Google Announces Google Chrome Operating System

[katewes]

The tuaw.com article said the Chrome OS is based on Linux. Now, if that's the case, wouldn't it change the picture if Chrome OS can run all Linux software.

If so, then on one hand, it'll have an established base of applications, including Open Office.

But, on the other hand, if it's just another flavor of Linux -- what is it's reason for existence (raison d'etre - for non Frenchies).

Personally -- as an Apple fan - I welcome anything that gives Apple some competition because right now, Apple (or should I say, Steve Jobs and his followers) are acting like a bunch of IBM-reincarnated Big Brother henchmen -- forcing upon us their sole version of computing, and removing all reasonable options. The biggest one being the removal of matte screens. Then there's the removal of Firewire, which they relented.

Then there's the loss of replacement batteries -- which is not good for anyone who is far away from a power outlet for longer than say 6-8 hours. Everyone claims that only a minority of people buy spare batteries -- but I've been buying replacement batteries for all the notebook/laptop computers I've owned for over a decade.

And then there's Apple's disdain for its iPhone developers, particularly in the early days, where its own NDA was reported as almost Draconian.

I don't particularly care for Google's graphics skills, e.g. Android's klunky appearance, Gmail's cartoon interface etc. and it'd quite a lot to get me away from Mac OSX -- but the deal breaker could be the lack of matte screen. I just want someone to give Apple a good kick up the other side, and Google are just the people to do it nicely.

Be scared, Apple, so that you don't keep treating your customers with contempt.

 

[intel]

A new operating system based on a browser? Isn't that a little like building a new car based on a bucket seat?

not really, if it ends up having an audi engine with an porsche chasis

 

[ncollingridge]

if it can't do MS Word, the Adobe suite, or other major software, it will never become more than a toy for people who really hate 'the establishment'

I think you're totally missing the point of this product. It's designed as a portal to the web, not as a platform to run applications. However this does mean that it will be able to run all the online apps that are flooding into the market, including apps that have Office- and Adobe Suite-like functionality. It's a brave and essentially next (3rd if one counts DOS as 1st and GUI as 2nd) generation move - reducing the functionality of the OS to a minimum (with corresponding benefits in terms of security, stability and demand on the performance of the hardware), with all the sophistication coming from code that sits up on the web.

Apple absolutely does have a product in this space, even though their approach is somewhat different. The iPhone OS is intended to perform an entirely equivalent function, but it is more like a 2.5 generation product - reduced footprint compared to a full-blown OS, but still with a ton of functionality built in.

I guess that the main disadvantage of the Apple approach is that it still requires a lot of hardware (and hence power) overhead to run, although as modern hardware becomes ever more powerful, at the same time as becoming more efficient, this may not be a show-stopping problem. It does mean that Apple devices will probably be a bit bigger and heavier, but they are not that big and heavy as it is.

But I can imagine that a Chrome OS tablet could be much slimmer and have a much longer battery life than an Apple device, although there will be more data going backwards and forwards over a Chrome OS connection to the web than for an Apple device which may redress the balance.

This is a truly fascinating and potentially epoch-shifting announcement for the way in which computer devices are structured. Or it may be a damp squib. It will be fun to see which way it goes...

 

[OllyW]

Apple doesn't have a netbook per se but they do have the iPhone which appears to fill many of the needs of those seeking netbooks. Personally, I doubt netbooks are selling as well as some would have us believe. I don't know anyone who owns one. I haven't seen any on the store shelves and I have heard no talk where I work of the benefits of using them. I don't see where they fit in or what purpose they serve in any compelling way.

I don't know how well they are selling or know anyone who has bought them but I've seen plenty of them in the stores.

They are pushing them everywhere in the UK, obviously in computer and electrical stores but also in mobile phone shops and supermarkets. There are also lots of sign up to mobile broadband and get a netbook free deals on offer.

 

[chewietobbacca]

It's a big announcement for google...

Which also means that it can be a potentially big dud if it isn't ready to meet its objective

Personally, I thought Chrome wasn't anywhere close to the hype people were giving it, and I wouldn't be surprised if this was similar

I see this as a challenge to both MS and Apple in different ways - MS for the general purpose use of an OS, and Apple for the allure/hype factor (I hate to admit it, but Google gets as much hype and branding as Apple out there these days, which will surely hurt Apple's claim as being the only anti-MS game in town)

edit: Actually, given its first iteration I see, it's definitely meant more as a complimentary product until the technology becomes available where entire OS's can be on cloud computing

 

[MattInOz]

Apple OS is used by people for its heavyweight rich gui based apps. This lightweight simple os can be targetted for naive users, who use internet for email, general browsing etc

That was my first reaction to.
It is a competitor just not an aggressive one.

