[HN Gopher] 10 years since Google said to "hang tight" about Lin...
___________________________________________________________________
10 years since Google said to "hang tight" about Linux support for
Google Drive
Author : politelemon
Score : 277 points
Date : 2022-04-24 16:40 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (abevoelker.github.io)
(TXT) w3m dump (abevoelker.github.io)
| wzm wrote:
| https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/35904387 ipv6 support in
| GCP is similar, it's at 9 years now.
| dreen wrote:
| Websockets still not generally available, ticket opened in 2009
| https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/35886348
| dudus wrote:
| There's really no reason to use AppEngine these days. I
| believe it still exists for legacy apps. You should be using
| Cloud run. Cloud run support WebSockets[1].
|
| If you already have an AppEngine App you can always keep it
| and create a CloudRun app to handle the WebSocket part and
| they communicate well.
|
| [1]: https://cloud.google.com/run/docs/triggering/websockets
| [deleted]
| cloudking wrote:
| The market size is not big enough to justify the internal costs
| of building and maintaining it.
|
| For dev environments, you can workaround it using Windows + Drive
| filestream + WSL.
| https://github.com/microsoft/WSL/issues/2999#issuecomment-91...
| jchw wrote:
| When I worked at Google, almost all developer workstations were
| running Linux. That alone really should be plenty of
| justification for having such a client. They did not.
| imajoredinecon wrote:
| As a Google employee, you almost never need to store anything
| on Drive, do you? I'm struggling to think of a "sync my
| files" workflow where corp Drive would have been the best
| solution if only there had been a Linux client.
| shadowgovt wrote:
| As a Google employee using Linux, the kind of files I
| stored in Drive were rarely useful synced to my filesystem.
| jchw wrote:
| To be clear, I would've preferred something more like a
| FUSE implementation, which thankfully exists for someone
| outside of Google.
|
| There is FileStream or whatever it's called, but it's
| never coming to Linux so who cares.
| jchw wrote:
| If you needed to share files outside of code or what have
| you, you would have to use Google Drive. Perhaps not all
| developers wind up needing this very often. But
| realistically, for me, the majority of the benefit would've
| been integration. I'm sorry, but browsing files in a web
| browser absolutely sucks. Even if double clicking a
| document only opened Google Docs, that would still be a
| usability win.
|
| At my current workplace I use a FUSE driver to get Google
| Drive in my file browser and I wouldn't have it any other
| way.
| cloudking wrote:
| Internally is a lot different than externally
| https://www.statista.com/statistics/218089/global-market-
| sha...
| jchw wrote:
| You're missing my point.
| cloudking wrote:
| Your point is a lot of internal developers use Linux so
| they should make a Linux drive client, my counterpoint is
| that dedicating engineering resources to building and
| maintaining such a project is not worth the cost.
| Management looks at the cost and ROI of developing and
| maintaining projects, in this case the ROI from having a
| Linux client that would likely need 5-10 SWEs to maintain
| is not worth it for them. They have to ensure the client
| is compatible with multiple flavors of Linux releases,
| monitor security issues etc it's a big ongoing cost. If
| more consumers and businesses used Linux, they could
| justify the cost.
|
| I'm not saying this is the right move, but I'm explaining
| why this project hasn't been funded.
| jchw wrote:
| If Google made a calculated decision to not implement
| Drive on Linux, it wasn't clear to me, nor did I ever
| hear that in or out of Google.
| ilrwbwrkhv wrote:
| Google is a me too company now. Innovation left the company a
| long time ago. That is why I tell startups I invest in, not to
| worry at all if Google enters their space.
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| What are you even talking about? Let's look at the opposite end
| of the spectrum for innovation like Truth Social or Parler.
| Those are absolute Trash.
| jchw wrote:
| Times have changed in many more ways than one.
|
| These days I greatly prefer to own my data more directly, which I
| accomplish using a NAS. I don't use Dropbox OR Google Drive, I
| use Syncthing, which can do stuff that neither of those could
| ever dream of in terms of syncing between machines.
|
| Not only do I _not_ want Google Drive, I don't even want anything
| like it.
|
| That said, I totally get why it's still important. I do use
| Google Drive at work and for that type of use case I would not
| argue in favor of self-hosting. Syncthing is great for a single
| person or even a fairly large group of people, but not for a big
| organization. Not to mention you probably use Google Docs or
| Office 365 anyways, both of which are integrated with their
| respective company's storage offerings. Syncthing won't give you
| directory sync, docs integration, or granular ACLs.
|
| But that's actually perfectly fine, because I don't need any of
| those things. Hell, I flat out don't really want them. You could
| probably get something similar with ownCloud which I did try
| running, and I'm not even particularly enticed. I'm sure Synology
| has a full suite as well, but it's not what I want out of my NAS.
| Part of being happier with my technology was just as much
| realizing what I _didn't_ want as it was realizing what I wanted.
| bpye wrote:
| I'm curious, what do you use to access files on your NAS? I've
| used Samba for forever but it's always been kind of annoying to
| deal with permissions, and whilst running AD would probably
| solve that, I then have to deal with running AD. I'm tempted to
| try switching to NFS instead.
| jchw wrote:
| Samba. I tried AD very briefly before realizing how
| absolutely terrible of an idea it was. It just makes life so
| complicated, and AD integration was not as good as I was
| hoping. I can see why this market constantly has all kinds of
| crazy offerings...
|
| As far as permissions go, I guess I am mostly ignoring
| granular permissions. I'm generally only concerned with
| permissions on a per-share basis. This way, file permissions
| mostly don't matter and can be a one-and-done affair. Then, I
| can split files up into separate shares.
|
| NFS also seemed appealing, but honestly it does seem to bring
| a lot of complexity that SMB/CIFS does not, and everything
| supports the latter well enough for my use cases.
|
| Remote access is another issue, since you should probably not
| do SMB over the internet, but I guess that can be solved with
| Tailscale or ZeroTier.
| frontierkodiak wrote:
| I've been very happy with self-hosting a Seafile instance to
| serve as a personal cloud for myself and a small academic ML
| team. I built a small NAS, Proxmox runs on baremetal, on top of
| which there's an ubuntu VM running a Seafile docker instance.
| Fantastic performance, so so much more efficient for syncing
| large libraries b/w machines. Owncloud/Nextcloud was a pig for
| my purposes, it seemed unable to sync libraries w/ large number
| of files (2million+). IIRC Seafile sync client is C under the
| hood, and is much more performant than any other sync client
| I've tried. OneDrive was completely unable to upload the amt of
| data that I needed, and I was tired of manually splitting my
| datasets into chunks, only to have to stitch them back together
| on the shitty WebUI. Feel free to hit me with any questions if
| anyone is thinking of setting up a Seafile instance. I've found
| their 'community edition' free release to be more than
| sufficient for our team.
| frontierkodiak wrote:
| Oh yeah, most importantly-- Linux is treated as a 1st class
| citizen, the sync clients are equally performant b/w
| platforms in my experience. In contrast to Nextcloud, Seafile
| is really good at one thing-- file sync&share-- and the Web
| UI is intuitive & full-featured for users & admin alike.
| pipeline_peak wrote:
| I don't think average users even use the Google Drive desktop
| client.
| titzer wrote:
| Just give us a web filesystem already. Stop with these shitty
| infantilized GUIs with no hierarchical organization and an
| overreliance on search to find things. I have literally hundreds
| of thousands to millions of files on my local machines and have
| no trouble remembering where I put things. Drive can't seem to
| scale past a few dozen before it's confusing, useless, and
| apparently lossy. Remember when web servers would serve up the
| contents of a directory as a list with hyperlinks on the file
| names? That actually _worked_ ffs. I cannot understand how we
| could be moving backwards so quickly.
| silisili wrote:
| I agree with all of your complaints, but will say Gnome
| nautilus integration is working pretty well these days, and
| allows me to interact with it more like a filesystem than a
| shitty webui.
