Hacker News Reader

Comment by MatthewPhillips | Hacker News Reader

That's because you mistakenly think Chrome is a Windows app, a Mac app, and a Linux app. It's not. It's an operating system that runs on top of those. They aren't going to, and shouldn't, waste their time trying to mimic UI decisions for various OSes. They aren't trying to be like Seesmic or Evernote (meaning, they aren't trying to be an "app").

View on HN

More people use multiple apps on one platform than use the same app on multiple platforms. That said,a browser is considered an app platform itself these days.

Also: you disagree with the poster. That doesn't mean he has been proven wrong. Your post comes off as unnecessarily rude.

I assumed your parent post did not mean Chrome the app, he meant chrome the UI concept. Of Firefox. But I think I was wrong and he does mean Chrome the app. So, wtf? Off topic, and confusingly so, since Firefox suffers the same problems, and worse.

I'll admit I am not a good pick when it comes to computer semantics, so I might be mistaken.

Trying to be an "app" or not: For me, it is about the courtesy of respecting my main OS settings. It is about introducing accessibility concerns by overriding system settings such as demonstrated in this active bug report from 2008: http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=92

> They aren't going to, and shouldn't, waste their time

It looks like they are going to, and really should fix this bug report. Improving the usability, interoperability and accessibility of your "app" or "operating system" is not a waste of time. You'd have a hard time backing that up.

My point wasn't that they shouldn't fix bugs; it's that they shouldn't prioritize fixing OS-specific bugs that impact 0.2% of their users. It sounds like you are a Windows power user and I suggest you use IE9 instead.

I'm pretty sure more than .2% of Chrome users use Windows.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com