Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×
Data Storage Operating Systems Linux

After Negative User Response, ChromeOS To Re-Introduce Support For Ext{2,3,4} 183

NotInHere writes: Only three days after the public learned that the ChromeOS project was going to disable ext2fs support for external drives (causing Linux users to voice many protests on websites like Slashdot and the issue tracker), the ChromeOS team now plans to support it again. To quote Ben Goodger's comment: "Thanks for all of your feedback on this bug. We've heard you loud and clear. We plan to re-enable ext2/3/4 support in Files.app immediately. It will come back, just like it was before, and we're working to get it into the next stable channel release."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

After Negative User Response, ChromeOS To Re-Introduce Support For Ext{2,3,4}

Comments Filter:
  • re ext support (Score:5, Insightful)

    by freddieb ( 537771 ) on Thursday October 16, 2014 @08:55AM (#48158005)
    Correct response. Thanks Google for listening. I definitely would consider a Chromebox however ext support is manditory!
    • Re:re ext support (Score:4, Interesting)

      by KozmoStevnNaut ( 630146 ) <henrikstevn@gmaiFREEBSDl.com minus bsd> on Thursday October 16, 2014 @09:21AM (#48158189)

      Absolutely, I was in the same camp of considering a Chromebook, but removal of extFS support could have made it a lot harder to work smoothly together with my Linux desktop. I'm glad the devs listen to the feedback they get and are willing to go back on their previous decisions if they prove hugely unpopular with the users.

      Now, all I have to do is wait for the 64-bit Tegra K1 "Denver" Chromebooks to hit the market.

  • by Thantik ( 1207112 ) on Thursday October 16, 2014 @09:00AM (#48158041)
    So now bitching and moaning constitutes contributing to F/OSS? Awesome! I'm an open source contributor! Now to put this on my resume.....
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      You joke, but honest and constructive feedback from users is a huge part of developing quality software. Sometimes the feedback to certain changes gets a bit virulent and aggressive, but even then there might be bits of valuable information on how users view your software.

      So keep up the feedback, and try to be as constructive as possible! :-)

      • by ihtoit ( 3393327 )

        What he said. I've had "Application tester" on my resume for years, always impresses the geek.

        Truth of it is, I'm always sending in bug reports complete with hex dumps and screenshots. I just want my shit to work, and when it doesn't I want it fixed, letting the devs know what's up is the best way to accomplish that.

      • However there is a case where there is a vocal minority using the product for a niche use, that the product isn't designed for.

        XKCD [xkcd.com]

  • by Philus ( 58941 )

    Now where can I bitch and moan about Chrome loading all tabs at once on startup? Such a pain to launch it and wait for a.couple dozen js- and flash-ridden pages to load..

    • It's been reported as a bug multiple times and closed, on the basis that they would rather load all tabs on startup than having the user wait for each tab individually. It's really a tossup between two non-ideal solutions. Last I heard, they're trying to optimize page loading to lessen the impact of loading a bunch of tabs simultaneously.

      If I may ask, why are you loading a bunch of tabs on startup? I assume these are the same tabs every time, and that you're actually going to use these tabs actively as soon

  • Confused (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Midnight Thunder ( 17205 ) on Thursday October 16, 2014 @09:12AM (#48158125) Homepage Journal

    So a bug is a feature and per Google, a removed feature is a bug? Okay, I think I have it.

    • The way I understood it a bug is what originally caused them to remove a feature that they didn't think anyone wanted. When backlash hit they fixed the bug and re-introduced the feature.

  • At least they are listening. But, it would be nice if they pushed a unified OS between the Chrome stuff and Android. Annoying when a phone/tablet has more software available than a "laptop".

    • They're doing that now. Android apps are slowly trickling into the Chrome app store. They started out with Vine and Evernote and a couple of others, but the goal is to have every Android app run on Chrome as well.

      • I am so sick of this trickle approach to computing. If they are developing an OS, ALL apps should work, not carefully selected ones.. So tired of everything being hand-tuned for strategic partners while the ground remains scorched.
        • Android compatibility wasn't part of the original plan for ChromeOS. Would you rather have had to wait 2-3 years and then have a big announcement that Google has secretly been building Android compatibility?

          Or would you agree the current approach is better, since Google needs to get the app developers in on this thing, too? It's not like every Android app will magically work, a bunch of them will probably need code changes. Would you have preferred Google to keep everything secret and then spring the surpri

    • Annoying when a phone/tablet has more software available than a "laptop".

      Unless the giant software ecosystem is insecure.

    • I think the coming Windows laptops [hp.com] with Atom processors are going to obsolete the whole reason for getting a ChromeBook. When you can get a laptop that runs full Windows for $200-$250 and get's 8 hours of battery life. To make it clear, these are full Windows 8 Laptops, not Windows RT. I'm waiting for the reviews to come out to see how they will perform in real life, and how durable they are, but I'm definitely looking into getting a couple for my kids if they are decent. Even in grades 2 and 3, all their
      • by ihtoit ( 3393327 )

        prior art: Asus EeePC 1008HA I have has 1GB RAM and runs full Windows XP, with a nearly 10h battery life. I bought that in 2011 not long after they came out.

