Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Google Introduces the Chromebook Pixel to Compete With the MacBook Air
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The Chromebook Pixel must interest or bother or annoy Apple fans. We are at a Mac forum, and the news on the introduction of a Google (!) laptop has already 776 comments, which is more than:
Wow! Very popular this Chromebook thing...
----------
15-inch retina MacBook Pro: 2880x1800 resolution in a 15.4-inch laptop: pixel density of 220 ppi (pixels per inch)
13-inch retina MacBook Pro: 2560x1600 resolution in a 13.3-inch laptop: pixel density of 227 ppi
Chromebook Pixel: 2560x1700 resolution in a 12.85-inch laptop: pixel density of 239 ppi
Google Chromebook Pixel does not have the highest resolution of any laptop. The 15-inch MacBook Pro with retina display does. But the Pixel has the highest pixel density, even higher than any Mac Apple has ever released.
- the update and price drop of retina MacBook Pros (537 comments):
- the introduction of the 13-inch retina MacBook Pro (201 comments)
- the introduction of the iPad Mini (667 comments)
- the introduction of iPad 4 (580 comments)
- the announcement of iPhone 5 (643 comments)
- the introduction of the 3rd generation iPad, with the retina display (445 comments)
Wow! Very popular this Chromebook thing...
----------
15-inch retina MacBook Pro: 2880x1800 resolution in a 15.4-inch laptop: pixel density of 220 ppi (pixels per inch)
13-inch retina MacBook Pro: 2560x1600 resolution in a 13.3-inch laptop: pixel density of 227 ppi
Chromebook Pixel: 2560x1700 resolution in a 12.85-inch laptop: pixel density of 239 ppi
Google Chromebook Pixel does not have the highest resolution of any laptop. The 15-inch MacBook Pro with retina display does. But the Pixel has the highest pixel density, even higher than any Mac Apple has ever released.
Yes, of course. That was never the point. Google never announced the Chromebook Pixel as having a higher resolution than the retina MacBook Pro. It announced the Chromebook Pixel as having a higher pixel density, which means a higher concentration of pixels, in the screen. This is achieved by cramming as many pixels as possible in the same area.
The outcome is that the 15-inch MacBook Pro has more pixels on the screen than any other laptop. But the Chromebook Pixel has the smallest pixels, making them even harder to distinguish with the naked eye. Simple as that.
As technology evolves, we are going to see lots of these screens popping up, in several devices. I've even compiled a list with a timeline of such screens. Toshiba and Sharp both already have 6.1-inch screens capable of a 2560x1600 resolution, which means 495 ppi, much higher than any device Apple has ever made.
You're clearly wrong since Apple does everything first, better and with the best specs. 
Again - people read/hear what they want to.
Again - people read/hear what they want to.
You're clearly wrong since Apple does everything first, better and with the best specs.
Again - people read/hear what they want to.
Oh, of course. I forgot that. Apple II would still be the best computer in the world these days, had Apple not released anything else after it.
Actually, I didn't make your point. Somebody said that their tablet was better than this and I asked how. That doesn't prove anything.
> Yeah, it's less than half the weight... but still really light.
> 5 hrs is good enough... >_>;
> "more useful" is subjective
> Doubtful
> Only the front camera is really useful.
> And only with that Apple ecosystem. I'd retort by saying that this is likely better with Google's ecosystem.
> And if a person has a phone, they're probably using that for GPS.
Their virus protection is a combination of sandboxing everything and fixing the base OS image via wifi if they detect something wrong. There is no anti-virus.
It looks to me like Google may be trying to send a message to Microsoft and Apple. That message is the innovative concept brought to us by Apple of a basic OS with apps developed by third parties can apply to "laptops" as well. I agree this product is going to be a flop because I don't think it's going to have the backing of developers. Yet, when you think about it, the Android was also a platform without much in the way of developer support when it initially came out, and look where it is today. Google is clearly trying to disrupt the current market.
Apple really needs to take this seriously, along with the challenge Microsoft is bringing to the table. It's time for Apple to completely disrupt the market for both Google and Microsoft. My first piece of advice is to not be insecure about cannibalizing their current laptop and tablet market. The fact is the company that can make a device that serves the function of a tablet and a laptop is going to really develop a new category of devices, in my opinion.
I initially thought Tim was correct when he said the iPad is entirely separate from the laptop and the two should not be merged, I thought he was correct. Now that I think about it, it's just a matter of doing it correctly. No company is in a position to do that more effectively then Apple, but they would have to set aside their current market and take the courage to innovate once more.
I'm using my iPad with a bluetooth keyboard to type this, for instance, but obviously the iPad has some features lacking that do not make it a complete laptop replacement. On the most basic level, it's nice to have a touch screen, but having a mouse is also important.
Just my two cents, for what it's worth.
Apple really needs to take this seriously, along with the challenge Microsoft is bringing to the table. It's time for Apple to completely disrupt the market for both Google and Microsoft. My first piece of advice is to not be insecure about cannibalizing their current laptop and tablet market. The fact is the company that can make a device that serves the function of a tablet and a laptop is going to really develop a new category of devices, in my opinion.
