Chrome team, on the other hand, does not have the resources. Which is to say that this is not the thing they believe is most important to work on at the margin, and given the amount of engineers Google will fund for the project.
If Nvidia wants their cards to work well on an all-free-software stack, they can provide a free software driver. If users care about making an unofficial driver work, they can do the work or fund the work. Chrome is just trying to get web pages on the screen and it doesn't seem like it's worth the boil-the-ocean level of effort of taking responsibility for implementing a reverse-engineered graphics driver when they can just get web pages on the screen using software rendering.
Something doesn't add up to me there, and no one that I saw ever addressed that in more detail.
they are also saying their that driver may work fine on some less common linux configurations, and the chrome team does not have the resources to test those.
you are literally saying they are saying the opposite of what they said, then blaming them for it.
The common distribution was blacklisted not because it was not tested, but because it clearly has issues observed and reported by the users.
If a driver does not work in popular configs, and needs to be blacklisted in those configs, your solution is to still whitelist it in other configs and have the browser likely not work.
yes, "every company" does exactly what google did. you are being purposely dense, trying to catch a "technically correct" chance of not admitting the stupidity of your question. The problem is, you are not even technically correct - just purposely dense.
And the test suite failed on a minor issue where the cause was uncertain, which gets in the way of checking for the bigger definitely-the-driver problem.