, the lack of a unified and comprehensive HIG, to GTK not being a very compelling toolkit. With Adobe getting twitchy about the glibc fork and previously describing the various audio systems as welcome to the jungle, is it time to concentrate on consolidation and standardisation in GNU/Linux in general, and the desktop in particular?"

Comments

Article by Slashdot completely distorts reality

[Anonymous Coward]

Follow the discussion, and you'll find it's not about complaints at all, at all, at all. Google is trying to figure out the best way to do Chrome for Linux, while making it something that Linux users will actually like, and that means more choices. That's all. No, it's not about needing to standardize, so could someone at Slashdot quit with that FUD? GNU/Linux is about choice, and it always will be.

Re:Yes!

[Enderandrew]

If only the Linux Standard Base existed! Oh, wait, it does!

http://www.linuxfoundation.org/collaborate/workgroups/lsb

That is why Skype can build a distro-agnostic package with static linked libraries that just works on every distro, even though they also make distro-specific packages as well.

Re:Yes

[Enderandrew]

He did call for it to be built on top of Qt, not KDE. I know better, and honestly can't tell you why I typed KDE instead of Qt.

Re:It's been time for YEARS

[jacksonj04]

A standardised API doesn't mean that there can only be one operating system, it just means there's a generally accepted way of making the operating system do what you want without having to alter your code for every different platform.

Re:Um....

[PeterBrett]

I mean if I am a hardware manufacturer it takes just three drivers if I want to support Windows past, present, and future with a binary driver. Four if I want to cover the niches. I just have my developers write a Win98/ME, A win2k/XP, and a Vista/Win7. I add a WinXP64/Vista64 and since Win7 can use Vista drivers I have everything from 1998-2014 completely covered with just four binary drivers and no more out of pocket. There just ain't a way to do that in Linux.

There's a much easier way. Send a message to the kernel list saying, "I am a hardware manufacturer. Here are the docs for my hardware under NDA, and here's some samples." Ta-da! You get drivers written for free (or significantly reduced), and every subsequent distro release will support your hardware by default.

Re:It's been time for YEARS

[AlXtreme]

Constantly having to use second rate programs because the the GPL is so restrictive and viral that no software vendor wants to deal with it. As much as people spout 'open source' it isn't. It places as hard or harder restrictions on its use as any proprietary software, they are just different restrictions. But it definitely is not open.

Now you're clearly trolling/FUDing. There are plenty of proprietary apps for Linux, either as drivers (Nvidia) or as userland software (mostly for servers), and if you are merely using FLOSS there are hardly any restrictions at all. When was the last time you saw a EULA when you installed a FLOSS application?

The reason companies don't target desktop Linux is because it's only a tiny fraction of the market. The GPL has nothing to do with it. It's business, plain and simple.