| CoastalCoder wrote:
| > Just give us a web filesystem already.
|
| Your level of angst makes me think you believe someone out
| there is obligated to do this for you.
|
| If you believe that, I'm curious why.
| mplewis wrote:
| Because one would presume that a company building online file
| storage as a product would want it to _work?_
| CoastalCoder wrote:
| It does work, but apparently not as the OP wishes it did.
|
| There's a difference between "I wish this product had
| feature X" and "I'm upset because I'm _owed_ feature X for
| reason Y. "
| pessimizer wrote:
| > There's a difference between "I wish this product had
| feature X" and "I'm upset because I'm owed feature X for
| reason Y."
|
| Then you probably shouldn't have added the _owed_ part.
| thrwyoilarticle wrote:
| Because it's a paid service. But explaining the emotions
| you've projected upon OP isn't useful discussion.
| CoastalCoder wrote:
| From the OP:
|
| > Just give us a web filesystem already. Stop with these
| shitty infantilized GUIs ... That actually worked ffs.
| ...
|
| I responded by saying:
|
| > Your level of angst makes me think ...
|
| I suppose I could be wrong about the OP expressing angst,
| but I think it's reasonable inference.
|
| Also, you wrote:
|
| > Because it's a paid service.
|
| I see two problems here:
|
| (1) I was asking the OP (@titzer) what their reasons
| were, not yours.
|
| (2) Only some people pay for Google Drive. One reason
| that I wrote:
|
| > Your level of angst makes me think you believe someone
| out there is obligated to do this for you.
|
| >
|
| > If you believe that, I'm curious why.
|
| was that if the @titzer _was_ paying for Google Drive, I
| could see him having a stronger reason for expecting
| Google to make the product useful _to him_. But I didn 't
| want to assume, which is why I asked.
| boredpudding wrote:
| Just gonna leave this here:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
|
| Please don't go into how another person is feeling, just
| read the comment and reply. It will never go well for you
| if you try to dismiss somebody's comments by focusing on
| how they are feeling instead of their words.
| mechanical_bear wrote:
| I am paying for Google Drive and I agree with Titzer.
| llanowarelves wrote:
| It barely works.
|
| Google Drive deletes files randomly (whether due to
| programmatic/storage problems or the documented issue
| with the algo not liking things and silently deleting
| them).
|
| Missing block level sync reinforces that it's a toy. What
| would you do with 100+gb they tout if not having big
| media files? 10,000 spreadsheets (that might still
| randomly get deleted)?
|
| I would be afraid to rely on it for business
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| I see no proof of it doing this. It sounds like it you
| are saving spreadsheets it may have to do with an
| extension or third-party app you are using. I've never
| had an issue with files randomly getting deleted on
| Google Drive and it would be a much bigger issue if this
| was common.
| ranrotx wrote:
| I'd take a file system that can be indexed by my local
| operating system (MacOS).
|
| The last MacOS update broke Spotlight indexing for my Google
| Drive folders. Really annoying not being able to use Spotlight
| (and by extension Alfred), so the only logical thing to do was
| move to iCloud.
|
| In the process of moving off of Google Drive, I also decided to
| move my email to Fastmail and just ditch GSuite (or whatever
| they are calling it today) forever. I'll sleep better at night
| knowing that Fastmail knows their place and (hopefully) won't
| try and force a chat function into my web email client as a
| means to build engagement for a product I don't care about.
| voltaireodactyl wrote:
| Spotlight no longer working with google drive -- for months
| now -- has been such a pain in my ass that it's finally
| convinced me to shift my entire company off Google Workspace.
| At least with Microsoft I can get someone on the phone.
| snvzz wrote:
| Consider paying for S3.
| maccard wrote:
| S3 is not a filesystem replacement unfortunately.
| kumarsw wrote:
| Not a filesystem, but rclone works pretty well
| maccard wrote:
| rclone also works with Google drive, if that's all you're
| after.
