--- title: Download Google Chrome for Arm64 Linux now | daily.dev description: Google Chrome now has official Arm64 Linux builds available in its Debian and RPM repositories, fulfilling a promise made in March 2026. Users can download it... canonical: https://daily.dev/posts/download-google-chrome-for-arm64-linux-now-e3xjoiiwp twitter:card: summary_large_image twitter:site: @dailydotdev og:type: website og:site_name: daily.dev og:title: Download Google Chrome for Arm64 Linux now | daily.dev og:description: Google Chrome now has official Arm64 Linux builds available in its Debian and RPM repositories, fulfilling a promise made in March 2026. Users can download it... og:url: https://daily.dev/posts/download-google-chrome-for-arm64-linux-now-e3xjoiiwp og:image: https://api.daily.dev/og/posts/e3XJOIIWP.png og:image:alt: Download Google Chrome for Arm64 Linux now og:image:width: 1200 og:image:height: 630 og:locale: en --- > ## Documentation Index > Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://daily.dev/llms.txt > Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further. # Download Google Chrome for Arm64 Linux now **[omg\! ubuntu\!](https://daily.dev/sources/omgub)** · 3 min read · 1 upvotes · 0 comments ## Summary Google Chrome now has official Arm64 Linux builds available in its Debian and RPM repositories, fulfilling a promise made in March 2026. Users can download it by editing the URL to replace 'amd64' with 'arm64'. The build includes Google account sync and native Widevine DRM support — previously requiring workarounds on Arm Linux. DRM is still software-based, capping streams at 1080p. Testing on a Raspberry Pi 5 showed smooth 2K YouTube playback and BBC iPlayer at high quality, though 4K content caused dropped frames likely due to hardware limits. ## Full article daily.dev links to this article rather than hosting it. Read it at the original source: ## Community take How the wider developer community reacted, aggregated from 1 discussion and 70 comments across hackernews (as of 2026-07-27). **TL;DR:** The HN thread largely ignores the Chrome Arm64 news itself, instead spiraling into a heated debate about EME/Widevine DRM in web standards and Firefox's strategic decline. Sentiment toward the actual release is mildly positive but overshadowed by broader frustration with DRM and browser politics. **Sentiment:** 20% positive · 30% mixed · 50% skeptical **The case for** - Native Arm64 Chrome finally enables DRM-protected streaming (e.g., Netflix) on aarch64 Linux without workarounds. - Google account sync is now available natively on Arm64 Linux. **The pushback** - EME/Widevine is seen by many commenters as an anti-consumer web standard that should never have been standardized. - DRM remains software-based on Arm Linux, capping streams at 1080p. - One commenter warns that using Chrome on Linux increases the risk of sessions being flagged as bots. **By community** - hackernews (mixed): The thread quickly pivots from the Chrome Arm64 release to a lengthy, divisive debate about EME/DRM standards and Firefox's strategic failures, with only passing acknowledgment of the actual news. **Hottest debate:** Whether Firefox was right to implement EME/Widevine to retain users, or whether doing so sacrificed its principles and differentiation without meaningfully halting its market share decline. **Open questions** - Will Ladybird browser implement EME/Widevine support? - Will Valve eventually implement hardware-backed attestation for Steam hardware, undermining its current DRM-free incentive for developers? - Does refusing EME actually cost Firefox meaningful users, or does it only affect a small minority? **Highlights** > Mozilla making choices specifically to try to "keep up" with Chrome has objectively failed: Firefox's marketshare has plunged so far that it's getting harder to keep using it on the web, as developers simply stop testing or caring much if it works with their site. I think this is because simply chasing Chrome didn't have the desired effect anyway. By doing so, Mozilla hurt Firefox by gradually reducing what differentiated it from Chrome in the first place, relegating it to be kind of just a worse Chrome that looks even weirder. A similar statement would be something like, "Firefox may as well pledge to support Web Environment Integrity; otherwise, people will just use Chrome." In a totally different vertical, Valve has made interesting choices. To my knowledge, they do not provide a way to do attestation on Steam hardware devices, so games that want to support Steam hardware simply have to get rid of their intrusive DRM and anti-cheat, or at least significantly loosen it. Depending on how you look at it, this has either been a massive success or a massive failure. After all, a lot of big games don't run; Fortnite, Valorant, etc. But on the other hand, it remains a very powerful incentive for publishers and developers to reconsider their choices, as these devices still do have a non-trivial marketshare. (And for smaller games this obviously is hard to ignore, probably often moreso than intrusive DRM.) Mozilla may have been ultimately correct that the choices they made helped them stay relevant; it's hard to know for sure how much their marketshare