Re:The optional chaining operator, “modern” browsers, and my...
by ramses0 on Tuesday January 11, 2022 @02:10PM
(#29896217)
I got bit by this obsolescence. My understanding of the gist of it:
1) Chromebook is a "secure platform" => including drivers, firmware, etc. etc.
2) Supporting "security" across the browser is the first point, but additionally, there's security required across the whole hardware footprint
3) "when it's too expensive to keep track of / backport security fixes" or "the latest kernel won't build anymore" => "Sorry, your device is obsolete."
4) The rise of evergreen browsers (specifically chrome-monopoly) is pushing the definition of what is worth updating / monkey-patching / transpiling.
There's "ways" to update "stuff" but at that point you're basically using it as a linux device (subject to _linux's_ security and update stance) instead of a chromeos device.
1) Chromebook is a "secure platform" => including drivers, firmware, etc. etc.
2) Supporting "security" across the browser is the first point, but additionally, there's security required across the whole hardware footprint
3) "when it's too expensive to keep track of / backport security fixes" or "the latest kernel won't build anymore" => "Sorry, your device is obsolete."
4) The rise of evergreen browsers (specifically chrome-monopoly) is pushing the definition of what is worth updating / monkey-patching / transpiling.
There's "ways" to update "stuff" but at that point you're basically using it as a linux device (subject to _linux's_ security and update stance) instead of a chromeos device.