| Stampo00 wrote:
| I agree with you 100%. I just want something that stores files
| and works with SFTP and NFS out of the box. I get so annoyed
| every time I have to use S3 manually.
|
| However, there is a post on this site that has become infamous
| in which a commenter questions the need for Dropbox when stuff
| like SFTP already exists.
| Buxato wrote:
| Thanks Insync I could survive without their support.
| stjohnswarts wrote:
| Insync works well but it is pay to play
| emilsedgh wrote:
| https://community.kde.org/KIO_GDrive
| AeroNotix wrote:
| GCS works. For my own use it is just much simpler to use GCS
| beastman82 wrote:
| Right. Don't they have a fuse file system that they actively
| maintain?
| stjohnswarts wrote:
| There is some guy there that maintains an ocaml based fuse
| google-drive client. It works okay. I'm not sure if he
| volunteers to maintain or is paid. I have moved on to the
| isync product but the ocaml opensource project is still there
| and maintained last I checked.
| layer8 wrote:
| I'm glad that Dropbox provides a Linux client, although it is
| annoying that it is limited to x86 and ext4. At least the latter
| can be worked around with a loopback device.
| dehrmann wrote:
| Wasn't that around the time Sean Hannity volunteered to get
| waterboarded?
| shadowgovt wrote:
| The Drive API is pretty stable. So given that we're talking about
| Linux, the immediate question that comes to my mind is "why
| hasn't somebody written it themselves?"
|
| Perhaps Google sees no benefit in building a service in a space
| where users can self serve making it.
| [deleted]
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| The OP no longer seems to succesfuly link to any communication
| from Google saying to "hang tight".
| ISL wrote:
| As the decision seems to be deliberate, I'm interested _why_
| Google has chosen not to implement such a feature. I 'm a paying
| GSuite customer. I'd love to be able to NFS-mount portions of my
| home directory into Google Drive for access across platforms and
| sharing/collaboration with others.
|
| There's got to be a reason that Google Drive isn't interested in
| implementing linux mounts -- I'd be surprised if it is market
| share alone. The reason may be interesting/unexpected.
| shadowgovt wrote:
| It's market share, but I suspect Google's numbers may be skewed
| here by their measurement system. They almost certainly have
| hard numbers on the percent of users accessing the UI via
| various platform configs, and the Linux numbers are low.
| Question is if that's because they haven't cracked into the
| market because they aren't offering desktop integration.
|
| The other interesting question is: what are Linux users using
| instead? Because that's Google's competition for this software,
| which implies how much they could make competing.
| frontierkodiak wrote:
| Lack of Drive integration was what kicked me to finally self-
| host a Seafile instance.
| blagie wrote:
| My experience is that data-driven companies get into self-
| reinforcing circles:
|
| - Data shows not a lot of customers use Linux
|
| - Which leads to poor Linux support
|
| - Which leads to not a lot of customers using Linux
|
| That's not specific to this either. I've seen companies
| discount continents of people due to lack of customers on
| those continents, which was often due to inanely easy-to-
| solve problems. But if you only have 0.1% of your market in
| China, why bother with servers which are inside the Great
| Firewall? If 0.1% of your population is Spanish-speaking, why
| bother with i18n?
|
| Data driven companies have an inherent bias towards /current/
| customers, and away from /potential/ customers....
| henriquez wrote:
| fulafel wrote:
| Would the ChromeOS implementation work if they packaged it, and
| if not, why not?
| Mikeb85 wrote:
| The web app works fine. In fact, it works better than anything
| OneDrive related for example (which never seems to sync
| properly).
|
| Chrome and all of Google's services make being in Linux-land way
| easier...
| sgtnoodle wrote:
| I suspect that there's a fundamental conflict in semantics
| somewhere between drive and posix filesystems. Any sort of
| filesystem wrapper on top of drive would immediately require
| making annoying compromises, and the trade-off is convenience
| vs. data safety.