would be different today if they made bolder choices, but in the long run I think it has doomed them, as it is now unclear what even really differentiates Firefox. The last remaining thing seems to just be that you can run the full version of uBlock Origin, which is pretty valuable and all, but I'm not sure it makes up for the deficiencies. (I also like Container Tabs, but I think that feature is pretty niche, possibly somewhat by virtue of the fact that Firefox is now pretty niche.) I'm currently using Librewolf. My long term hope was that Ladybird would become the browser that does what Firefox should have, but when I asked Andreas Kling whether or not Ladybird would try to support EME/Widevine in an HN thread, there was no reply, which is pretty close to "probably". > — [jchw on hackernews · 6 comments](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49069083) > >I think this is because simply chasing Chrome didn't have the desired effect anyway. By doing so, Mozilla hurt Firefox by gradually reducing what differentiated it from Chrome in the first place, relegating it to be kind of just a worse Chrome that looks even weirder. That logic might work for firefox's product direction as a whole, but narrowly looking at the EME issue, what should have they done? If they didn't implement EME, then people will have to install chrome to watch netfilx. The users who are there as a matter of principle (eg. HN readers) might still use firefox as their daily driver, but they'd almost certainly lose some normies who were using firefox on inertia. Meanwhile because they refused to negotiate, they won't be able to influence the direction of the standard, which means no sandboxing of DRM modules and other privacy features. Both firefox and their users lose out in this scenario. > — [gruez on hackernews · 1 comments](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49069641) > Yes I am asking them to have principles. I'm sorry this is such an insane concept to understand or appreciate. Maybe the next Mozilla will understand that having principles is not optional. > — [jchw on hackernews · 1 comments](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49071054) > > they had more issue because they catered to a loud minority that can always push for a "you are not pure enough" narrative. Because who push for that just doesn't care (rightfully) to be mainstream. Discussing certain things on HN is like a portal into another dimension full of profoundly out-of-touch people who somehow think being contrarian to the technical nerd crowd is actually what being "in touch" means. How do you reckon Firefox actually gained popularity in the first place? I don't think Firefox ever lived or died on "purity", but it sure as shit harmed its own image multiple times over the years in ways that have absolutely nothing to do with "catering to a loud minority". Like for example: - Killing all of the extensions; extensions that once differentiated Firefox as a product became unusable or unavailable, like Vertical Tabs and NoScript. The Web Extension versions of these never worked as well. It killed off one thing that made Firefox "better" than Chrome. Did the vocal minority ask for this? I fully understand that Web Extensions was done for technical reasons, but of all the paths forward it's hard to imagine this was actually the best one. Today, Firefox hardly offers any extensions Chromium-based browsers do not or can not, mainly because Firefox extensions got worse. - The various over-reaching sponsorship deals. The Google Search one obviously drew plenty of scrutiny itself, but I think most people understood it as a necessity. The Looking Glass/Mr Robot advertisement controversy and its use of Firefox Studies as a vector for deploying unwanted code, on the other hand, absolutely hurt Firefox's image among power users (and some others, judging by press at the time). Hey maybe they should've consulted that vocal minority. - The "Terms of Use" update. It is still to this day not clear why this was necessary, but it was bad PR that spread throughout the Internet, especially Twitter and Reddit. - A lot of updates that made user customization worse or more limited, bringing it much more in-line with Chrome. Mobile Firefox doesn't even let you use about:config anymore, and still only allows whitelisted extensions as far as I know. - The new AI push. Now when you hold down the mouse button on a link you get a "link preview". Nobody asked if you wanted this feature, it's just there now. The previews are almost unilaterally useless, too, just to add insult to injury. They may very well have lost a lot of their marketshare for other reasons, but because of a lot of these decisions there is little reason for a user to not choose Chrome. Can they trust Mozilla more? Well, their track record isn't fantastic, all things considered. Can Firefox do anything Chrome can't? There's a couple things but Chrome does a lot more things that Firefox can't do than vice versa. Is Firefox faster or more efficient than Chrome? That one was lost a long time ago. Is Firefox more secure than Chrome? Given that it still lacks a lot of the sandboxing technologies Chrome has, I'd venture to guess "no". Mozilla's problem isn't