Opinion: Why Chrome OS will fail — big time

Discussion in 'MacBytes.com News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Nov 23, 2009.

  1. MacBytes macrumors bot

    Jul 5, 2003
  2. Shoesy macrumors 6502a


    Jun 21, 2007
    Colchester, UK.
    flexibility is definitely where this all falls down. Look at iphone os - it's inflexibility is what has caused it's very quick and certain demise.

    What we need are more options! Not a knew way of looking at things at all! Make it do everything and then it's certain to beat all the other bloated osses around.

    Brilliant thinking there, well done.
  3. sconnor99 macrumors regular

    Dec 14, 2005
    iPhone OS - demise, what on earth are you on?
  4. kate-willbury macrumors 6502a

    Feb 14, 2009
    actually this would be true.

    if the jailbreaking community had not started creating 3rd party apps for the iphone, apple would never have stolen the idea and 'allowed' to open up their OS and pave the way for official app store apps.

    lets face it, the only reason the iphone is so popular now is because of the app store. it would have failed if it were up to apple and kept the OS inflexible.
  5. Shoesy macrumors 6502a


    Jun 21, 2007
    Colchester, UK.
    Oh yeah, that's what I meant - the exact opposite of what I said. That passes for humour where I come from. ;)
  6. ss957916 macrumors 6502a

    Jun 17, 2009
    I just don't get the whole cloud thing. The last thing I want is a computer that only has full features when I have the internet.
  7. MisterMe macrumors G4


    Jul 17, 2002
    I choose to believe that he was being facetious:)

    As for Randall Kennedy's piece in ComputerWorld at the heart of this thread, it is nonsense. His Fatal Flaw No. 1: The Linux Foundation defies logic. Supposedly Linux is a weakness owing to its "spotty" hardware support. For it to work, it doesn't have to support every phone in the World. Each manufacturer simply needs to write drivers to support its own hardware. This is a limited task that can be done to high precision. As for his Fatal Flaw No. 2: The web user interface—well, I suppose that it is matter of taste. However, I would hardly call it a fatal flaw. For my tastes, it is not the iPhone OS. I have no desire to use it. However, a majority of phone users do not use the iPhone. It is up to Google to design its interface to satisfy a critical mass among that group. I am certain that it can.
  8. Demosthenes X macrumors 68000

    Demosthenes X

    Oct 21, 2008
    The article appears to be written from the erroneous presumption that Chrome OS is intended to supplant Windows/OSX. That's hardly the case. I'd argue Chrome OS is intended to to supplement another computer running a full-fledged operating system. The author's statement, "Why you would want a web-only appliance as well is not so easy to answer," demonstrates just how widely he misses the point. Chrome OS will appeal to the same people who want netbooks.

    As to "spotty hardware compatibility", I fail to understand the criticism. As long as it runs on the hardware it claims to, where's the problem?
  9. jayducharme macrumors 68030


    Jun 22, 2006
    The thick of it
    Google is partnering with a few hardware vendors to make sure its system works. I don't see how that's a "wart."

    I'm reserving judgement on this until I can actually use it. Chrome isn't meant to replace hard-core computer tasks like 3D animation. It's meant for "most people" who check their e-mail and spend most of their time online. It's a slow process, but like it or not many tasks are gradually moving to the "cloud." Aviary is a good example: a fully functioning multitrack studio (similar to GarageBand) but completely online. It will probably take another decade or so, but eventually the cloud will rule.

    Ummmm ... but I thought you just implied that Linux was carp. And OS X isn't exactly the most flexible system ever devised, but it does what it does well. Chrome might find a niche it can fill. It doesn't need much flexibility if it essentially has one function: to handle web interaction.
  10. gotenks05 macrumors member

    Jan 1, 2009
    I have not read the article yet, but I am about to. However, from a few posts to thread here, I think the article's author does not take a whole lot of data into account. Seriously, why would it require Internet all of the time? People can access most of Google's stuff offline. That is what Gears was supposed to accomplish, was it not? If Gears is included in Chrome OS, then that point is useless. Then again, the article is just an opinion.
  11. ClassicBean macrumors 6502a

    Jun 20, 2004
    I agree. Until all computers are automatically and forever online all-the-time without ever losing a connection, I'm not interested.
  12. Jazurm macrumors newbie

    Nov 23, 2009
    To each his own

    Some people fail to see the good in things. Just because a product or idea does not apply to you, does not mean it is "bad". This OS is perfect for the netbook or tablet revolution (especially one with a 3g plan), but it only applies to this field. No person would ever put this OS on a desktop computer or even a laptop if that was their only computer. I agree it's a very limited OS, but it looks to be able to do a few things very well instead of doing everything decent.
  13. bmb012 macrumors 6502

    Jul 25, 2006
    Haha, thanks for making the perfect point. This might be acceptable if this was a PHONE we were talking about. But it's not, this is an operating system for a COMPUTER. An OS that makes the computer less capable than OS 9, Windows 7, even less capable than BeOS is nowadays!

