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 Previews Chrome OS, Scheduled for Release in Late 2010
- Thread starter clevin
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Thanks for sharing. I thought it was odd that the user had to log into the computer with Google account, & then log into Google (two log-ins).
& as we all know, Microsoft = efficient, open standards, quality software
& as we all know, Microsoft = efficient, open standards, quality software
Lol, your sarcasm fails, considering that those are probably the most praised applications from MS.
I feel that it would be great on netbooks only in the beginning
but you never know what google are capable of doing
but you never know what google are capable of doing
A part I still don't get is people still want their multimedia...who doesn't (aspire to) have multi-gigabytes of music & videos offline? Users want feature rich applications to access their media. Much of iTunes is "in the cloud" but I still spend most of my time using iTunes to listen to offline music or watch offline movies. Users still have iPhones, android phones, etc. to sync. They still want their privacy from putting everything online. Where do you store your passwords on Chrome OS? How is it encrypted? Add all this + a few more things & I still want the browser to be another albeit prominent app rather than THE end all be all of the OS.
I would have thought a lightweight OS that boots really fast like Android for netbooks featuring Chrome browser would have been a more interesting angle for Google.
I would have thought a lightweight OS that boots really fast like Android for netbooks featuring Chrome browser would have been a more interesting angle for Google.
I think this is something amazing from Google.
yeah of course the fanbots and people who can't see outside of Apple (most on this forum) are saying "It's not for them", but for the bigger picture (users across the world) this is going to be huge
Using a country like USA for example, (with N Y having the most wifi spots) a user can do the usual Starbucks/coffee house run, and instead of bringing a paper, just log in wirelessly..of course then there is the whole university aspect of things. I think that if I was still in uni I would get Google OS, almost over any other OS since it can run as a small foot print, on a small notebook, and it's got the essentials of an OS
The only downside is the notably and obvious Google privacy issues. I kinda hate Google Chrome for that (I know you can turn it off, but it's a limited browser), and it will ultimetly make me hate this OS. The cloud is excellent and will take over the netbook worl when more devs get involved, and when more internet access spots raise up throughout the world
But for now it's only a dev build, so I'm looking forward for more things to come
yeah of course the fanbots and people who can't see outside of Apple (most on this forum) are saying "It's not for them", but for the bigger picture (users across the world) this is going to be huge
Using a country like USA for example, (with N Y having the most wifi spots) a user can do the usual Starbucks/coffee house run, and instead of bringing a paper, just log in wirelessly..of course then there is the whole university aspect of things. I think that if I was still in uni I would get Google OS, almost over any other OS since it can run as a small foot print, on a small notebook, and it's got the essentials of an OS
The only downside is the notably and obvious Google privacy issues. I kinda hate Google Chrome for that (I know you can turn it off, but it's a limited browser), and it will ultimetly make me hate this OS. The cloud is excellent and will take over the netbook worl when more devs get involved, and when more internet access spots raise up throughout the world
But for now it's only a dev build, so I'm looking forward for more things to come
With a Mac just create a Simple Finder account, only allow access to a web browser & make it the startup app, give no other privileges and essentially you have Chrome OS with a richer interface. This would be a good thing for users with a knack for messing up their systems
PS, I did find this interesting:
& here's where we'll likely see its niche:
PS, I did find this interesting:
& here's where we'll likely see its niche:
source.
It's an alternate OS - I think their are more than enough alternative operating systems, don't you?
My post has nothing to do with not having a PC in a home when originally they were for corporate use - people who were saying that never had a computer so they did not know the advantages.
I am talking now and realistically.
Google's idea for future computing is for the user to have a few components at home and the rest of your computing assets in one big hardware cloud that you will never see.
No Thanks.
Lol to think that the computer industry will remain static is silly
I never said your post did, merely that it reminded me of the similar thought process
Thinking the computer landscape will not change is not thinking realistically, sorry
We will never see huh. You seem to be a tad short sighted with the direction the industry is moving.
Even Apple is slowly going that way with mobile me, never mind the fact that this is what Google is doing....so yes, we will see it
SInce it's alternative, you dont have to get it. Now don't you feel better lol
Yes, I use my browser for email. GMAIL also imports my email from other POP/IMAP accounts.
