|
|
|
|
|
by kyrra
905 days ago
|
|
Googler, opinions are my own. Every thing deployed at Google has all kinds of frameworks and shared libraries and tooling. There are many policies in place to get insure they get newer versions of shared code, such as: https://opensource.google/documentation/reference/thirdparty... And to maintain these kinds of things, it isn't uncommon for unfunded mandates to be pushed on people that own various tools, such as this one. Meaning, even to keep a website up at Google, there will be some maintenance burden. Also, I could imagine Chrome pushing some update that would make all of the usb pairing stuff that they do here break at some point, and they will have to do work to keep it working. |
|
I think the real question is why bother doing it with this website? The controller has a USB port on it and I imagine can talk over USB. It would be far better to just have some application which can flash over USB instead of needing some Google-hosted website. Just give me an executable that people can toss on a torrent or whatever. I appreciate they did something to make these controllers useful to people, but it seems like they really didn't pick the best path to achieve that.
I imagine they probably painted themselves into a corner and the firmware update process is so locked down and will only talk to approved Google endpoints over an HTTPS request or something like that and that's the ultimate reason why they went that route. But really I feel that kind of shows a failure to imagine the hardware life after the service.