Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

10 years since Google said to “hang tight” about Linux support for Google Drive

abevoelker.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 227 posts

Re: 10 years since Google said to “hang tight” about Linux support for Google Drive

#141

Post by [deleted] »

georgebarnett wrote: post #79
throwaway787544 wrote: post #4

Worth noting that it's not actually "Google" that said to "hang tight". An entire brand does not make a decision like whether to support Linux. It's a two-pizza team with a shitty budget and a remit to just keep the damn thing from going down and working out all the bugs with basic features like moving a file to a new folder in a weird drop-down. I'm sure the team would like to support Linux, if they had a bigger bud…

The team who made the post were representing Google, therefor the company made the post. To propose otherwise implies that all similar actions/statements made in a similar way are not made by the company, which is both ludicrous and also causes Google to not exist.

[deleted]

Re: 10 years since Google said to “hang tight” about Linux support for Google Drive

#142

Post by bachmeier »

I just want to collect the major options for Google Drive on Linux in a single comment, since a few options are scattered around:

Insync works well, and it's 50% off for a couple more days: https://www.insynchq.com/ Not affiliated, but $15 is not a lot to pay, as opposed to waiting for something that probably won't happen.

Rclone has support for Google Drive, and it's open source: https://rclone.org/

There's a command line client that uses a push/pull workflow: https://github.com/odeke-em/drive It was written by a member of the Google Drive team.

Gnome supports Google Drive, or at least used to, directly in Nautilus. I don't use Gnome, so I can't comment.

There may be other options I've missed, but the point is that there is already good support in multiple forms. I'd be interested to know what support Google could provide that's not already available.

Re: 10 years since Google said to “hang tight” about Linux support for Google Drive

#143

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

ss108 wrote: post #119
easrng wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's Google Chat, which is really made for companies but available on normal accounts too, and Google Messages, their SMS/MMS/RCS app for Android, which requires that you have an Android phone and a phone plan.

I think I may make an independent thread about this soon (but my question may be stupid): why does messages use this paradigm of connecting to one's phone directly instead of accessing texts in some centralized fashion? Is that impossible because only the carrier has the contents of the thread (even though other services can be used to post texts)?

The surveillance state likes it that way.

Re: 10 years since Google said to “hang tight” about Linux support for Google Drive

#144

Post by phendrenad2 »

georgebarnett wrote: post #79
throwaway787544 wrote: post #4

Worth noting that it's not actually "Google" that said to "hang tight". An entire brand does not make a decision like whether to support Linux. It's a two-pizza team with a shitty budget and a remit to just keep the damn thing from going down and working out all the bugs with basic features like moving a file to a new folder in a weird drop-down. I'm sure the team would like to support Linux, if they had a bigger bud…

The team who made the post were representing Google, therefor the company made the post. To propose otherwise implies that all similar actions/statements made in a similar way are not made by the company, which is both ludicrous and also causes Google to not exist.

That's why you need to use your best judgement to determine if a random employee at a company has the knowledge/power/clout to act as an official spokesperson before believing what they say...

Re: 10 years since Google said to “hang tight” about Linux support for Google Drive

#145

Post by awill »

anuragsoni wrote: post #125
layer8 wrote: post #105

I’m glad that Dropbox provides a Linux client, although it is annoying that it is limited to x86 and ext4. At least the latter can be worked around with a loopback device.

Dropbox works on zfs, xfs and btrfs just fine. Source: https://help.dropbox.com/installs-integrations/desktop/syste...

Check https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20498454 Dropbox did drop support and bring it back. I use Linux with xfs, so I switched off Dropbox. Even though Dropbox went back on this decision, they did some damage, and probably lost people that haven't come back (like me).

Re: 10 years since Google said to “hang tight” about Linux support for Google Drive

#146

Post by jchw »

jra_samba wrote: post #126
jchw wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Samba. I tried AD very briefly before realizing how absolutely terrible of an idea it was. It just makes life so complicated, and AD integration was not as good as I was hoping. I can see why this market constantly has all kinds of crazy offerings… As far as permissions go, I guess I am mostly ignoring granular permissions. I’m generally only concerned with permissions on a per-share basis. This way, file permissions…

SMB3 is secure over the internet. But you really have to make sure it is an encrypted connection. In Samba you do this by adding: server min protocol = SMB3 smb encrypt = required to the [global] section of your smb.conf.

Honestly, I don’t mind a VPN moat on top of even that, but it’s definitely a good tip. Any unencrypted data over a VPN is a liability anyways.

That said: for the moment, I still have some SMB1 clients inside my network. Yes, this is terrible, and frankly it is surprising Samba still supports it (I won’t be too surprised or too angry if it gets removed now that it’s separated out.) I should probably segregate SMB1 clients onto a different fileserver on a different VLAN or something. Until then, it would be annoying to force SMB3 on all clients.

(As for why Anybody would use SMB1, the answer is retro computing. I also suspect that Open PS2 Loader is an SMB1 client, though I have not checked.)

Re: 10 years since Google said to “hang tight” about Linux support for Google Drive

#147

Post by wlesieutre »

GuB-42 wrote: post #116
titzer wrote: post #29

Just give us a web filesystem already. Stop with these shitty infantilized GUIs with no hierarchical organization and an overreliance on search to find things. I have literally hundreds of thousands to millions of files on my local machines and have no trouble remembering where I put things. Drive can't seem to scale past a few dozen before it's confusing, useless, and apparently lossy. Remember when web servers woul…

There is a transition from a file-centric to an app-centric model, that I mostly disapprove of, but that's what is happening. Before, you had files stored in a filesystem, you picked the file and opened it with the app. On Windows, you double-click on the file, on a command line, you type "app filename". Now the trend is to first open the app and then use the app to fetch your data, that data is entirely managed by t…

On the flip side, Steve Jobs tried to make this happen for the iPad and Apple eventually gave up and built the Files app because they were trying to make it into a system you could do actual work. "All data belongs to a single app" was at odds with most work tasks other than checking your email, and sending copies of data back and forth between apps with share sheets is alright if you only have to do it once, but it doesn't really scale.

Re: 10 years since Google said to “hang tight” about Linux support for Google Drive

#150

Post by ImprovedSilence »

samizdis wrote: post #103
fswd wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You nailed it. Every 3 years google renames and rebadges their chat system. I don't even know what to call it anymore.

I've posted this link before in comments, but for anyone who's not read this arstechnica piece it is well worth it: A decade and a half of instability: The history of Google messaging apps https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/08/a-decade-and-a-half-...

Good stuff. To give google a little credit, google talk is what killed off AIM for everyone I knew. Mostly because you could knock out chat and email on one page and it was cool cuz google was not yet being evil and then eventually they had other fun stuff to integrate with like reader and igoogle…
Post reply on HN