Yes I use my browser for RSS.
Yes I use my Browser for file sharing.
Yes I play games on my browser.
Your Mac's OS (OS X) doesn't really play 1/100 of games available for the Personal Computing platform, now does it? Does that mean Apple's OS fails?
Horrible logic. You fail.
So you're saying it's the crème de la merde
Um, I'm saying that corporate IT loves Office, Sharepoint and Exchange.
Perhaps people would love Office even more if it wasn't so god damn expensive
macsmurf, I think Chrome OS/Google OS is destined for obscurity. Just my opinion. But I'm sure you'll call that irrelevant. You originally cited JS going faster will make this OS viable. I disagree and think you drank a lot of the "web 2.0" kool-aid when it was being passed around. RIAs-do-not-an-OS-make. You keep jumping over my points, but do what you must. Look at some facts, which I've included below.
I'm open to any facts or info you may have, it seems that none have made it into your posts as of yet. It is just childish to arbitrarily drop in the word "irrelevant" when you run out of points to make.
These apps are all still slow and will never replace a desktop app. The "potential" has been explored and we know where the ceiling is on these things. If the future was a browser-based OS, we'd all be using HyperOffice, WebOS, or Desktop.com form years ago. Those failed. Nobody wanted them. They were the first "RIA"s. This has been discussed and tried ad nauseum since the late 1990s. Heck, they even got Venture Funding for it in those days (http://www.internetnews.com/ec-news/article.php/186901). We weren't using them then, we aren't using them now, nor will we be using it, or this "Chrome OS", in five or ten years. Not via browser-based RIAs running a 15-year old scripting language, anyway. I think you're trying to sound forward-thinking and future-minded, but unfortunately, in my opinion, you're coming off sounding like a middle-manager at a random tech company who is trying to appear relevant.
Not to mention Google OS replaces all the years of research into user experience and window management that has gone into Mac OS, Linux, Windows, and every other human-computer interface and throws it all out the window in favor or tabs for everything (see 4:29 of the video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANMrzw7JFzA). That is a poor choice, and arrogant to usurp all that we've advanced OSes to become to be reduced to tabs. I can just imagine the pioneers, researchers, and innovators of human-computer interaction having fits about this right now. A step backwards in usability for sure.
Do some research into Grand Central Dispatch, as just one example of how Apple is looking to the future. GCD is technology built to support multi-core chip architectures that will become the standard in the future (from which you appear to be insulated). You think by Google using a browser to run their apps is "looking to the future" via a JS VM?? What are you, from 1999? Why don't you go build a Flash OS while you're at it.... Good God, man. Sounds like you are the type of person would have said that Java OSes had a future, too (http://sourceforge.net/projects/jnode/, http://sourceforge.net/projects/jos/, or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JX_(operating_system)). They use "VM"s, too, FYI.
Oh, I get the technology and what they are trying to do very well, but what I was saying was that I don't get why they think this will succeed. This is a browser booted up by some kernel. Who cares. If it didn't have Google's name on it, it would drift off into obscurity like the other OSes that are, and have in the past, tried to do this same thing (jolicloud, moblin, and eyeos, just to name a recent few...). Anything's possible, I suppose, but I just think this isn't going anywhere.
I'm open to any facts or info you may have, it seems that none have made it into your posts as of yet. It is just childish to arbitrarily drop in the word "irrelevant" when you run out of points to make.
Google Gears is not OS-fast, I don't use it anymore. I do my editing locally and save what I need to Google Docs or any other "cloud" service. Gears is ancillary.
Maybe some do, and clearly you do, but that ship has sailed. These companies saw that potential many years ago and did something about it. Remember the "new" Yahoo! Mail (Oddpost)? It didn't "change the frickin world". It had potential, sure, but 80% of users didn't care. Nobody talks about it anymore, but the RIA buzzword is still bandied about. That "potential" is still idly sitting there being used by users who could care less what they are using, much less that it is an "RIA". Nobody is saying "Gee, I wish I had an entire OS that works like this!" Because we do, already, in every OS, since RIAs are modeled after desktop OS apps...
