What Chrome OS has on Windows that Linux doesn't
Google's Chrome OS isn't the first operating system to challenge Microsoft Windows' commanding lead. But it's got an advantage that other rivals such as Linux lacked: the Web.
Any new operating system must attract the developers who produce the applications to make it useful. The trouble Windows challengers have had is matching the wide spectrum of software available for Windows already.
That software includes mainstream titles such as Microsoft Office, Quicken, Adobe Photoshop, games, but also innumerable programs for narrower niches such as genealogy. Although some people are happy if they have the handful applications they need, an operating system needs broad support to achieve mass penetration.
Canonical's Ubuntu version of Linux has a lot of buzz as a desktop operating system, but when April 15 comes around, TurboTax doesn't run on it. Multiply that by all software the world needs and the Windows incumbent advantage becomes clearer.
Chrome OS faces the same applications challenge as any other operating system, but it's rising to that challenge in a different way. It includes the Chrome browser running on a stripped-down version of Linux, but the applications won't run on Linux, they'll run on the Internet. Chrome is the conduit to the Web applications, and Chrome OS is the vehicle by which Google will get the browser installed on Netbooks starting in the second half of 2010, the company promises.
The Web is the OS
"For application developers, the Web is the platform," Sundar Pichai, vice president of product management, and Linus Upson, engineering director, said in the Google Chrome OS blog announcement Tuesday.
That gives Google some real advantages. Everybody already is using the Web, including everybody using Windows. Adding Web applications to your life is a much more gradual shift than suddenly cutting over from Windows to Linux or Mac OS X.
Programmers writing Web applications can reach anyone using Windows--and Mac OS X, Linux, and even a lot of advanced mobile phones, for that matter.
And speaking of those programmers, there are innumerable Web developers already gainfully employed. Many of the advanced ones are headed in Google's direction of interactive Web applications rather than passively viewed, static pages.
Aside from Google's own Web applications, such as Google Docs and Gmail, there are online photo editors, personal finance tools, and games.
Then there are places such as Facebook that couldn't exist without the Web. Yahoo, Google, Facebook, MySpace and others are turning parts of their sites into vessels to contain others' Web applications, too, through foundations such as OpenSocial.
In short, while the Windows paradigm has been relatively static, the Web is blossoming as an applications platform. Even Microsoft is getting in on the action with its Web-based version of Office 2010.
Not so fast
So it's a slam dunk, right? Microsoft should just throw in the towel and sack everyone except the online Office team? Wrong.
The Web is increasingly useful, but it's got some big drawbacks as an applications foundation. Recreating the power and richness of applications that run natively on a PC with a Web application requires new technology and new expertise.
First, Web applications can't tap into hardware resources the way a native operating system can for reasons of security and technological limitations. Want to use that Webcam or burn your photos onto a DVD? Good luck using a Web app to do that.
Second, there's performance. Web applications run through a combination of standards such as HTML (Hypertext Markup Language), CSS (Cascading Style Sheets), and JavaScript, where the Web programs actually run. Those standards are workable for basic chores, but computationally intense operations crawl compared with native applications, and user interfaces are often Spartan, too.
Third, there's that pesky issue of Internet connectivity. Web apps without the Internet are as useful as a sewing machine without thread. It's getting better, through 3G connections and whatever technologies will come later, but today you can't count on a network connection even in many high-tech regions.
Fourth, although there are plenty of Web developers at work, there aren't nearly so many who have the command over the necessary technology that they can write complex applications. That's even more the case when you consider applications often run differently on Chrome, Opera, Mozilla's Firefox, Apple's Safari, and the market-leading Internet Explorer. Programming tools will help--Mozilla this week offered its own gallery--but it takes time to learn new coding methods.
Tackling the problems
Google may be ambitious, but it's not naive. It's tackling many of the problems.
For example, it's been agitating for years for more pervasive Internet access, and it offers tools such as Google Web Toolkit to try to ease the chores of writing JavaScript that supports multiple browsers.
