Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'iPad' started by Kinobi, Feb 2, 2010.
Here it is..
Waaaaaay to early to speculate on this
Google = "it will be everything the iPad is not"
Promises are easy to make
Woof, Woof - Dawg
from the mock up it looks like a 30 inch display on a table, yeah that is a iPad killer.
Thats all fine and dandy, but until they announce a day I can buy it its vaporware just like the MS Courier.
You do realize the mockup video had nothing to do with the dimensions of any device. Clearly Chrome OS is going to run on multiple netbooks and multiple tablet PCs. It isn't constrained by screen size since all the apps will be web apps.
Not just an iPad killer (yeah I saw the sarcasm ), but an iBack killer too.
If they go fully web apps, it will fail. Look at how quickly Apple reversed their stance on apps for iPhone being web only.
Google's ChromeOS to do tablets?
Looks like Google is positioning a version of the ChromeOS to do tablets.
I'm not sure it would fail. I'm sure it would work for many people. It would be no good for me though because I need some offline access. Although HTML5 on such a tablet should allow for some degree of offline work.
There's usually a big chasm between the idea and actual implementation.
maybe a better fit fot chrome os than netbook. but if google wants to compete in that "pad" market, then it needs to get it out in 2 months.
looks like it can do multitasking too.
How about actually polishing the OS and making it viable before pushing out more beta operating systems onto mobile devices?
That might help them in their quest to "kill the iPhone" or "kill the iPad."
"Concept". Does this have a ship date?
Yeah google seems to be all over the place on the OS front, and I think it means a lot of half-arsed operating systems instead of one with the potential to really change Apple in the mobile space.
How is someone going to challenge apple in the iPad space when nobody touches them in the phone space. By opening up this new front Apple has created a lot of trouble for its competitors who already trailed them.
They can't just do what apple essentially did which is take their top notch product and make it bigger. They would be taking a second rate product and make it bigger which guarantees it would still be second rate.
Which means they will have to spend substantially more money and time than apple trying to catch up.
Plus Google's primary business is selling advertising. That is what almost all their revenue comes from. Apple is a hardware company.
Unless google can figure out how to make all these OS'es come back and increase the bottom line of their core business it doesn't make a lot of sense for them.
Not to mention with them running around stepping on everyone else's toes now everyone else is looking at them dangerously and they will end up losing access to ad views because they will be replaced by Bing etc.
All Google ever does (aside from Search) is release half-ass 2nd rate products they copied from Apple (and other companies).
This is true, but I think Google sees the value of having viable platforms that are independent of Apple and in particular Microsoft.
As far as Apple is concerned Google is no competition. They simply are too half baked at all of their applications to be a viable competitor to Apple who sells the "whole experience". If Apple has demonstrated anything, it is that they can charge 2-3X the cost of PC's for things that actually work and focus intently on the "whole experience".
On the other hand. Microsoft should be quaking in their boots. MS is already half to three-quarters baked, and so from what I have seen, consumers don't see much difference between Google's half baked apps/products/browsers and Microsoft's half baked apps/products/browsers.
But since Google's stuff is either free or cheap, consumers prefer Google's stuff.
None at the mean time. It's way too early to tell.
Must admit, I really don't get this. Oh, I understand the Chrome OS path well enough and I can see it being implemented on tablets simply because it only really uses web apps so it should be relatively easy to build an interface that at least kinda works with both mouse and touch interfaces.
What I don't get is why people think, even for a moment, that this will be a better user experience than the iPad. It's basically just a web browser with enough of an OS behind it to run the hardware and provide some basic integration for off-line data (but I believe only first party apps can do that). Google is famous for producing very functional but plain interfaces and while it may be open source I just don't see that even a complete reskin ala HTC on Android phones is going to be enough to beat the ultra-slick design gurus at Apple.
Yes it may have multitasking but if you can't run local apps what's the point? If that's really their definition of multitasking then the iPad and Safari can do exactly the same thing. It'll be cheaper I guess but I can't help but feel this is following the same lines as Linux Netbooks: bought because they're cheap, returned when the functionality and ease of use doesn't meet user expectations.
I cant wait to see what The finished joint will look like.
I will be spending my hard earned money wisely this year.
It's easy to see that they are trying to follow Apple's footsteps by creating Chrome OS versus Mac OS X , their own music store versus iTunes, their own phone (Nexus One) versus iPhone, and now their "Tablet" versus the iPad.
Do you see what they're clearly trying to do?
Apple has done the same in each of those categories as well.
That is incorrect. With HTML5, any web site/app can store offline data (in Chrome and Safari).
I think what people fail to realize is that with HTML5, you can now create a full web app with the same functionality as iPhone apps (with full storage). And like the iPad, these apps will be able to use a much larger screen to have more complex UIs. The real downside is gaming. I don't think you will be able to get the same gaming experience on Chrome OS except for Flash games.