|
| Targeting a locked down OS like Windows or Mac isn't too
| difficult, because those compromises can be carefully
| implemented in a way that avoids accidental data corruption but
| doesn't negatively impact user workflow too much. On a Linux
| system, there's hundreds if not thousands of configurations
| that folk would expect a filesystem to work in, and so it's a
| lot more difficult to strike that balance.
|
| Years ago, I remember a coworker dragged a directory around on
| his MacBook, and it completely flattened the company's entire
| drive directory structure.
| renewiltord wrote:
| There's a pretty good FUSE driver and the web app is fine. Never
| felt the need for a Linux client for this service. Two decades of
| Linux use and the thing that has changed everything has been the
| arrival of electron which has made practically everything cross-
| platform.
| jokethrowaway wrote:
| If something uses electron, I'll look for a native alternative.
|
| Ripcord doesn't have the best UI and I can't open Teams calls
| or even links that are too long (Slack broke their API at some
| point) but at least it's not wasting my ram and it's responds
| quickly. The rare times I have to open Slack on the web I sigh
| and wait 2 minutes for the app to load.
|
| I automated Prituln VPN via bash just not to have to deal with
| another Electron client for a damn popup on my tray bar.
| assbuttbuttass wrote:
| There's always the excellent unofficial google-drive-ocamlfuse
| which uses FUSE to mount Google drive to a local directory.
|
| https://github.com/astrada/google-drive-ocamlfuse
| robertlagrant wrote:
| Don't worry - Google Drive does support Linux. Just only on for
| the server, not the client :D
| dijit wrote:
| Wait, doesn't this work? I had a weird experience where pop_OS!
| automatically mapped my google drive to nautilus once I had
| logged in.
|
| I'm sure that it's not native, but what features would I be
| missing? I was very pleasantly surprised when it just kinda
| worked.
| Kye wrote:
| That support comes from Gnome Online Accounts.
|
| https://wiki.gnome.org/Projects/GnomeOnlineAccounts/Provider...
|
| Last time I tried it, that only supported the virtual drive
| thing, so no actual files locally.
| ggambetta wrote:
| I've been using Insync for a few years now, works flawlessly.
| lovelearning wrote:
| What's it supposed to do? Aren't "rclone mount" and the OS file
| manager sufficient?
| ncphil wrote:
| ... exactly what I was thinking. Discovering rclone mount
| finally let me abandon the file sync paradigm and return to my
| workflows of yesteryear when NFS was still the dominant file
| sharing system on Unix.
| kkfx wrote:
| GNU/Linux users are mostly a bit tech-savvy users, big of IT like
| dumb users, they are easy to profit from, very moderately tech-
| savvy ones are just needed to pull more people in so offering a
| bit of services with a good enough quality and something to make
| the experience nice enough for a tech-savvy user (like YT or
| Google Search with a certain set of extensions to cut ads etc) is
| enough to have thous users recommend those services to their less
| tech savvy friends and the world of mouth do the magic. More than
| that might be even counter-productive if show a real tangible far
| lower quality to the aforementioned users like most single-
| company show software are: crappy and outdated.
|
| Alphabet do want data from the masses, not much from a small
| cohort of smart users. Invest for them is not interesting.
| jeffbee wrote:
| Google Drive does support Linux with the completely open source
| DriveFS and supporting userspace services like Seneschal in the
| ChromiumOS project. People who claim otherwise don't believe in
| actual open source software development, they just want a
| convenient quasi-commercial software package that doesn't cost
| them anything.
| lawl wrote:
| > they just want a convenient quasi-commercial software package
| that doesn't cost them anything.
|
| Wouldn't I be paying for gdrive and thus expect to get working
| software? The free tier isn't enough for me and I would have
| paid if they had a linux client.
|
| Its okay if they don't think linux is worth it, but your
| argument that i should pay for the software again seems really
| weird to me.
| stephbu wrote:
| It feels like Google's attention span, leadership longevity, and
| product development patience is roughly 3 years. Any product that
| survives longer than that probably has transcended beyond being a
| "pet project/toy" into a PR-problem or revenue-stream significant
| enough that it takes on a life of it's own. As management turns
| over, that lease on life is renewed...