that they weren't "pure" enough, but it absolutely is a problem that they seemed to really lack any principles at all and just blindly chase trends and Chrome to try to keep up. This really has nothing to do with purity and is exactly the opposite of caring about a vocal minority. It's just that chasing Chrome was always a losing strategy from the start. The vocal minority, of course, is the Firefox evangelists. Upsetting and ignoring the people who evangelize your products isn't usually your best move... > Thinking back at the actual history (and I lived it, having used Netscape Navigator, the Mozilla Suite and Phoenix 0.1), my view is that when Firefox was winning marketshare in Windows-land over IE, the release of Chrome and Google behind it basically killed (slowly) its momentum [1]. Even if the momentum was surely paid for by Google who was the default search engine in Firefox and paid millions to Mozilla for it > — [jchw on hackernews](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49072205) > Using Chrome on Linux is a big mistake because your session is much more likely to get flagged as a bot. > — [m00dy on hackernews](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49071635) **Source threads** - [hackernews](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49067919) · 60 points · 70 comments ## Similar posts on daily.dev - [Google Chrome is now available for Arm Linux. We tested it on a Raspberry Pi 5](https://daily.dev/posts/google-chrome-is-now-available-for-arm-linux-we-tested-it-on-a-raspberry-pi-5-zzgudyop1) · CNX Software · 0 upvotes · 0 comments - [Chrome lands on arm64](https://daily.dev/posts/chrome-lands-on-arm64-0edrcd58w) · Calibre · 5 upvotes · 0 comments - [Canonical On Making Ubuntu For ARM64 "Truly A First-Class Architecture"](https://daily.dev/posts/canonical-on-making-ubuntu-for-arm64-truly-a-first-class-architecture--atb9bdxyc) · Phoronix · 0 upvotes · 0 comments - [Linux finally has working HDR, but you still can't use it for most streaming services](https://daily.dev/posts/linux-finally-has-working-hdr-but-you-still-can-t-use-it-for-most-streaming-services-5kvkjhtdt) · XDA Developers · 0 upvotes · 0 comments --- Tags: [#linux](https://daily.dev/tags/linux), [#hardware](https://daily.dev/tags/hardware), [#google-chrome](https://daily.dev/tags/google-chrome), [#raspberry-pi](https://daily.dev/tags/raspberry-pi) [View this post on daily.dev](https://daily.dev/posts/download-google-chrome-for-arm64-linux-now-e3xjoiiwp) ```json {"@context":"https://schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https://daily.dev/#organization","name":"daily.dev","url":"https://daily.dev","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://daily.dev/apple-touch-icon.png","width":180,"height":180},"sameAs":["https://twitter.com/dailydotdev","https://github.com/dailydotdev","https://www.linkedin.com/company/daily-dev-ltd"]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https://daily.dev/#website","url":"https://daily.dev","name":"daily.dev","publisher":{"@id":"https://daily.dev/#organization"},"potentialAction":{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https://daily.dev/search?q={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}}]} {"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"TechArticle","headline":"Download Google Chrome for Arm64 Linux now","url":"https://daily.dev/posts/download-google-chrome-for-arm64-linux-now-e3xjoiiwp","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://daily.dev/posts/download-google-chrome-for-arm64-linux-now-e3xjoiiwp"},"datePublished":"2026-07-26T21:45:46.469Z","dateModified":"2026-07-27T16:55:32.793Z","description":"Google Chrome now has official Arm64 Linux builds available in its Debian and RPM repositories, fulfilling a promise made in March 2026. Users can download it...","image":"https://media.daily.dev/image/upload/f_auto,q_auto/v1/posts/1575a5d4d36a352ce4e0272b7a834581?_a=AQAEuop","thumbnailUrl":"https://media.daily.dev/image/upload/f_auto,q_auto/v1/posts/1575a5d4d36a352ce4e0272b7a834581?_a=AQAEuop","isAccessibleForFree":true,"articleSection":"omg! ubuntu!","inLanguage":"en","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"daily.dev","url":"https://daily.dev","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://daily.dev/apple-touch-icon.png","width":180,"height":180}},"author":{"@type":"Organization","name":"omg! ubuntu!","logo":"https://media.daily.dev/image/upload/t_logo,f_auto/v1/logos/79e495adb3c3425785b9be27969a2562","url":"https://daily.dev/sources/omgub"},"commentCount":0,"discussionUrl":"https://daily.dev/posts/download-google-chrome-for-arm64-linux-now-e3xjoiiwp","interactionStatistic":[{"@type":"InteractionCounter","interactionType":{"@type":"LikeAction"},"userInteractionCount":1},{"@type":"InteractionCounter","interactionType":{"@type":"CommentAction"},"userInteractionCount":0}],"keywords":"linux,hardware,google-chrome,raspberry-pi","timeRequired":"PT3M"} {"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https://daily.dev"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"omg! ubuntu!","item":"https://daily.dev/sources/omgub"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Download Google Chrome for Arm64 Linux now"}]} ```