And Google is working directly on the browser, too.
Chrome sports a multi-process architecture that, while it consumes more memory, isolates what's going on in each browser tab for reasons of performance and security. And it's got the V8 JavaScript engine, which Google hopes to use to accelerate JavaScript programs. Finally, it's got Gears built in, a technology that permits offline access to Web application data. Gmail and Google Docs have varying degrees of support for offline access through Gears.
Then there's work to improve performance even more. Native Client technology can let programmers endow a Web application with a downloadable module that runs directly on the processor, adding muscle to what can be done with relatively pokey JavaScript. And O3D, along with a related Canvas 3D project from Khronos Group and Mozilla, are designed to let browser-based applications take advantage of hardware graphics acceleration.
The problem isn't licked by far. But the Web shows no signs of diminishing in performance, pervasiveness, or sophistication. Google Chrome OS poses only a modest competitive threat to Microsoft Windows in the near term, but in the long term, it's a force to be reckoned with.
Stephen Shankland writes about a wide range of technology and products, but has a particular focus on browsers and digital photography. He joined CNET News in 1998 and since then also has covered Google, Yahoo, servers, supercomputing, Linux and open-source software, and science. E-mail Stephen, or follow him on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/stshank. 
In the EU-Microsoft browser case, Google actually sided with EU. So what does Google really believe: are they against browser choice in the OS or not? Can you un-hook Chrome Browser from this Chrome OS?
So many web application now are becoming native applications on devices. Facebook? There's an App for that.
Google Maps can't even run on the Blackberry browser... Or maybe that's the point of this browser. Google's getting frustrated that it can't run Google Maps and other apps from some browsers so they plan to create a new browser that runs on any device that can do so?
Unfortunately, the EU is only in it for money, easily gained from Microsoft.
Does anybody else find it interesting that every new OS except Windows is based on Linux or Unix? Apparently nobody really writes their own these days...
@istill: Can you run IE on any other Linux (and why would you want to)?
Please show me a native Linux version of IE made by Microsoft. Otherwise, you pretty much don't have an argument.
It's an odd situation where Microsoft could benefit from this.
Its not the fact that Microsoft has a browser in its operating system that is a problem. Its that Microsoft throws in "features" including a web browser, that make whatever market they just entered anti-competitive, because who's going to buy a piece of software if their OS came with something passable? Since people getting Chrome OS are getting it because of Chrome the browser, and you can get Chrome the browser without getting the OS, there is no problem like this.
I agree with you. The only people who are dissatisfied with Windows are either Power Users or people who have no clue as to why Windows is inferior to Apple. They but just go by other peoples opinion and have the extra cash to buy a Mac and pretty much do the same thing others would do on Windows for a much cheaper price. What those people don't understand is Apple has the luxury to just switch the entire OS from OS 9 or OS X requiring App developers to completely rewriting their code to support OS X and Intel architecture. This is possible because who really cares - it will only affect less than 10% of the World PC market. Now imagine Microsoft doing the same thing, as it did with Vista... we are now talking about roughly 90% of the PC market which the App developers have to support if they want to stay in business. Things don't just happen overnight. It takes time to do that and now after years of being in the market, I don't think there is any App/driver (latest version) which is not support by Vista. Also for Microsoft, the biggest challenge is Enterprise users which Apple has what 1%??? Companies don't just change their business practice just because Software companies decided to redo the OS to make it more appealing to consumers. Vista is backward compatible all the way to DOS (although nobody is going to use any DOS app but it still does support). How far back does OS X support?
All I am saying is think about the userbase Windows and Mac support before judging any OS. I like to thing of comparing Windows and Mac like comparing Toyota and a Ferrari, obviously the Mac would be the Ferrari given the ridiculous price tag but at the same time more power and cool looks. No doubt the Ferrari will ALWAYS overtake the Toyota but at the end of the day, from a shareholders and employment point of view, Toyota will end up sell more cars = more revenue by volume for shareholders + more sales means more production means more employment.
Coming to Chrome OS it will take at least a decade if not more before it can even make any impact on Windows market share.
Let's look at the facts.
1. Chrome OS will only be able on Netbooks. No doubt the netbook market is picking up but it's still a niche market compared to notebooks. That's win for Windows (supply and demand - more notebooks = more Sales for Windows)
2. If I understand correctly, Chrome OS is a WebOS so you basically you are carrying a piece of hardware if you are in a tunnel (if you are using aircard for connecting) or if you don't have WiFi. Currently not every city is WiFi enabled. Win for Windows (don't need WiFi to work on Office or play games installed on your PC unless you are playing online games)
3. Enterprise - This is the biggest killer. No doubt Chrome being a WebOS it might attract consumers (very niche but likely to grow quickly). What about corporations who have already invested billions on the existing hardware? Companies don't just shift immediately, it takes time. And using Chrome OS means we are talking about using SaaS - a win for Salesforce.com but what about Database Apps (Oracle, DB2, SQL Server) which every company needs. No doubt Oracle (most widely used DB) has iSQLPlus using which you can query the DB through a browser. But how many people actually use that as compared to TOAD or SQLPlus. Another win for Windows.
Not saying Chrome OS will not succeed but it will take time and patience, which I am pleased to say Google has it. Google is definitely going in the right direction but unless we have WiFi connectivity covering every sq mile it's not practical to use WebOS especially on a portable device. It will make more sense to have a Desktop computer with Chrome OS since at home or work chances are you will likely have either DSL or broadband. This way you will always be connected.
I always think of Google as the company which carries the best of Microsoft and Apple in one company. Google understands what consumers want and presents to them in a very simple and elegant manner (in the lines of Apple). At the same time Google does not charge ridiculous price or has it's products locked to only one vendor... ie open source - available to anyone and everyone AND it knows how to bend at times in order to accommodate enterprise uses (similar to Microsoft).
I am expecting Chrome OS to capture roughly 3-5% market share by 2012.
Actually, well, let's just correct a few things: The switch-over from MacOS 9 to OSX involved a metric ton of collaboration with software vendors, The entire Carbon library/API suite, and, oh yeah... Classic Mode.
To top it off, you may want to google for "PPC OSX" - there were three whole generations of CPU processors (G3, G4, G5) which were (and until Snow Leopard comes out, still are) supported on OSX - before Apple switched to Intel in 2005.
"This is possible because who really cares"
Ask Adobe (one example among way too many) how they felt. ;)
re #1: "Chrome OS will only be able on Netbooks."
'x86' covers a lot more than Netbooks... I have a room full of some rather large iron next door that could run the thing...
re #2: "If I understand correctly"
That would make your statement a supposition, not a fact.
re #3: "Enterprise - This is the biggest killer."
Last I checked, Google Docs sells mostly in the business realm.
"Last I checked, Google Docs sells mostly in the business realm. "'
That would make sense since it's free for personal use and only costs if you use it for business purposes.
It's not Linux, it's not Google Chorme OS, it's not even Mac OS X.
It's called XP and yes, its a force to recon with.
But its Windows you'll say. According to Microsoft it shouldn't be or else there wouldn't be an XP Mode inside 7.
Microsoft has a extremely big pipeline of Vista/7 applications coming, which will sell squat if 7 doesn't garner even a modest 10% of the market, plus Vista 10-15% (that'll be 25% in total) With Mac OS X at 10% and Linux as a modest 2%, that means that more than 60% of the people are going to use XP.
Worst case scenario. 80% XP, 20% rest-of-the-guys. As the article mentions, who cares to write apps for such meager market share. Well, Microsoft cares, and some time in the future if you install Office 2012 in your PC and it says "Vista/7 only", if you are a minority, you are screwed. But things seem to be heading the opposite way, with most new development going into Web apps/Mobile apps and, of course, Windows (universal, not Vista/7) apps.
" Vista is backward compatible all the way to DOS (although nobody is going to use any DOS app but it still does support). "
Not entirely true. There are old DOS apps that will run under Vista; however, there are a lot of old DOS apps that have to be virtualized to be run or cannot be run at all under XP or Vista. SQL Server 2000 developer edition will not run under Vista. Earlier versions of Quickbooks have compatibility problems. The later two are Windows NT apps. SQL Server 2005 developer edition can only be run under Vista 64 bit if you have I believe it is SP 4 (it maybe 2 or 3) installed on it. If Vista was completely backwards compatible to DOS then these programs wouldn't need updating to run. Eventually, even Microsoft has to break backwards compatibility or suffer the fate of Wordstar.
I know because I've run into issues with each of the above programs (except for Quickbooks which I don't use) when trying to install them on Vista. I also ran into issues when installing some of my older DOS programs on XP not to mention when trying to run some of them under Win 9x (which was basically an extention of the DOS kernel).
Technically we don't own the software we purchase. We own a license to use the software that can be terminated at any time by the publisher. If the new wave is to have everything online, then it'll be even easier for the publishers to deny access to their software whenever they want.
It'll be many, many years before the Internet becomes as reliable as an OS in terms of security and speed. I do 3D work using 3ds Max and also use Civil 3D. It'll be decades before programs like that can ever work through the Internet while meeting the needs of a company.
In the enterprise, legacy products 20+ years old are STILL being used in mission critical environments.
There are plenty OSs that do more than Windows. Windows advantages are that it has a few more drivers and (some) apps written for it. But it's best advantage is that it has millions of unpaid marketers who are promoting Windows because that is all they know how to use. Linux running a windows shell can run most if not all of the Windows apps.
99% of the users only need a rudimentary Office and Internet Browser. The gamers can easily switch over. Office is bloated and so is Acrobat. How many people who use Office even know how to use the tool bars. NOT many. So please stop with the circular logic for self promoting Windows.
I will give you some examples of the MS-like marketing.
- Adobe makes everyone believe that they are the only one who can write and read PDF files. There are hundreds of free and very reasonably priced PDF writers. And Free Readers that work perfectly fine if not better than Adobe. And most of them can run on non-windows OSs
- Turbo Tax and Tax Cut are two biggest tax programs that now run on the Web and do NOT require windows yet MS evangelist on this list makesyou believe that you need Windows
- IBM's Lotus suite and Open Office are FREE and yet the MS sales team and the free evangelists make you think that you need MS Office.
- Mainframes, and mid-size computers have OS that run all of these applications without actual Windows. Yet none of these so called MS evangelist will ever admit that
Less than 1 percent of PC users actually use anything more than Internet, rudimentary office and financial apps and games. Windows is not needed, so why pay the hefty penalty for pure marketing? Oh, I forget people are 'owned' by marketing and reality TV these days. It is sad that we cannot have a technical discussion without someone putting in marketing and cool-aid in to the mix.
I'd hazard to guess that half, if not more, of computers purchased are for corporations / businesses. 1% doesn't even come close.
As for Turbo Tax and Tax Cut, there are a LOT of people who do not wish to have all their financial data stored on a remote server they can't control and have no guarantee it won't be hacked.
Open Office is great (I use it at home), but in a corporation it's just not quite good enough yet.
And of those financial apps and games you mention, the vast majority of them run only on Windows. Try doing payroll online and storing all of that information. Once it gets hacked (which it would), then the company is sued for allowing their personal data to be accessed outside of the company. Just taking a quick look at Wikipedia about the top list of PC games ever sold, how many run on a non-Windows computer?
Did anyone ever stop to think that an OS is kind of like a Pied Piper thing? Most people are introduced to it on the job. And they had no choice in the matter, because that's what the company IT guy wants them to learn. Because that's all the company IT guy knows. Because he believes that it is a better product. Not because he has learned about other products, but because someone told him so a long time ago and he's never had the desire to find out otherwise.
You'd be surprised at how well several different operating systems can co-exist happily on one network. My employees use what they like. Until a year ago 4 of 9 used Windows, 1 used Linux, 4 used MacPros. Now all have MacPros except one, who still has HP with Windows because I need at least one to open Publisher files. The designer I just hired has also asked to work on Windows, and I will make sure that's what they get.
Everyone's happy, including the IT guy, who was smart enough to learn ALL OS networking specs. I see him once a month for system maintenance.
>>Oh, I forget people are 'owned' by marketing and reality TV these days.
Yes, that's always been the case - not just these days. Marketing creates the awareness, desire, and demand for products. That's how products get sold. That's the way the world works. Some companies are better at it than others. Ever looked at Apple's hype about introducing cut-and-paste on iPhone?
Unfortunately, the world doesn't seem to revolve around Linux just yet (not true for Apple, which is doing great!). Perhaps the Linux vendors need to go to B-school and learn marketing? :)
If "IBM's Lotus suite and Open Office" are so great, and free as you noted, they should've been way more successful by now, and no doubt they will be increasingly more successful over a period - but they're nowhere close just yet. The fact that they're given away for free, by a company such as IBM in the former case, should say something about the perceived value.
If the software is free, it's not given away for the love of mankind. Somebody still profits. That's as true in case of OpenOffice/Linux etc. as it is for Internet Explorer. I'm sure Google's not in it for charity either. :)
Or maybe not. Google can do no evil. It's Microsoft that's evil, right? :)
Yes you can run many windows apps in wine, but most of them have glitches to work around, and are often very likely to crash due to poor emulation or emulation difficulties.
I have a co worker who is an Ubuntu fanatic, and he has grown to hate his wife, since he has forced her into the Ubuntu world. Now its not that she hates Ubuntu at all she hates her husband because 20-25% of the things she likes to do with a computer don't work properly in Ubuntu. I listened one morning to his rant, as she was mad at him becuase some flash game she liked to play on Facebook just would not work in FF on Ubuntu worked fine for her on Vista and XP with FF but in Ubuntu failed.
Then listened to him complain about his horrid weekend as she tried to watch a downloaded video she got from the Applestore, and every time she tried to Fast Forward or Rewind the video the app crashed or locked up or lost sync.
Seams every Monday morning he looks more and more tired and haggard as he spent the weekend tweaking and fixing, some little odd thing his wife did.. like shopping on amazon. That caused him some form of grief.
I thought one morning he was going to pull out an UZI he had it all working and then he updated.. and wham
Now his wife is just your basic user. Now he is a techno nut, so things he likes he tweaks and gets to work and works within those constraints.
His wife though she likes her ipod and to play on facebook, and other normal things.. and they seam to drive him crazy
Really? Because I would really like a version of Vista or Windows 7 that will run on a dual PPC machine I have at home. Can you point me to one?
Well, okay, how about a version of Vista that will allow me to connect to an ext3-formatted external hard disk without having to rely on a third-party package?
"Really? Because I would really like a version of Vista or Windows 7 that will run on a dual PPC machine I have at home. Can you point me to one? "
Good point. Since Apple doesn't allow you to install non-approved Operating Systems on their hardware, it would be rather hard for Microsoft to build, sell, and support such a product. However, Microsoft does not limit you on what you want to install the OS onto. Apple sure does though. I appreciate you pointing out this very options-limiting fact of Apple's OS and hardware.
BTW: I can run Windows on my SGI system. I can't run OS X on it. Chew on that.
"Well, okay, how about a version of Vista that will allow me to connect to an ext3-formatted external hard disk without having to rely on a third-party package? "
That's a licensing issue by Apple's choice. Don't blame Microsoft for Apple's decisions to restrict the market.
But none of your comments actually pertain to the article and are just so much noise. Let's leave the OS Holy war stuff out and just deal with the subject at hand, hmm?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe this discussion is about supercomputers and mainframes; it's about desktop computing.
There are many supercomputers running Windows, most notably the Dawning 5000A which is currently the 15th fastest supercomputer in the world. Look up Windows 2008 Server HPC:
http://www.microsoft.com/hpc
Windows is also extremely common on ATM systems, etc:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_teller_machine
http://code.google.com/apis/o3d/
I would say that this would be the perfect system for less computer literate people such as pensioners. And if your internet cuts out there is always gears. Google has been laying the groundwork for this for years. Most of its services are already gears compatible
And don't get me started on the Apple Iphone.... Grrrr. Apple went with AT&T - biggest mistake ever - I was forced to switch back to Verizon to get reliable 3G and reliable calls. Iphone crashes more often then ever with 3.0.. and WIFI went backwards too... Grrrr..
Sometimes you get a lemon out of any batch regardless of where it comes from. You may just have an isolated situatiuon with your particular MacBookPro.
My MBP works fine, as long as I use only Apple-approved hardware, Apple-approved software, and Apple-approved sites. Beyond that, it's a crapshoot like any other hardware out there. Finding a webcam or video capture system that works has been... a challenge. But it's a nice and shiny metal challenge with a glowing Apple logo to show off to my friends while I'm still trying to find drivers for hardware that is supported on every other platform.
Some of your statements here are right on the nose. Apple computers are aesthetically pleasing and good for show & tell. Also, you mention Apple-approved hardware and software. Remember that, while some hardware components are built by third parties, all Macs are built by Apple; there's no reason why the hardware being discussed in twitter_1963's post should NOT be Apple-approved, especially when the cheapest Mac is $1,000.
As far as Apple-approved software, you can compare that with digitally signed software that is designed for Windows, thoroughly tested on Windows, and bearing Microsoft's logo. Given, there is more poorly-coded software designed for Windows than for any other platform, but that comes with the territory; Windows is the standard. You can't blame Microsoft for being successful. Yes, our haystack is bigger, but there are also a LOT of goodies in this haystack, including freeware in every genre that may outnumber the total number of titles designed for Apple (free or paid). Also, there are highly effective maintenance tools for Windows, one of the most trusted being WinDoctor in Norton SystemWorks; and virtually every Windows problem under the sun has already been addressed in plenty of forums, and is searchable through Google. Unfortunately, I can't say the same for two Unix (including Apple) problems mentioned below that seem to be not only common, but pervasive.
@destructaball and Vegaman_Dan:
I can't verify the problems mentioned by twitter_1963, as I have never owned a Mac. I am a third-generation MS loyalist who has used Microsoft operating systems since DOS 5.0, appreciated IBM PC compatibles (formerly known as IBM "clones") for their piecemeal upgradeability and consequential economical sensibleness, and held fast to the view that "Macs are for dummies." Don't get me wrong; I'm not saying people should start with DOS, or learn the terminal in Red Hat Linux inside and out in order to qualify as a computer user (Windows is nowhere near being THAT difficult to use). But I AM saying that more pacification leads to less self-sufficiency when problems arise, which in turn leads to more Mac taxes to pay.
Twitter's problem with sleep is the reverse of what I have seen on Macs and Linux boxes (more so on the latter, as I have spent more time with Linux). But what's sad is that the problems I've seen on Macs are out-of-the-box problems, whereas Windows problems are due to compatibility issues or user error, and easier to explain. Macs and Linux boxes have a sleep bug that is so common that CNET has a video telling you what to do about it. It tells you to unplug all peripherals, close all running applications, and log off all users. RIDICULOUS!!! I use standby so I may continue later what I'm working on, and may have several browser tabs open while in the middle of researching something. I installed Ubuntu on one of my laptops once, and put it to sleep with nothing more that a SINGLE Web page open. Two hours later, I opened the lid to find the system already on, and radiating heat.