These apps are all still slow and will never replace a desktop app. The "potential" has been explored and we know where the ceiling is on these things. If the future was a browser-based OS, we'd all be using HyperOffice, WebOS, or Desktop.com form years ago. Those failed. Nobody wanted them. They were the first "RIA"s. This has been discussed and tried ad nauseum since the late 1990s. Heck, they even got Venture Funding for it in those days (http://www.internetnews.com/ec-news/article.php/186901). We weren't using them then, we aren't using them now, nor will we be using it, or this "Chrome OS", in five or ten years. Not via browser-based RIAs running a 15-year old scripting language, anyway. I think you're trying to sound forward-thinking and future-minded, but unfortunately, in my opinion, you're coming off sounding like a middle-manager at a random tech company who is trying to appear relevant.
Not to mention Google OS replaces all the years of research into user experience and window management that has gone into Mac OS, Linux, Windows, and every other human-computer interface and throws it all out the window in favor or tabs for everything (see 4:29 of the video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANMrzw7JFzA). That is a poor choice, and arrogant to usurp all that we've advanced OSes to become to be reduced to tabs. I can just imagine the pioneers, researchers, and innovators of human-computer interaction having fits about this right now. A step backwards in usability for sure.
No. "Fast enough"? For what? Editing an email or editing a 10MB PSD file? An OS needs to support many, and very different, tasks to be useful and to be more than just a text editing browser. C'mon man, think about these things before you post them.
Wow. What a ridiculous statement. Yes, the iPhone was totally produced by a company not looking to the future at all...
Do some research into Grand Central Dispatch, as just one example of how Apple is looking to the future. GCD is technology built to support multi-core chip architectures that will become the standard in the future (from which you appear to be insulated). You think by Google using a browser to run their apps is "looking to the future" via a JS VM?? What are you, from 1999? Why don't you go build a Flash OS while you're at it.... Good God, man. Sounds like you are the type of person would have said that Java OSes had a future, too (http://sourceforge.net/projects/jnode/, http://sourceforge.net/projects/jos/, or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JX_(operating_system)). They use "VM"s, too, FYI.Yes, and clearly you've never used OpenOffice so you don't know how slow and unusable it is.
Neither did the guy who built Orkut or those Web OSes from 1999. And everyone uses Orkut instead of Facebook, right? Well, maybe you do...
Oh, I get the technology and what they are trying to do very well, but what I was saying was that I don't get why they think this will succeed. This is a browser booted up by some kernel. Who cares. If it didn't have Google's name on it, it would drift off into obscurity like the other OSes that are, and have in the past, tried to do this same thing (jolicloud, moblin, and eyeos, just to name a recent few...). Anything's possible, I suppose, but I just think this isn't going anywhere.
This probably won't be a huge success but it won't fail either. They seem to want to release a whole mobile platform, hardware + software, for one specific purpose: web tasks; web based applications to create and edit documents, listen to music and watch videos are already here, but improvements are needed.
Chrome OS just had WAY too much hype, and everyone was waiting for a HURRR MS KILLER. This isn't, this is just the OS made for netbooks, this is an OS made for tasks that can be done on the go. You and others are just expecting TOO much from this. There is still no system that can do it all, I'm sorry if you can't quite understand this.
Chrome OS just had WAY too much hype, and everyone was waiting for a HURRR MS KILLER. This isn't, this is just the OS made for netbooks, this is an OS made for tasks that can be done on the go. You and others are just expecting TOO much from this. There is still no system that can do it all, I'm sorry if you can't quite understand this.
It's a browser appliance.
Easy enough to make it go in VirtualBox
Folks are making a big deal about this as though it were a revolutionary new OS. It's not.
It's a browser appliance.
More specifically, it's a really slimmed-down, customized, and hardened Ubuntu, with chrome running on top of xorg.
When all you need is a browser that will boot from a little bit of flash memory, it's just the ticket. This is perfect for any simple public terminal. Also nice to have around so that when a family member's old windows machine gets all virused up or the hard drive dies you can just plug this in and get them back online.