It will be a complimentary Competitor.
It will open up as much or more new market to Apple than it will take away. After all if enterprise adopts this and moves services to Web hosted or HTLM5 apps. Then Apple is a drop in when more power is needed. Where currently they might be ruled out due to custom Windows only management systems.

At the same time it will have the same effect for everyone but Windows.

 

[nostaws]

software - that's the big one. if it can't do MS Word, the Adobe suite, or other major software, it will never become more than a toy for people who really hate 'the establishment' (i realize there are open source alternatives, but for the most part they're not entirely viable)

I think you miss the point of "Netbooks." Netbooks already can't use the adobe suite, or some other kinds of software, and even Office is a little slow on them. If you need to use these apps regularly, you definitely don't want to buy a netbook.

Netbooks are great. My sister carries hers in her purse, and takes it everywhere. They are dirt cheap $200+. But they don't replace a desktop, or more powerful laptop, and are priced as such.

Also, I know some pro photographers who take them on assignment to foreign countries because of their size. They use them to basically backup, store, and view photos (no major photo editing), until they can get back home.

Also, everything is "MS Word" compatible these days. Google offers an office suite equivalent online. It isn't too bad.

 

[4D4M]

I love both Google and Apple... what am I going to do?!

Given that Apple is in bed with Google, I'd guess they won't make it too difficult to run both OSs on your MacBook.

After all, they let people pollute their Macs with that other OS from the evil empire...

 

[Chintan100]

Inflection point for cloud computing?

All this means is more work for developers.

A different breed of developers will evolve.

Like Apple did it with iPhone development, Google may just do it with cloud computing.

 

[MH01]

Apple OS is used by people for its heavyweight rich gui based apps. This lightweight simple os can be targetted for naive users, who use internet for email, general browsing etc

hmmm, where do you think all those current naive users end up now? Once these people get the £$!$!!%% with M$, they switch to apple and love the experience cause it is alot simpler. I actually believe that alot of apple users just have vanilla computer needs, most only user thier machines for light needs, heck most think ilife is all they need.....

I believe apple has alot to lose here. Currently "naive" users have little choice, but enter chrome, which will run on much cheaper hardware.... I think u can see where i am heading.

 

[MH01]

Given that Apple is in bed with Google, I'd guess they won't make it too difficult to run both OSs on your MacBook.

After all, they let people pollute their Macs with that other OS from the evil empire...

Don't worry, they will just offer crap bootcamp drivers making their "other" os experience subpar.......

 

[Chase R]

I can't wait to see what it's like... Probably a lot like Linux. I see this as more of a threat to MS than Apple (since Apple's hardware is tied to OS X).

 

[nubero]

Work Title for Chrome OS

let's start a competition on what the working title of this project could be:

-NoPOS (No Privacy OS)

-GiMAYD OS (Give Me All Your Data OS)

-Gestapo OS

Hey, this is fun!

 

[cerote]

Given that Apple is in bed with Google, I'd guess they won't make it too difficult to run both OSs on your MacBook.

After all, they let people pollute their Macs with that other OS from the evil empire...

This is why you don't see Google targeting Apple. They have a relationship, also if they turned their back on them all the sudden then Apple could sue for trade secrets probably. Watch it end up being like ATT and many other companies. The big company lets the small guy move around then jump in and buyout. Get called monopoly then split and buy back later on.

 

[almost30boohoo1]

That is great news... I hope it is stylish too. I would really like a streamlined OS; in truth the Mac OS is kinda bloated with lots of stuff I don't want during install but don't have the option to remove them.

What Chrome would need though is a good media player, windows media and mov files aren't really that common anymore, neither are real media files. Google has got youtube (awful site) but at least they have experience with media such as flash and mp4.

 

[KingYaba]

Consider me excited.

 

[BongoBanger]

Great. Another minority OS that will completely fail to capture the market.

Google: you do search, photo management, maps and mail. You're good at these things. Everything else you do sucks and this will be no exception.

 

[Evangelion]

maybe this is a dumb question , but what type of foundation or architecture is it based on, or is it completely new?

The announcement says this:

"Google Chrome OS will run on both x86 as well as ARM chips and we are working with multiple OEMs to bring a number of netbooks to market next year. The software architecture is simple — Google Chrome running within a new windowing system on top of a Linux kernel."

It wouldn't make much sense for Google to create a totally new system, when they already have a robust and widely-used system available in Linux. Especially since they already have lots and lots of in-house Linux-expertise. They employ Andrew Morton, the Number 2 of Linux-kernel hackers (After Linus Torvalds)

Unless Google add windows program compatibility out of the box, their system will fail. If it's based on Linux, grats to them, but for ease of use for customers, I doubt that it will be wanted - their used to the Windows ways of things.