    If the thing uses low cost processors, how will it run inefficent web programs at a decent rate? Nail in the coffin: It's supposed to cost as much as current netbooks, which already do everything ChromeOS will, and TONS more.
  14. zakfox1986 macrumors member

    Jul 10, 2008
    Chrome OS won't work for everybody. It may work for the most basic user out there though. Some people want the internet and nothing more. I was talking to a mom yesterday and she is Google's perfect user. She wants to be able to turn her computer on and it go straight to her Google home page. No clicking to open IE or FF or Safari...just boot to internet. Chrome OS would be perfect for her.
  15. kerpow macrumors 6502

    Jan 16, 2004
    Disagree. My netbook is under-powered, takes a long time to boot up and then has all the usual issues with XP. I could install linux but I can't be bothered to worry about whether the sound card or wifi card works. And it doesn't have a CD player so I've got to worry about iso on a USB etc. The hard drive failed a month or so ago so it had to be sent back.

    A ChromeOS would boost faster, no hard drive to fail, no data loss.

    For people that worry about it being useless if you're not connected to the internet - how often are not connected to the internet? Wifi is everywhere and will be even more prevalent. Planes and subway is possible quite soon. 3g and then 4g/WiMax etc. will only improve.

    I would be very surprised if Google don't allow you to cache aspects of Google Docs and Gmail so that you can at least write stuff if you disconnected for a short period of time.
  16. mgamber macrumors 6502a


    Jun 12, 2008
    IMO it only applies to super cheap netbooks, not really anything that's currently available. The problem lies in what will make netbooks so much cheaper that they, coupled with Chrome, will make them commercially viable? Taking out the hard drive? That's hardly going to make a dent. Suddenly a $250 netbook can sell for $230? Replacing Windows with a much cheaper system will make a difference but, as I recall, that was tried with Asus netbooks running Linux and we saw how they just leapt off the shelves at Target and Walmart, the exact target audience, according to Google, for Chrome. Finally, you have to really trust google to buy into this at all. Most people probably won't care, some people probably worship the ground it's built on but I, personally, don't trust anything with so many fingers in so many pies. It would take one greedy, self-serving CEO (and there's been no shortage of them everywhere else lately) to turn it into a total malware package and no one can guarantee that won't happen the next time Google's stock takes a big hit. In the end, I see as much of a market for this as with the OS Netscape trumpetted years ago. The one that never made it to market and yet still managed to ruin that company.
  17. Pomares macrumors member

    Jul 23, 2002
    New category altogether

    Chromium is not meant to supplant anything. It is pioneering a completely new category of OS. The closest thing to compare it to is the iPhone OS, but even the iPhone OS has too much the feel of a full featured, albeit compact, computer.

    This is completely new. It could very well fall on its face, but not because of the poorly argumented reasons the author gave. The interface does not have to be innovative, it has to be intuitive. If users are comfortable with browsers than they will be right at home on Chromium.

    The author just lost all credibility for me.
  18. SimonMW macrumors 6502

    Jan 15, 2008
    I'm not a huge fan of cloud computing. However, remember that when YouTube first hit the web people were wondering what the point of it was. The videos were slow to load, and had absolutely abysmal quality in terms of the high compression used.

    Now YouTube is used by all sorts of people from individuals posting clips of themselves farting, to businesses promoting their products. And now there is 1080p HD on there too.
  19. brisbaneguy29 macrumors 6502


    Nov 27, 2007
    Until we get full broadband speeds 100% of the time in 100% of locations, I can't see cloud making huge inroads. Not to say it won't, but for me, people need to know they can be connected all the time, before they will take it up.

    Also where is the cloud when it comes to security, and protecting my data from prying eyes. We have enough issues with data stored locally, without storing in some virtual hard drive for any haxor to come along and steal.
  20. kimberly187 macrumors newbie

    Nov 27, 2009
    I just want to say that I've been sitting here in the middle of the night fooling around with trying to get Cubase set up again, and I was having all kinds of trouble. I hadn't fooled with it in years, you see -- my install has always been rock-solid. So I pulled down the asio4all driver and installed it, and got Cubase going, and was fooling around with settings wondering why I was getting 300+ms latency and a weird config for the Asio that I didn't recognize. I did fifty google searches trying to figure out what was going on...

    ...and it took this thread to pound into my thick skull that "Multimedia ASIO" is not "Asio4All". Thank you all for saving my life. And making me feel quite happily stupid.

Share This Page