It is very, very easy to use. Just log in with your google account, and you're in business. It boots and loads the browser from a read-only partition and is thus incorruptable, be it by malware or hard shutdowns. Embedding this on ARM daughtercard notebooks like Dell's Latitude ON machines could easily give somewhere north of 10 hours of wifi browsing time. It's still very alpha at the moment (not too hard to freeze it), but it's got a lot of potential. I can see myself carrying this around on a USB key.
Now, a lot of people will say "oh, great, another linux livecd on a USB key, we've had that for years and years". Google's point here is not the technology in the OS itsself. There have certainly been linux distros made to run from USB keys that are a lot nicer than chromeos, maybe even easier to use.
But the non-technical ramifications of chromeos have M$ and co. silently quaking in their boots. Because chomeos isn't just some linux distro. The point of this exercise is to remove the computer from the internet user experience as much as possible. This means that the OS is free, and the hardware is low-power and ridiculously cheap (even compared to a netbook). I'd bet good money that one of Google's eventual aims with chromos is to have $100 ARM-based tablet machines that Starbucks lets you use for free for 20 minutes when you buy a latte (and Asus will probably build them).
Microsoft cringes at this proposition, because Windows alone for such a device has to cost almost that much in order for them to make any money on it. Yes, the Asus' of the world could have done this with linux years ago. But there is no heavyweight proponent of consumer-grade linux to make it happen, and linux is far too fragmented for it to happen on its own. Google has shown up and (wisely) is not even calling it "linux"; chromeos is basically a bootable browser that almost completely removes complexity and the need for administration from the end-user. They are the 800lb gorilla in the room necessary to drive mass adoption of the platform with things like partner agreements, distribution channels, sales channels in every major media market in the world, etc etc.
I should also mention that the segmentation between Android and ChromeOS makes sense to me. Android clearly targets the mobile phone market, where the handset vendors & carriers want to customize their platforms & services and have the developer resources necessary to do so. ChromeOS clearly targets PC manufacturers; their business is clearly not creating software to run on their devices, but if they're given an OS for free and assured that they'll have support for it they'll jump at the opportunity to not have M$ cramming an OS down their throats.
Come to think of it, this makes Google a lot more Apple-like in their end-to-end control of the user experience:
- they have a strong hand in the spec of "official" Chrome OS machines
- they provide the OS and the browser for the appliance
- they run the network that connects the machine to the net (whether that be wifi, whitespace, 4G LTE, etc).
-Blake
Easy enough to make it go in VirtualBox
Folks are making a big deal about this as though it were a revolutionary new OS. It's not.
It's a browser appliance.
More specifically, it's a really slimmed-down, customized, and hardened Ubuntu, with chrome running on top of xorg.
When all you need is a browser that will boot from a little bit of flash memory, it's just the ticket. This is perfect for any simple public terminal. Also nice to have around so that when a family member's old windows machine gets all virused up or the hard drive dies you can just plug this in and get them back online.
It is very, very easy to use. Just log in with your google account, and you're in business. It boots and loads the browser from a read-only partition and is thus incorruptable, be it by malware or hard shutdowns. Embedding this on ARM daughtercard notebooks like Dell's Latitude ON machines could easily give somewhere north of 10 hours of wifi browsing time. It's still very alpha at the moment (not too hard to freeze it), but it's got a lot of potential. I can see myself carrying this around on a USB key.
Now, a lot of people will say "oh, great, another linux livecd on a USB key, we've had that for years and years". Google's point here is not the technology in the OS itsself. There have certainly been linux distros made to run from USB keys that are a lot nicer than chromeos, maybe even easier to use.
But the non-technical ramifications of chromeos have M$ and co. silently quaking in their boots. Because chomeos isn't just some linux distro. The point of this exercise is to remove the computer from the internet user experience as much as possible. This means that the OS is free, and the hardware is low-power and ridiculously cheap (even compared to a netbook). I'd bet good money that one of Google's eventual aims with chromos is to have $100 ARM-based tablet machines that Starbucks lets you use for free for 20 minutes when you buy a latte (and Asus will probably build them).