        • Yeah, they definitely aren't the first, but the fact that the new HP ones are 11.6 and 13 inches changes things a bit. the 10.1 inch and 1024x600 resolution of the EeePC is something that very much constrains what you can do with it. Also, I remember them being a bit more than $200, at least when they were initially released.
          • by ihtoit ( 3393327 )

            there's that, although I find the ability to vertically compress the desktop to 1024x768 when needed, to be very handy and not too distracting. Anyone remember what the Dell C400 and L400s went for as new (I have both but secondhand - paid more for a new screen for the C400 than I did for both machines combined)? I do like those, even more than the EeePC in the perfect balance between screen size and almost-pocket-portability and battery life (notwithstanding the price tag of the C400 battery being over

      • Chromebooks are not primary computers, they're supplemental computers. Having full Windows is a disadvantage, the purpose is to be as dead simple and unbreakable as possible.

      • by Rich0 ( 548339 )

        Will those windows laptops have:

        1. Secure boot with verification of the entire OS.
        2. All installed software runs in a sandbox.
        3. All installed software gets automated updates.
        4. All OS configuration is cloud-backed.
        5. Full disk encryption by default, with protection of each user profile (such that no user can read another's profile).
        6. Ability to reset to factory state with a single click, with re-configuration just requiring a user to login with a cloud ID.

        There are certainly things you can do with W

        • I think that most users didn't really care about those features. They saw $200 and laptop, and the choice was obvious. Most people don't have any clue what secure boot, or sandbox is. When there's a Windows laptop sitting right beside it at the same price, people are going to pick the Windows machine, because it can run everything they want.
  • by kilodelta ( 843627 ) on Thursday October 16, 2014 @09:29AM (#48158243) Homepage
    A responsive development team. That's pretty cool! Now if only Google would put some time into improving Gmail because their web based product sucks ass.
    • " Now if only Google would put some time into improving Gmail because their web based product sucks ass."

      Hmm... Who makes a superior web based email/calendar system? What secret sauce would you bring in that solves your problems with the gmail service, which doesn't add complexity or confusion to the rest of the planet?

    • The minute Google touches Gmail again to do any improvements, they're going to change the interface to their new cardifided bullshit, just like Google+ and Drive. I don't want them gimping the Gmail interface on the web with unremovable whitespace and hidden details.
  • Just think (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Ol Olsoc ( 1175323 ) on Thursday October 16, 2014 @09:34AM (#48158267)
    If this was Microsoft instead of Google, the fanbois would be out yelling at the people who complained, telling them what idiots they were, and that no one in their right mind would ever want an external drive on their Chromebook.

    Then Google would have completely ignored the complaints claiming that their research showed absolutely everyone just loved elimination of support for external drives.

    We talked, they listened.

    Sitting here at breakfast, happily using my little Chromebook that boots into Linux when I need it.

    • Which is exactly what happens with Android (see: microSD support debate). I'm glad the Chromebook community is nascent enough to avoid the sheeple.
  • Other android smartphones flash drives with OTG cables out of the box, why don't you?

  • I'm a linux user, and a ChromeOS user. I failed to see why everyone got their painties in such a bunch over this. ext* external file systems don't really seem to be in the scope of the ChormeOS devices, what would be the use case for 99.99% of users of ChromeOS to do this? Heck, I don't even format my detachable external drives as ext* on my linux boxen as those are the drives I use to transfer bits around to other computers.
    • It's the PS3 OtherOS all over again. If they didn't have the feature in the first place, fine; but having it and then removing it smells bad.

    • Even if you don't, others do. I read plenty of comments on the link in TFA where people explained their setups. Many users are using ext for its featureset, and don't need compatibility with Windows systems.
      • I'm still not buying it, it's still not the scope of the device. Catering to users that use the device outside its intended use (not that there is anything wrong with that) starts to back you into a corner as a developer. Want a cheap linux laptop with reasonable specs? Fine, get a chromebook and install a "real" linux distro on it and not this locked down thing, then you can format your drives however you want.
        • Ext2/3/4 are common file systems for Linux users. By saying they are outside the scope, you're essentially shooting yourself in the foot in regards to the Linux market. Which is hypocritical considering that Chrome OS is built on top of Chrominium, a FOSS project, which is built on top of the Linux kernel in turn. Having a Linux derivative that supports Ext2/3/4 is not outside scope.
  • by TangoMargarine ( 1617195 ) on Thursday October 16, 2014 @10:38AM (#48158753) Journal

    To quote Ben Goodger's comment: "Thanks for all of your feedback on this bug. We've heard you loud and clear. We plan to re-enable ext2/3/4 support in Files.app immediately. It will come back, just like it was before, and we're working to get it into the next stable channel release."

    It's not a bug unless it was an accident.

    • by ornil ( 33732 )

      Come on, "bug" is slang for something filed in a bugs tracker.

    • There was a bug that was the underlying cause for them to remove the feature.

      The feedback was on how they handled the bug (removing the feature rather than fixing it).

  • I guess. But WTF were you people thinking? That course of action was a not only a colossal blunder, it was an obviously colossal blunder. What twisted reasoning could possibly have made that seem like a good idea.?
    • by Shados ( 741919 )

      They probably have pretty extensive usage statistics that made it easy to push down in priority until it totally fell off the list of things worth doing.

      At that time, bad publicity wasn't part of the metric. Now it is. Thats probably all there is to it.

Time-sharing is the junk-mail part of the computer business. -- H.R.J. Grosch (attributed)

Working...