|
| https://killedbygoogle.com/
|
| While this fosters new ideas and opportunities, that conversion
| into long-term direction and execution can be pretty rough.
| fswd wrote:
| You nailed it. Every 3 years google renames and rebadges their
| chat system. I don't even know what to call it anymore.
| samizdis wrote:
| I've posted this link before in comments, but for anyone
| who's not read this arstechnica piece it is well worth it:
|
| _A decade and a half of instability: The history of Google
| messaging apps_
|
| https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/08/a-decade-and-a-
| half-...
| easrng wrote:
| There's Google Chat, which is really made for companies but
| available on normal accounts too, and Google Messages, their
| SMS/MMS/RCS app for Android, which requires that you have an
| Android phone and a phone plan.
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| Also Hangouts, Meet, Duo, Allo, Spaces. I don't even know
| if all of them are alive now, and I don't care enough to
| check.
| lyton wrote:
| I used Allo for some time. It's long gone now.
| hda111 wrote:
| To be even more confusing, it's also possible to chat and
| video conference with the Gmail app. But maybe this
| changes tomorrow who knows?
| DangitBobby wrote:
| They removed the ability to install the dedicated chat
| app and moved it all into the Gmail app. Infuriating. Oh,
| and it opens all links on the built-in chrome browser
| instead of respecting your default browser settings.
| There is no option to change the behavior.
| zeusk wrote:
| I'm pretty sure there was a Google+ chat, and who
| remembers Google Talk?
| joeframbach wrote:
| And Wave, whatever that was?
| seizethegdgap wrote:
| Not to be confused with Chat, which is inside the Google
| Messages app, which _is_ RCS.
| sbrother wrote:
| 3 years is roughly the average time it takes to get promoted at
| Google.
| enduroman wrote:
| Or the time someone leaves and goes to another job.
| llaolleh wrote:
| "Show me the incentives and I will show you the outcome." -
| Charlie Munger
| password4321 wrote:
| No mention of https://rclone.org/drive yet in case anyone is
| unaware.
|
| I don't see how 1st party could do any better than the handful of
| 3rd party options.
| noasaservice wrote:
| Those were the quaint times when we still believed that Google
| was awesome and cool, and doing amazing things.
|
| Now, it's a "our project is already dead", automated banning
| hellscape, where the only assistance is from other yet-to-be-AI-
| killed fellow user attempt to barely help. Or gods forbid, find
| someone here for a "social media escalation".
|
| I used to care. I gave up caring WRT google ages ago. They are
| not worth the trouble.
| meibo wrote:
| If there was one, people wouldn't use it. It's so well supported
| by open source software like rclone and insync, I feel like it
| actually works better than it does on my windows machine.
| Flimm wrote:
| Insync is not open source.
| midislack wrote:
| Over ten years ago it was already obvious that Google wasn't a
| reliable or useful company. You're gonna be waiting a LOOOONG
| time.
| munchler wrote:
| Link to the Google product forum on the target page is broken, so
| this is not informative at all.
| politelemon wrote:
| Yeah, looks like they broke the groups page, which was
| 'migrated' from an original Plus page at
| https://plus.google.com/u/0/+ChadMcCullough/posts/SxDNKR7ehS...
| charcircuit wrote:
| Yeah, I'm confused why no one else is discussing this. Who even
| said to hang tight? Was it someone on a Drive team? Was it a
| trusted community member? Was it just a optimistic Linux
| fanatic?
|
| There is missing context.
| seanwilson wrote:
| Do Google use Google Drive on Linux internally? Isn't Linux used
| a lot there?
| pedro2 wrote:
| They can mount GDriveFS internally as NFS, I think
| throwaway787544 wrote:
| Worth noting that it's not actually "Google" that said to "hang
| tight". An entire brand does not make a decision like whether to
| support Linux. It's a two-pizza team with a shitty budget and a
| remit to just keep the damn thing from going down and working out
| all the bugs with basic features like moving a file to a new
| folder in a weird drop-down.