Microsoft cringes at this proposition, because Windows alone for such a device has to cost almost that much in order for them to make any money on it. Yes, the Asus' of the world could have done this with linux years ago. But there is no heavyweight proponent of consumer-grade linux to make it happen, and linux is far too fragmented for it to happen on its own. Google has shown up and (wisely) is not even calling it "linux"; chromeos is basically a bootable browser that almost completely removes complexity and the need for administration from the end-user. They are the 800lb gorilla in the room necessary to drive mass adoption of the platform with things like partner agreements, distribution channels, sales channels in every major media market in the world, etc etc.
I should also mention that the segmentation between Android and ChromeOS makes sense to me. Android clearly targets the mobile phone market, where the handset vendors & carriers want to customize their platforms & services and have the developer resources necessary to do so. ChromeOS clearly targets PC manufacturers; their business is clearly not creating software to run on their devices, but if they're given an OS for free and assured that they'll have support for it they'll jump at the opportunity to not have M$ cramming an OS down their throats.
Come to think of it, this makes Google a lot more Apple-like in their end-to-end control of the user experience:
- they have a strong hand in the spec of "official" Chrome OS machines
- they provide the OS and the browser for the appliance
- they run the network that connects the machine to the net (whether that be wifi, whitespace, 4G LTE, etc).
-Blake
Can we stop with this "you are wrong" crap? He's voicing his opinion, genius. And while we're at it, clearly you've never actually worked in an IT department, because you'd know that you don't give everyone complete control over their systems. Not unless you're a glutton for punishment, anyway.
Citrix is a fantastic technology, allows people to work from home without lugging a laptop, and it even allows them to access docks from an iPhone. In my experience people love it. Kinda shoots your "EVERYONE who uses them HATES them!" statement to hell, doesn't it?
The video for it made me lol. "Even the fastest computer takes 45 seconds to boot up" (my slow Mac takes about 40). "As soon as you see your internet icon you are double clicking it over and over until it opens" (I click it once when I see it and it opens up straight away). Makes me happy I use a Mac .
.
Not that it changes the rest of your point, but it is not Ubuntu and does not run on top of xorg. It will use a custom windowing system running on the linux kernel.
Thank god, finally someone who gets it. It's Google's way of trying to encourage the growth of cheap internet-surfing devices by addressing the problems that
- The single most expensive part of a netbook/nettop is the windows licence sticker
- The 'linux community' are congenitally incapable of getting their **** together without some grownups to boss them about
Yeah, so they can break their computers by installing kitten wallpapers, games and itunes until the disk is full and then deleting the Wndows directory to make space. Then they can sit around whining about how long tech support takes to fix it. 90%+ of people in the workspace shouldn't be trusted with anything other than a dumb terminal. They may hate it, but that's why they get paid - to make them put up with **** they wouldn't do for free.
Oh and for all those people who keep complaining about how you wouldn't be able to 'work' if there was no network - in what conceivable way is that a problem for a consumer electronics device?
If your employer gives you a glorified etch-a-sketch to work on, then it's their problem if it doesn't work. If you yourself have decided to do serious work on a $200 web surfing + email appliance, you deserve to suffer a bit now and again, it'll teach you a lesson.
Web appliances are for LolFaceTubeSpace, remote-controlling your PVR and maybe updating a spreadsheet of your grocery bills - not for business-critical life-or-death stuff.
I think it would be cool if you could push a button when you open your laptop and launch into this OS if you just want to browse for a few minutes instead of loading your entire OS along with things you don't need at that moment. In that way it would be kind of useful. I don't know that I'd want to buy an entirely new device to use it though. It does something that 2 of my devices already do.
GREAT!!! Another camouflaged way for the government to see everything we are up to...An entire OS in webspace...Brilliant, but No Thanks Google.
O'Rly, you fail, epically.
No, I use Apple Mail.
No, I use NewsFire.
No, I use AFP connect for file sharing.
No, I do not play and games on the browser.
Ever heard of bootcamp? Or the fact that I have a dedicated PC hooked upto my iMac?
C'mon, this is basic stuff, go back to school.