You don't see how the recent market failure of a cheap computer with a very basic OS is relevant to Google's plans to release a cheap computer with a basic OS?
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
You don't see how the recent market failure of a cheap computer with a very basic OS is relevant to Google's plans to release a cheap computer with a basic OS?
Linux is cumbersome and difficult for people who don't know it to use. This is a whole different can of worms. SIMPLE, EASY, IE, if you can use the web, you can use this computer. THAT is the difference, and if you don't see it, I sure as heck can't help ya.
I forgot and would agree but data like music and photos won't be available offline simply won't be available.
You don't necessarily need to trust any website with your info. You can make your own backup copies as many do now.
That was what was supposed to have happened at MS/Danger but didn't. In essence you are trusting that other companies are responsible to create backups of the data. While this is rare, it only takes one time for you to get really screwed over.
True, but let's be real. Anyone who is willing to buy into ChromeOS, will also be using all of their services as well.
I'm not talking about casual Flash-based games which I will assume they can do. As of now I'm unaware of any service that deals with any amount of mid-level photo editing. Photoshop.com only deals with light edits. As for movie editing I'm not aware of any site that offers editing that a novice app like iMovie does much less any internet connection that can easily handle editing HD movies from $150 camcorders that are so easy to get nowadays.
This is a joke. What conspiracy theories did I raise? You again miss the point and are jumping to conclusions. I don't have to prove anything. Where did I imply Google with anything? I said they were collecting massive amounts of data about you. That is a fact. If you want to take comfort in the approach "Everybody else is doing it, why can't I?", go ahead. Now if you feel OK with that then go ahead and have a great day.
Also, let's get's something straight. When a company is monitoring the content of you're emails, regardless of whether it's for ads, that is spying. When a company wants to pay attention to what books you've read and what page you read up to, that is spying. When a company uses a consolidated search and address bar which can tell which sites you go to and how often (in Chrome it is not off by default), that is spying. Don't feed me crap about "machine-based ads" because you have no idea what those machines are doing and neither do I.
Are you actually arguing for vendor lock in?
Google doesn't care if you use their OS. They just want to get more people on the internet more often, so they get more people to see there ads.
I was arguing that vendor lock in tends to be in the vendor's favor... and in turn, in the stock holders of the vendor. But that's a valid point, google is making money from the ads, not the OS.
However, I would say that having zero exclusive apps gives people no incentive to use Chrome.
is it possible that google will license the OS for free, like they did with android?
then the incentive would be for the manufactures to save money.
is this possible?
Who wants a web browser for an OS???
The web only works in some places. I like their browser, search engine & mapping programs. But their web apps & it is appearing that their "OS" is lacking in real useful features.
The web only works in some places. I like their browser, search engine & mapping programs. But their web apps & it is appearing that their "OS" is lacking in real useful features.
NO web based OS or apps for me.
My internet speed at the current time is slower than my old, old dial-up speeds of 300 baud. That is very pre internet time frame. Why would I want an OS & programs to depend upon this, 9MB, "150 baud," speed.
My internet speed at the current time is slower than my old, old dial-up speeds of 300 baud. That is very pre internet time frame. Why would I want an OS & programs to depend upon this, 9MB, "150 baud," speed.
Most households only need 1 "real" computer. The rest can be netbooks.
IN those terms this will work great.
And I like the browser as the OS idea. Makes sense. Most folks are so used to using the browser to navigate. Why not just make it the default OS?
And the panels are a good idea.
But not sure everyone wants to use web apps to do tasks although I don't get it if you can use the thing offline or not. OR how that would work.
Jobs I think has a better vision of combining local and cloud and using each where it works best.
And I think Google will underestimates this driver thing.
IN those terms this will work great.
And I like the browser as the OS idea. Makes sense. Most folks are so used to using the browser to navigate. Why not just make it the default OS?
And the panels are a good idea.
But not sure everyone wants to use web apps to do tasks although I don't get it if you can use the thing offline or not. OR how that would work.
Jobs I think has a better vision of combining local and cloud and using each where it works best.
And I think Google will underestimates this driver thing.
While I can't say if I want one or not, what I hope this will do is drive innovation in web apps. As far as I understand, web apps that can run in Chrome OS should be able to run in the Chrome browser (and presumably other browsers). If Chrome OS is sufficiently successful, we can expect to see great new web apps. Google should lead the pack, of course, but why not Spotify and Skype in the browser?
Alex Payne on Chrome OS
Smartest thing Ive seen so far about Chrome OS is this tweet by Alex Payne:
I have no opinion about Chrome OS. All I know is that cheap hardware feels cheap. Its less cloud computing than disposable computing.
★
Daring Fireball 09-11-19 6:10 PM John Gruber http://daringfireball.net/
Smartest thing Ive seen so far about Chrome OS is this tweet by Alex Payne:
I have no opinion about Chrome OS. All I know is that cheap hardware feels cheap. Its less cloud computing than disposable computing.
★
Daring Fireball 09-11-19 6:10 PM John Gruber http://daringfireball.net/
So, Apple might be right after all
I don't know if this has been mentioned before in this thread or not, but, in a way, this sort of got me thinking that, this might be the reason Apple's tablet will be released based on the iPhone OS, not the full blown Mac OS. If you think about it, iPhone OS is sort of in between the regular OS, and this Web based OS. We are not ready yet for a Web based OS because the infrastructure is not there. People complain about the browsing speed in their phones now, imagine when they get everything (music, movies, etc. and nothing is stored locally) from 'up there'. I think Apple's plan is longer term than most of us can see. And that future looks bright, or at least I hope.
I don't know if this has been mentioned before in this thread or not, but, in a way, this sort of got me thinking that, this might be the reason Apple's tablet will be released based on the iPhone OS, not the full blown Mac OS. If you think about it, iPhone OS is sort of in between the regular OS, and this Web based OS. We are not ready yet for a Web based OS because the infrastructure is not there. People complain about the browsing speed in their phones now, imagine when they get everything (music, movies, etc. and nothing is stored locally) from 'up there'. I think Apple's plan is longer term than most of us can see. And that future looks bright, or at least I hope.
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/03/offline-access-to-google-docs.html
Despite the marketing slant, you will have localized storage offline. It will utilize flash memory AND cloud data storage.
The source code license basically says that you can use it for whatever you want.
http://git.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome/releases/4.0.245.1/src/LICENSE?view=markup
The infrastructure IS there, at least in most developed countries. That people in large cities in the US struggle with decent broadband or 3G connection is truly perplexing, but in developed Europe (particularly the Nordic region), and developed Asia (Korea, Japan), infrastructure is hardly the problem, even outside large urban centres. And once carriers in the US get their act together, it won't be there either.
zzz
Google sounds very excited by their idea, but Sun has been very fond of saying "The Network is the Computer" in a rather smug way for years. Turns out, we're still using computers, and the network, if it is available, not the other way around.
I think Jolicloud OS has a bit more potential than Google's Chrome OS, frankly. It can actually install stuff and run local apps, and uses the network in a smart way (no, I'm not affiliated with them):
http://www.jolicloud.com/tour
No Skype on a Chrome OS machine? Kinda lame IMO. No local files at all?
You mean, I get the pleasure of bringing a laptop with me but can't watch my own video files or play a game on a wifi-less plane/train/boat/bus? Lame.
And, wait, if I don't want to spend the $12/day wifi charge at my hotel then I can't even use my OS? But I just wanted to import and edit some pictures off my camera and write a draft for a post on MacRumors.com! Even more lame.
If all I wanted to do was surf the web, send/receive email, check Facebook or Twitter, listen to my music or stream an online video, then I have my iPhone or any other smartphone for that. And it fits in my pocket. And it has 3G. And I can make calls. And I can access over 100k apps that do other stuff Google OS can't do...
In addition to all that, not only does it appear to be only for kids and beginners, I don't think Google employees will be using this OS anytime in the near future after it is released. This is going to make any machine that runs it primarily a media consumption device (like any smartphone), not a "participatory device" (like most smartphones), since you can't contribute or share anything other than text (no videos, audio, pictures, etc). Heck, you can't even take pictures with it.
Sorry Google, but I just don't think this has much of a future. A browser is one thing, but a web OS concept has been kicked around for many years and never caught on. Google OS doesn't look like it is going to get it "right", either. Jolicloud might have a better shot, if it isn't vaporware.
Google sounds very excited by their idea, but Sun has been very fond of saying "The Network is the Computer" in a rather smug way for years. Turns out, we're still using computers, and the network, if it is available, not the other way around.
I think Jolicloud OS has a bit more potential than Google's Chrome OS, frankly. It can actually install stuff and run local apps, and uses the network in a smart way (no, I'm not affiliated with them):
http://www.jolicloud.com/tour
No Skype on a Chrome OS machine? Kinda lame IMO. No local files at all?
You mean, I get the pleasure of bringing a laptop with me but can't watch my own video files or play a game on a wifi-less plane/train/boat/bus? Lame.
And, wait, if I don't want to spend the $12/day wifi charge at my hotel then I can't even use my OS? But I just wanted to import and edit some pictures off my camera and write a draft for a post on MacRumors.com! Even more lame.
If all I wanted to do was surf the web, send/receive email, check Facebook or Twitter, listen to my music or stream an online video, then I have my iPhone or any other smartphone for that. And it fits in my pocket. And it has 3G. And I can make calls. And I can access over 100k apps that do other stuff Google OS can't do...
In addition to all that, not only does it appear to be only for kids and beginners, I don't think Google employees will be using this OS anytime in the near future after it is released. This is going to make any machine that runs it primarily a media consumption device (like any smartphone), not a "participatory device" (like most smartphones), since you can't contribute or share anything other than text (no videos, audio, pictures, etc). Heck, you can't even take pictures with it.
Sorry Google, but I just don't think this has much of a future. A browser is one thing, but a web OS concept has been kicked around for many years and never caught on. Google OS doesn't look like it is going to get it "right", either. Jolicloud might have a better shot, if it isn't vaporware.
Youtube as of this week supports 1080p source files uploads and streaming.
Plus with Google NaCl, performance critical apps like Final Cut could even be written as web apps.
Will readily admit, I would be very interested in such an OS, such to see the possibilties that it would offer and how Google would make it work.
Haven't read the whole thread, but
I think the big selling point is going to be free wifi of some sort.
Google has been getting their hands into all sorts of wifi options( free wifi
at airports over Xmas, potential free wifi for cities.) makes complete sense.
I think the big selling point is going to be free wifi of some sort.
Google has been getting their hands into all sorts of wifi options( free wifi
at airports over Xmas, potential free wifi for cities.) makes complete sense.
google word, google excel, google powerpoint? that would get me interested, especially with 7 seconds boot time... that is stupidly fast 
google word, google excel, google powerpoint? that would get me interested, especially with 7 seconds boot time... that is stupidly fast
You mean Google Docs?
I don't know why you guys are criticizing it so much. Most of us probably won't find it worth anything, but most people don't use their computer for ANYTHING except the internet. So for them this will be good.
Yeah it's called Google Docs. (Which is also on the internet)google word, google excel, google powerpoint? that would get me interested, especially with 7 seconds boot time... that is stupidly fast
Honestly, your opinions and sources mean about this much _
So many of you can't even bother to open you mind a fraction of an inch to look at the potential. Guarantee you Apple will look into something like this or has something like this for there Netbook. Oh yeah and if Apple releases it LTD will praise it as the second coming.
We are only seeing one part of the puzzle, we are seeing the client. We know they are working on the server part but that team is the other side of world so they maybe working very much hands off from each other.
But a Wave server built in and running in the background on a device like this would answer all the questions that keep coming up about this style of device. The Wave server could control the flash pool syncing with all the other wave style servers you have links with.
That could include caching webapps ready for you to use, but if the developer is running a wave server they would only need to release build via their serve and yours would get updated.
Same for your photo's tag your mum in a photo and your wave servers not only sync between each other but with your mums wave server and she sees the photo.
Chrome by itself is really just a browser.
It's wave that makes it interesting as the second computer.
But no word as yet if Wave is included