|
| I'm sure the team would like to support Linux, if they had a
| bigger budget, if they could get out from all of their tech debt,
| if they had one or two specialized engineers added to their team.
| But the giant corporate behemoth isn't even remotely aware of
| those problems, nor will it care. There would have to be a clear
| case that adding a Linux client would create real business value.
| But considering how small Linux users probably are, and without
| an additional revenue stream to offset the cost of development,
| it's a non-starter.
| stefan_ wrote:
| The thinking was probably more along the lines of "no one ever
| got promoted for filling out the basic feature set of a file
| share me too service" and that promotion is what's standing
| between them and an extra 9000 pizzas a year worth of salary.
| With a bonus hint of "nobody cares what somebody promised that
| left the team a year ago after a year of working on it".
| jurschreuder wrote:
| Though Linux might be a small platform it's the only one that
| really matters.
| shadowgovt wrote:
| It apparently does not, since lack of Linux support hasn't
| killed the product.
| abeppu wrote:
| I get what you're saying, but:
|
| - The specific actions of a company will _always_ come from a
| specific subset of people who are interacting with and
| sometimes constrained by the broader organization. Should this
| mean that we can never talk coherently about the actions or
| statements of a company?
|
| - Isn't the company overall responsible for creating the
| organizational constraints and obstacles? Why is that team that
| size? Why is that their remit, and how has it changed since
| _someone_ decided to say "hang tight"? Why do they have the
| staff they have?
| georgebarnett wrote:
| The team who made the post were representing Google, therefor
| the company made the post.
|
| To propose otherwise implies that all similar
| actions/statements made in a similar way are not made by the
| company, which is both ludicrous and also causes Google to not
| exist.
| karaterobot wrote:
| I get what you're saying, but ultimately it is an issue of
| priority. Google has the money, they just don't choose to spend
| it on supporting Google Drive on Linux, even after saying they
| would. So, supporting Linux is by definition a lower priority
| than anything that did pass the bar for resource allocation in
| the last ten years.
|
| You're right about the motivations: they must not view it as
| creating real business value, since that's how these decisions
| get made.
|
| My only point here is that it IS a choice someone in an office
| is making: it's not worth it to support Drive on Linux. They do
| know about it, because it was on their radar 10 years ago.
| Somebody took it off their radar.
| hobo_mark wrote:
| I don't know how many M$/yr Google engineers cost, but there is
| at least one small software company out there (InSync) that
| built a multiplatform Google Drive client which, personally,
| has been working great for years, even on Linux (I'm just a
| user), for likely less than that.
| morganf wrote:
| I love Insync! Very underrated and I wish more people knew
| about it!!
| layer8 wrote:
| It seems that headless use (NAS, VPS) requires a
| subscription, unfortunately.
| anonymoushn wrote:
| Maybe they could ship a linux app instead of deprecating and
| replacing the mac app next time :)
| thecrumb wrote:
| Meh. Google. Google really hasn't come out with anything
| innovative in quite awhile, while killing once innovative
| projects.
| kornhole wrote:
| I connected my Linux systems to my Nextcloud server, and then I
| connected my Gdrive as external storage in Nextcloud. When I
| turned on server side encryption in Nextcloud it also encrypted
| my connected storage of Gdrive. So I accomplished both Gdrive
| integration as well as file encryption at the same time.
| politelemon wrote:
| > I connected my Gdrive as external storage in Nextcloud.
|
| This bit sounds interesting, could you explain it a little
| more, how you managed it?
| paisawalla wrote:
| Does this mean you're storing a backup of your NextCloud as a
| large encrypted blob in your gdrive?
| dang wrote:
| Related
|
| _How long since Google said a Google Drive Linux client is
| coming?_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24183399 - Aug
| 2020 (109 comments)
|
| _How long since Google said a Google Drive Linux client is
| coming?_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9434643 - April
| 2015 (59 comments)
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-04-24 23:00 UTC)