I initially thought Tim was correct when he said the iPad is entirely separate from the laptop and the two should not be merged, I thought he was correct. Now that I think about it, it's just a matter of doing it correctly. No company is in a position to do that more effectively then Apple, but they would have to set aside their current market and take the courage to innovate once more.
I'm using my iPad with a bluetooth keyboard to type this, for instance, but obviously the iPad has some features lacking that do not make it a complete laptop replacement. On the most basic level, it's nice to have a touch screen, but having a mouse is also important.
Just my two cents, for what it's worth.
Still cheaper than a comparable 13" MacBook Air, and yeah, lots of people just use the browser and a few simple apps. That's the point.
Yeah but for most tech companies *under* x-price really means very slightly below the given price. So at the very least, im guessing Glass will cost at least $1299, which is absolutely ridiculous for what it is.
I have used Chome OS. At a Best Buy oddly enough. I was not impressed. The two units they had couldn't even run Minecraft, due to a lack of native java support.
Now that said, I can sort of understand the appeal when the hardware is given a budget friendly price (eg $250). However $1300 is just obscene. For that kind of money I would expect to be able to run advanced creative suites such as CS5.
Last edited:
I really don't know what to say.
Yes, it wont run minecreft or CS5.
I guess people who want that should pick a tool that fits those needs. This doesn't fit your specific needs. My only issue is when people assume their person needs and what they consider valuable is what everyone needs and so forth.
Strategically, I don't think they're in a good position at all. With iOS they banked on the future of tablets being touch only (which is why they eliminated the mouse pointer) and ARM based. By keeping iOS separate, they were also able to use the platform to create a walled garden full of cheap software, which was a big key to their financial success.
The only reason to merge tablet and laptop is to take advantage of the x86 ecosystem. They have no way of harnessing this advantage without killing iOS.
People can argue whether or not the device suits them or not. And even the fact that the limited OS makes this an expensive purchase (assuming you're not going to rent 1TB of cloud storage anyway which would make this device a nice freebie)
But those that want to argue this device is "crap" should read this review.
http://www.engadget.com/2013/02/25/chromebook-pixel-review/#continued
It appears that the actual hardware is quite nice indeed.
But those that want to argue this device is "crap" should read this review.
http://www.engadget.com/2013/02/25/chromebook-pixel-review/#continued
It appears that the actual hardware is quite nice indeed.
This is really rather pointless... When will you learn Google??
For Google, it makes perfect sense to do this. A high end product for customers who use Google online services. I mean if you look at Microsoft Office 365 or Abode creative services online services and products produced by other companies for online access, having an app-less computer makes sense to me. Its thinking outside of the box.
For Google, it makes perfect sense to do this. A high end product for customers who use Google online services. I mean if you look at Microsoft Office 365 or Abode creative services online services and products produced by other companies for online access, having an app-less computer makes sense to me. Its thinking outside of the box.
Microsoft and Adobe both have high quality productivity suites. What does Google have??
Microsoft and Adobe both have high quality productivity suites. What does Google have??
My point is you don't need a traditional computer to access those products. Google has docs and other applications that can be found on Google Drive, not to mention a host of on line apps that can be found in Google's Play Store..
No reason to be so pedantic... Everyone knows Google's products are no real alternatives to current mainstream offerings. Therefore putting sub par software in a pretty(ish) and expensive package is really rather ridiculous.
With due respect, that's your opinion. If one is not a professional Google and other online products works just fine.
I've been calling it "trash" and "junk", but trash to me is a crappy value proposition.
A Chromebook is a limited functionality laptop. You're taking a regular laptop and eliminating its ability to run native applications. At a fraction of the price of a regular laptop, it's good value because it caters to those who'd only be using a laptop for web apps. But at a pricepoint exceeding that of a typical laptop, you're paying more to have less functionality.
You're buying a $100,000 moped
A Chromebook is a limited functionality laptop. You're taking a regular laptop and eliminating its ability to run native applications. At a fraction of the price of a regular laptop, it's good value because it caters to those who'd only be using a laptop for web apps. But at a pricepoint exceeding that of a typical laptop, you're paying more to have less functionality.
You're buying a $100,000 moped
Last edited by a moderator:
Actually
Actually, a similarly equipped MBA 13" with four times the SSD/Storage is actually cheaper. With USB 3.0 and BT 4
and probably 1.5-2x the battery life to boot.
(reviews of the pixel are showing between 3.5-4 hours battery life)
Actually, a similarly equipped MBA 13" with four times the SSD/Storage is actually cheaper. With USB 3.0 and BT 4
and probably 1.5-2x the battery life to boot.
(reviews of the pixel are showing between 3.5-4 hours battery life)
When people say they usually are "just browsing", they're happily forgetting all what they do on the side.
An overblown reputation built upon a search engine that statistically gives better, though completely unpredictable, results than crappier ones.Microsoft and Adobe both have high quality productivity suites. What does Google have??
Trash? As built with a mostly web-based OS, there must be some pretty serious lag for every tiniest click and operation.
Agreed - said the same thing awhile back. My $250 chromebook does everything I need it to and even though there's no real "OS" - the price point vs value is fantastic. I don't really know who this product is aimed at other than those that need 1TB of storage and want a free laptop to go with it...
Last edited by a moderator: