Google Previews Chrome OS, Scheduled for Release in Late 2010

[macrem]

Macs aren't meant to be turned off. Mine is always either on or asleep, never off, so like someone else pointed out Chrome OS' speed is not really a selling point for Mac users who wake up their machines in a few seconds. All I see left are things I can already do + Chrome's limitations, but it's an interesting concept (for netbooks) & it will be interesting to keep an eye on. It's also not a new concept. I remember Netscape talking about making the browser the OS ~a decade ago. But I guess it's smoke & mirrors to say the browser is the OS since the device drivers, etc. are from Linux at a level below Chrome browser.

Re: the Ubuntu looks better comment... I thoroughly enjoy both OS X & Ubuntu, but come on OS X has the best UI & user experience. Sure you can make Ubuntu look like OS X. The most popular Gnome themes are the OS X Aqua themes. You can make Ubuntu look like anything you want, which is what's cool about it. Someone who is capable of discerning between (compiz) usability features & over the top eye candy can indeed customize Ubuntu quite nicely. But nothing is as polished as OS X.

 

[ZedRuhlen]

I think this is a great concept and really good product release for business. I see at least 2 advantages:

1.) greater control over what users can do, and greater centralized monitoring in the work space.

2.) gets rid of the clutter of an OS, most of which many don't use.

This OS has a very specific niche'. I'm in academia at the moment, and ALL I use is a web browser and word processor. There would be real savings in nettops at my institution with this. Maybe even in the law firms and lobbying orgs I have interned with as well, at least in my research divisions. This is a huge threat to Microsoft business dominance because this addresses small and medium business needs, and some large ones, like the academy very well without more than we need.

You...are...wrong.
Businesses already have this ability. It's called a thin client. It already has an OS called Windows, and it works similar to existing technology. It's cheaper, and control stays local.

EVERYONE who uses them HATES them!

People do not want simple computers that are unable to do real work. They want complete control over their computer systems.

The only threat this OS represents is to Google's bottom line.

EPIC FAIL.

 

[scottness]

What good would this be on an airplane?

 

[ChrisA]

What good would this be on an airplane?

A small and light and portable computer would be nice to have. Do you maybe think it needs an Internet connection to operate? That is not the case. You can read Google's design docs on-line and even download the entire Chrome OS if you like today so see for yourself.

 

[alent1234]

Microsoft is already fighting back

with SQL 2008 r2, sharepoint 2010 and office 2010 you will be able to run a lot reports on the desktop that before you had to have delopers write code for.

And for academia there are a lot of apps out there that have to be run on the desktop and not in the cloud

 

[ikir]

Crap video. 45 seconds to boot??? My MBP 13" with slower SSD boots in like 10 seconds and safari loads in no time. And has a real OS which can do a lot of things and i don't use only facebook..... Anyway nice for a netbook which is hard to consider a computer.

 

[jashsayani]

A quick 4 minute video showing features and look and feel of Chrome OS: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htwIdfI6RMY

 

[SeenJeen]

Looks interesting. Should be great for netbooks, which is what Google is initially aiming for. OS X and Windows are way too bloated to be on a netbook for what they are intended to be used for: Connecting to the internet (reliably), using web apps.

Netbooks are growing in market share, so Google is preparing for the future. Google has no place in high-end multi-media production workstations, and they know this.

I think the most impressive thing out of the slideshow is the fact that they are trying to make a more reliable and secure OS than what Apple or Microsoft are offering due to the fact that:

1) The OS is small, and therefore can download whole OS updates faster.
2) Tying into #1, if something goes down the pooper with the OS (example: malware is installed, compromising security and usability), Chrome can fetch fixes for the OS WITHOUT having to boot into the OS, making the OS theoretically bulletproof.


Furthermore: LOL @ anyone thinking Google wants to make a full fledged OS to compete with Apple and Microsoft's current applications. Get a grip, and use your brains. Google is wayyyy smarter than that.

 

[roadbloc]

I'm going to have to escort you off the premises for that one. In your logic, Half Life 2 is like the original Doom. Whereas the only similarities is that its a FPS.

SO I can call KDE and Xfce similar or Photoshop and The GIMP similar.

your taking this into an entirely different context. you cannot compare video games with operating systems. Yes you can call them similar, because they are, maybe not underneath, but they both try and do the same thing. The same with Chrome OS and Ubuntu Netbook.

If I am to go into it your way though, Half Life 2 is like the Classic Doom, compared to Super Mario Brothers. HL2 is actually more like Quake, HL1's engine being loosely based on Quake 2's engine.

From the pictures, and other pictures I have seen of Chrome OS and Ubuntu Netbook, it is clear to see that Google have blatantly ripped off the GUI. They look relatively identical. I'm not saying they are the same, although they both set out to do the same thing.

Nothing against Ubuntu, but are you serious???

And no, vanilla Ubuntu is not the best looking OS.

I like how you said that Ubuntu looks better than OS X then immediately followed it with saying that looks aren't important to you. That explains it.

Looks are a matter of personal taste. I personally like the orange gnome look of Ubuntu. Call me mad, I don't care.
Think of it as an acquired taste, like Sushi.

 

[Manderby]

Whoa, history repeating at its finest!

It definitely will not be an OS for me but let's sit back and see how it evolves. Thin clients have failed in the past, maybe ChromeOS proves different.

Javascript wasn't designed to, nor can it ever, power an "OS".

My point exactly. Just because Javascript is Turing complete does not mean it is a bright idea to use it for everything.

Maybe I should look at my old virtual machines again which I wrote in QuickBasic. I could sell them to Google.

 

[bobertoq]

You...are...wrong.
Businesses already have this ability. It's called a thin client. It already has an OS called Windows, and it works similar to existing technology. It's cheaper, and control stays local.

EVERYONE who uses them HATES them!

People do not want simple computers that are unable to do real work. They want complete control over their computer systems.

The only threat this OS represents is to Google's bottom line.

EPIC FAIL.

Obviously this OS isn't targeted at you. Most people don't do anything but browse the web, myself included. Plus if I want to listen to music or edit documents I can use YouTube/Lala/Rhapsody and Google Docs.

What good would this be on an airplane?

There is an offline mode for most web applications. Which means you could still listen to music or edit documents on an airplane.

 

[Shodan]

Well, this fails so far.

Do I use a Browser for Internet Browsing? Yes.

1 Tick of the box.

Do I use a Browser for Gaming? No.

Do I use a Browser for Mail? No.

Do I use a Browser for RSS? No.

Do I use a Browser for file sharing? No.

I'm missing something here.

 

[bobertoq]

Well, this fails so far.

Do I use a Browser for Internet Browsing? Yes.

1 Tick of the box.

Do I use a Browser for Gaming? No.

Do I use a Browser for Mail? No.

Do I use a Browser for RSS? No.

Do I use a Browser for file sharing? No.

I'm missing something here.

Then obviously this OS isn't targeted at you. And by the way, you can do all the Things you Listed there on the internet except for certain games. Just because it isn't useful to you doesn't mean it fails.

 

[joejoejoe]

What's with all the hate?

What's with all the hate on Chrome OS? All these "sounds horrible" "uninterested" comments?

This is the future of personal computing. Everything indicates that computing devices are headed towards constant internet usage, a need for speed, and the cloud. Google is just fueling the process along and providing exactly what the market is asking for.

This is not only going to revolutionize netbooks but will have a huge impact on personal computer. The same way that their upcoming Android phone device is going to topsy turvey the phone industry.

I'm very excited and impressed at Google for doing this.

 

[dukebound85]

Well, this fails so far.

Do I use a Browser for Internet Browsing? Yes.

1 Tick of the box.

Do I use a Browser for Gaming? No.

Do I use a Browser for Mail? No.

Do I use a Browser for RSS? No.

Do I use a Browser for file sharing? No.

I'm missing something here.

You are missing the fact that this is simply an alternative OS

Who knows how the internet will be in 10 years time.....you post reminds me of one saying "why would anyone need a pc in their house" back when pcs were only large machines had by corporations

What's with all the hate on Chrome OS? All these "sounds horrible" "uninterested" comments?

This is the future of personal computing. Everything indicates that computing devices are headed towards constant internet usage, a need for speed, and the cloud. Google is just fueling the process along and providing exactly what the market is asking for.

This is not only going to revolutionize netbooks but will have a huge impact on personal computer. The same way that their upcoming Android phone device is going to topsy turvey the phone industry.

I'm very excited and impressed at Google for doing this.

Do I need to pull up the famed ipod thread, Thread 500? lol

 

[bobertoq]

Do I need to pull up the famed ipod thread, Thread 500? lol

lmao! thanks for showing that!!!

I have no use for an Mp3 player.

My house has a CD player.
My car has a CD player.
My Mac has a CD player

I don't use headphones.

The iPod requires me to change my lifestyle to meet it's needs...

<snip>

Doesn't a Mac with a CDR undermine the need for most of this? All that's left is the number of songs you can play and the ability to listen to all of them with headphones anywhere. Do I really need ALL my songs ALL the time?

uhm, no.

Won't last. Another Cube.

 

[philipt42]

You are missing the fact that this is simply an alternative OS

Who knows how the internet will be in 10 years time.....you post reminds me of one saying "why would anyone need a pc in their house" back when pcs were only large machines had by corporations


Do I need to pull up the famed ipod thread, Thread 500? lol

Nice thread...if you take a look at Thread #s 501, 502, 503, 504, 505....etc, they all have the same complaining about what a bad idea the iPod is.

Now, unfortunately, I think cloud based computing will be the standard soon, but I for one will be holding on to my hard drive a little longer!

 

[alent1234]

What's with all the hate on Chrome OS? All these "sounds horrible" "uninterested" comments?

This is the future of personal computing. Everything indicates that computing devices are headed towards constant internet usage, a need for speed, and the cloud. Google is just fueling the process along and providing exactly what the market is asking for.

This is not only going to revolutionize netbooks but will have a huge impact on personal computer. The same way that their upcoming Android phone device is going to topsy turvey the phone industry.

I'm very excited and impressed at Google for doing this.

google is just trying to lock you in like the old AOL

the entire history of computing is putting more power in the hands of the client device

the cloud is good for some things, but people will want to do offline computing as well

 

[alent1234]

i played around with the dev preview i downloaded and it seems to be nothing more than a browser

other than gmail and the internet and other google services you get Hotmail, Yahoo, Hulu, Facebook, Twitter and a few other "apps" that open up in a new browser tab.

there are no icons, no desktop, just the Chrome browser. AOL had more freedom

 

[cumanzor]

Do I need to pull up the famed ipod thread, Thread 500? lol

Holy **** wow!!!! It just shows how stubborn and short sighted some people can be.

We live in the YEAR 2001... not 6000 years from now when ridiculously awsome technology will exist. No other mp3 player has a harddrive like this... 5gigs... **** yeah. A rio of the same size offers 64megs. Jesum Crow, get over your moping.. .this is revolutionary.... plus it's just the beggining. This device litterally bests anything on the market by about 100x

5gigs **** YEAH! I still remember when 256 flash drivers were THE ****.

 

[KiraDouji]

Wow, lots of negatives here!

I think there's real value here: society is becoming more and more reliant on the internet. And, let's face it, the narrator's right: I can hardly think of a time when I've turned on my computer and NOT accessed the internet. On any sort of device with a consistent internet connection (read: 3G plan of some sort) this is absolutely perfect. Not only is it light and FREE, but if anything ever happens to it, you don't flip out over losing this that and the other thing - it's all stored elsewhere.

It's not going to replace a traditional OS, sure, but that's not really what it's there for either.

 

[jimmyjoemccrow]

Macs aren't meant to be turned off. Mine is always either on or asleep, never off, so like someone else pointed out Chrome OS' speed is not really a selling point for Mac users who wake up their machines in a few seconds.

Are you running a server? If not, save some energy. Your reduced startup times are incurring you extra costs on your electricity bill.

 

[lamadude]

Exactly, I shut down my mac every night, just as I do with my pc. Standby uses more power than you might think. I don't see why I should waste energy on that.
And about restarts, it seems like I have to restart my mac more often than my windows pc after updates these days. I really don't mind though.

 

[CQd44]

Exactly, I shut down my mac every night, just as I do with my pc. Standby uses more power than you might think. I don't see why I should waste energy on that.
And about restarts, it seems like I have to restart my mac more often than my windows pc after updates these days. I really don't mind though.

I don't see why a lot of users here see restarts as such terrible things. Or updates for that matter. Without updates, the guest user account bug would still be out in the wild.

 

[jimmyjoemccrow]

Its not just your electricity bill you should be worrying about either. Surely everybody thinks about the natural resources consumed? The energy wasted by devices on standby each year in the US is equivalent to the output of 18 power stations apparently. Thats a lot of oil/goal/gas (I dunno what the US mainly burns for their leccy).