Does it have all of the same features?
Yes (AFAICT)
Does it have an equivalent GUI?
Yes (though I accept that you disagree)
Does the extra stuff make sense?
No.
Synapse is control software for all Razer devices, so there are things that aren't purely mouse related, and thus are of no use to me.
Kinda the definition of software bloat: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
That isn't bloat, that's a different aesthetic from the Linux principle of "do one thing and do it well".
... which, in most cases, I would label as bloat. Also, supporting all those other devices is NOT the main contributor to the size of their software. You're being disingenuous at best.
Would it be smaller if it was windows-native and not built on Electron? Yeah ...
And there is the main contributor to the bloat!
I don't know why you're so bothered by this.
I could say the same of you - why are you so defensive of this practice? Do you sell hard drives or something? LOL
Honestly, these just seem like the most obvious and blatant cases of unnecessary bloat to me, and I wish that at least this group here could agree on that much. It's hard to have meaningful dialog when we can't agree on what words mean. Besides, you're directly asking me things. Why wouldn't I answer?
Were you in the old Mod scene and remain obsessed with packing things into the smallest space possible? Are you an embedded developer who needs to squeeze every byte, offended by the reckless behavior of those who can use however much space they want?
Sheesh! Way to shit on unrelated groups of people! But no. In fact, I work mainly in interpreted languages (ex. Perl, Python, PHP... not sure why they're all P's). These have often been chastised for not being as small and fast as a compiled alternative would be. Maybe Electron and Node.js and such are the modern day equivalents, but those C guys had very valid points back then that still apply today, and Electron stuff is orders of magnitude larger and slower than the aforementioned P's. Plus, sending a Perl script doesn't require sending the entire interpreter as well.
Anyhow, Windows does not install "this garbage whether you want to or not". It can be turned off in the system properties. ...
IE: it's opt-out, not opt-in. And there's no indication that it will auto-install stuff. And there are no instructions included on how to avoid that situation. If there wasn't a buried config item to disable that behavior, it could be argued that you could just keep your machine offline or otherwise block the download. Essentially, it's installed whether you wanted it or not.
It reminds me of the CD autorun stuff. Sure, that could be turned off (and that was MUCH easier than this), but we can still blame it for autorunning exploits. There's a reason Windows no longer defaults to autorunning software when disks/drives are attached. This is the same bad decision, shifted to the cloud.