If it needs to be Windows-compatible and be similar to Windows, then how exactly do you explain the growing popularity of OS X? you can't run Windows-apps in OS X, and the way OS X works is quite different to Windows, yet that doesn't seem to stop OS X from gaining popularity. Hell, even Linux has been gaining popularity recently.

Fact is that Windows is not the only way of doing things, and people will use different OS'es if it helps them do the things they want to do.

 

[tabasco70]

sounds great.
im pretty sure google will be able to cook up a great OS,
and giving apple competition will mean that the Mac will hopefully become better than ever before.

 

[chewietobbacca]

I see this as more of a threat to MS than Apple (since Apple's hardware is tied to OS X).

I don't see how that matters in the realm of computers. Apple's hardware is the same as everyone else's out there right now - if anything, this should be a big point of concern to Apple - Google's OS priced on cheaper hardware might start pulling those customers who just want a simple OS experience, but dont want to pay extra for Apple, and since the hardware is the same but Google OS is now available on a wide variety of OEMs we could see some serious undercutting going on here

 

[BongoBanger]

If it needs to be Windows-compatible and be similar to Windows, then how exactly do you explain the growing popularity of OS X? you can't run Windows-apps in OS X, and the way OS X works is quite different to Windows, yet that doesn't seem to stop OS X from gaining popularity. Hell, even Linux has been gaining popularity recently.

Fact is that Windows is not the only way of doing things, and people will use different OS'es if it helps them do the things they want to do.

Yup, that global market share increase of about 1-2% over the last two years really has MS worried. As for Linux as a desktop solution: no-one really cares.

I like OS X but it'll never compete against Windows in the mass market.

 

[sushi]

Concept is interesting.

Seems like to use the OS, you will need Internet connectivity. This will limit use in some cases.

Not sure if I want my data on line controlled by Google.

 

[sharkinfested]

Great. Another minority OS that will completely fail to capture the market.

Google: you do search, photo management, maps and mail. You're good at these things. Everything else you do sucks and this will be no exception.

Agreed. There are already so many small operating systems out there and they don’t go anywhere. The problem really isn’t with these platforms either. Many of them are fast and stable, the problem is with the lack of decent applications. What good is an OS that doesn’t have any programs?
Lets be honest, Windows is the top OS simply due to the sheer volume of programs that are written for it Apple is number two because they have the next largest library of software titles.
This is the same reason all the “iPhone killer” cell phones fail. The iPhone has 56,000 apps. It doesn’t matter how cool any new phone is, if they don’t come with 56,000 apps then they will NOT kill the iPhone.

 

[xUKHCx]

Seems to me that the Google Chrome OS will firstly compete on Netbooks - where Apple doesn't have a product, but where Microsoft has it's Windows XP and Windows 7 systems pre-installed. So at least at the moment it's Google taking on Microsoft.

By 2010 apple could well have a product in that market. In fact I would be surprised if they didn't.

Concept is interesting.

Seems like to use the OS, you will need Internet connectivity. This will limit use in some cases.

Not sure if I want my data on line controlled by Google.

I doubt it will be solely reliant on the internet, look at gmail you can now use it in off line mode. And the upcoming html5 spec has scope for client side storage

The client-side database storage API allows web applications to store structured data locally using a medium many web developers are already familiar with - SQL.

Source



Google Chrome OS running Google Wave seems like it will be very interesting for portable netbook needs. That said for me if I were to get a netbook ideally it would sync seemlessly with my main computer.

 

[Evangelion]

Great. Another minority OS that will completely fail to capture the market.

What do you expect? That "alternative OS'es" need to instantly get double-digit market-shares, or they are failures? Hell, OS X has been beating Windows in stability, features and functionality for years, and it too is still limited to under 10% market-share!

Google: you do search, photo management, maps and mail. You're good at these things. Everything else you do sucks and this will be no exception.

Few years ago it was "Google, stick to searching, everything else you do sucks!", then it was "Stick to search and photo management!". Then it was "search, photomanagement and maps", then it was "search, photomanagement, maps and email". Then we got "search, photomanagement, maps, email and browser". Now its "search, photomanagement, maps, email and phone-OS". It seems to me that Google has been pretty successful at bringing new stuff to market. Have ALL their stuff been successful? Of course not. But to say that all their new stuff sucks is quite dumb thing to say.

Had Google followed your advice right from the start, we would not have all those great things today (maps, gmail etc.), since when they were launched, we could have said "stick o searching, you are good at that".

Besides, Microsoft is now directly competing with Google, and they are doing that with the money they get from Windows. Eroding the dominance of Windows benefits Google's search-business as well.