I think they come across as a little cold and cruel when talking about whether or not they will give the results to Google, but essentially they are correct. Google should be happy to have those results and the price should be small enough to be worth it. I just think it could have been phrased better, or not said at all.

Agreed. I don't doubt that they should somehow get compensated for their time, but making it sound like an extortion attempt strikes me as a poor choice.

And that is how you do marketing and provide a useful service (and not another photo sharing app)

Has anyone else used PVS Studio before? Looks interesting as a static analyzer, but curious how it stacks up against other options. It looks like it's pretty reliant on Visual Studio. This is the first I've heard of it. With a free trial and at only 1,600 Euro for a single-user license, I might actually try it out.

Why did you find that cheap?

I'm used to pricing for commercial embedded tools, which is rarely this straightforward or inexpensive. I'm not saying that's a good thing, but that's why I found this "cheap". Of course, I can't really speak to its value without having evaluated it. The "only" qualifier presumed it's a comprehensive, commercially-supported static analysis tool that I would find valuable, but the call for actual users' opinions was my first step in testing this presumption. I'm installing it now.

tl;dr "Chromium is good."

Good as in "coded according to established coding standards". This probably reduces the likelyhood of programmer errors (such as the quoted mistakes with sizeof()..), but doesn't mean that there are few actual bugs left.

To be more explicit, Chromium has a large, but high quality codebase with a relatively low rate of errors.