It has everything to do with it. If you had money and needed to, would you buy a Porsche from a dodgy backstreet garage that had so many red flags on the way in?
Trust is everything. If I don't trust you, why would I believe your marketing bumpf?
Why are you shilling for google in a privacy community, anyway?
"and privacy/security are big aspects of those". Telegram wrapped their own encryption that isn't e2e by default and iirc had holes in it from a security audit. Many people like shouting across the fence to their neighbours, it has features that many want (seemless voice conferencing). It just isn't secure. You cannot be private without being secure.
Because they gain more from it. They pay Firefox for default search. There is a return on investment. $7bn is a larger cost and would need greater revenue from those activities to justify it. Whether they do or not, from the UK market, we'll have to wait and see, but it is a reasonable dint.
I wouldn't get excited until it's successful. They got expensive lawyers.
I'm not so sure, if it is quite expensive and carries on being quite expensive, they may need to make changes to default search or default browsers. If this can help people get Firefox easier, this could start to chip away at the viability of WEI (web DRM).
I have been using OpenSuse for over a year now, and it's solid. Had 1 minor issue with audio crackling where i needed to restart Pulseaudio, but that's long gone now. Highly recommend. Had regular breakages with Manjaro, so wouldn't touch it.
More functional at the expense of privacy or security is probably not an argument that will do well here. Most are here to get away from google and privacy/security are big aspects of those.
I'll go without, for both.
As an environmentalist this really bothers me. I want a new electric car which is better for the planet. I no longer think I can. I would probably have to pick up an older model. What a joke. I'm too angry about the way the world is progressing, our privacy is eroded faster that we can take steps to mitigate.
That is informative and unfortunate.
In reality, leave it, if they don't want to deal with toxicity, they want a toxic project.
Arch users are often quite proud of what their distro says about them. A spin off will likely have people who's ego is a little too invested in this. Many great distros exist that don't encourage toxicity. You can follow this project without being in messaging. Many messaging groups can be toxic.
I'm not sure of any. What's wrong with Firefox etc.?
Agreed. It looks more awkward than intentional. You don't teach people by making assertions of their character or banning then from places. You highlight the mistake and what it is the problem.
You not considered Proton for cloud storage?