It amounts to the same thing. Google decision-makers are aware they are excluding a significant chunk of "edge cases" in order to hit their profit goals. They don't think of it in terms of "let's screw over people who need to remap mouse buttons because of physical disabilities!" but that's only because they are actively choosing _not_ to think about the impact of their hyper-"logical" efficiency decisions.

Given the big Chromebook push into the education space, accessibility issues like this which impact the 5% of "edge cases" out there are actually really critical. There's no good excuse for skimping on accessibility. The fully-abled developers on the project--who likely don't work with anyone with disabilities, much less have they ever considered what it would be like to use their products with disabilities--have fully embraced the data-driven, A-B tested, "simplicity" (for most) at all costs approach that doubles down on human biases against disabled individuals, but just because they aren't actively choosing the predictable consequences doesn't mean they aren't responsible for the predictable consequences.