I also will not rely on ANY Unix-based operating system to handle with care the data on any of my flashdrives, and will not plug one in unless I have a recent backup. Too many devices plugged in at once, or too much strain on any one jack, and the entire subsystem will crash and become irresponsive until the system is rebooted. After reboot, the driver will crash inevitably every few hours until the OS is reinstalled.
I'm sorry, destructaball, but reliability? No. There is only one platform that is stable out of the box, and can therefore be called reliable; Apple is not that one.
@Vegaman_Dan:
Apple-approved hardware, software, and Web pages sounds like a pretty strict limitation to me. I prefer a little growing room; it's been a long time since I confined myself to surfing the Web and checking e-mail. I could do that with a netbook, and save a lot of money. Even if I thought Mac OS was stable, which I don't, I would never pay $1,000 or more for an Internet appliance. This Chrome OS netbook would likely be a better deal. Cheers!
Add to that Picasa for image viewing & manipulation. Along with Google Earth & good intergration of YouTube, Google Maps. That's most of what Google have at the moment that they could bundle with the OS.
One big missing bit would be a Audio/Video player. So I say the next big announcement from Google will be their own media player.
Then you would have most things people would need for a limited or 2nd laptop/computer. Obviously this would never be for graphics crazy people or apps or creative people. It's ment to be a basic browsing / daily tasks computer.
Swing and a miss
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
C'mon! You're kidding, right?
(Reminds me of Dilbert being asked to write an accounting system based upon their email system.)
"But it's got an advantage that other rivals such as Linux lacked: the Web. "
Hold on- Google owns the web?? You can't get to the web from a windows, apple, linux OS?
You can't use google apps on other OSes?
If that was true, then ChromeOS would sell like hotcakes. But if you're saying that's THE advantage it has, then it obviously has no advantage and a lot of shortcomings.
How about another targeted ad?
Who in their right mind would want their valuable files stored on servers maintained at Google or other similar sites!? For Chrome OS to be anything more than a feeble web-browser, it would have to duplicate the depth and breadth of conventional operating systems; so what?s the point!?
While IT companies may want to move to ?dumb terminals? like Chrome OS (remember X Terminals and mainframe consoles?), individuals who depend on others to store their data will deserve any ?surprises? that they encounter. I only hope the lack of foresight of those drawn to ?dumb terminals? (cloud computing) does not impact those of us ?with a clue?!
I have gmail as well and notice that the ads are very much targeted at me based upon the content of the email account I'm using at the time. One account used for automotive content gets a lot of loan and insurance offers for new cars, refiancing, and even spam dealing with automotive content.
Another that I have for personal sci-fi interests gets a lot of DVD offers in the targeted ads around the gmail interface.
I don't like either of those, and I don't think any corporation really wants to have a company datamining their content for advertising purposes. Some companies like health insurance or financial centers simply cannot legally allow this sort of access.
One thing this sort of thing will do is make Google a target for information thieves online. All that juicy data in one spot to go after. Throw in confidential corporate data as well and it makes it even tastier.
1. They have an online healthcare solution which they have actively lobbied to ensure they do not have to meet HIPAA requirements... what does that mean? They can openly sale your information to the highest bidder
2. Google strong-arming the publishing community
3. Google selling anything that can be indexed as a search term (Adsense/adwords) and selling that information to anyone and everyone -your Gmail is indexed and information you write is given to marketers to sell products - sure seems innocent enough right? Targeted marketing without really knowing who you are? ha... who says they won't share that information?
4. Partnering with CVS who is currently emboiled in many privacy suits on how they share information with potential marketers of drugs, etc. (you are the company you keep.)
5. Google stores and keeps all your information forevvveerr.... this information is indexed and kept in their hands. There is no deletion policy at Google. Think about the effect this could have if a.) it got into the wrong hands, b.) they were given the go ahead to sell your information to marketers/partners in the future with your contact information...
At the end of the day Google is a marketing company. All the rambling about how great their applications are is a trap to get you to buy more crap from their marketing partners. There is nothing free inside a Google OS - it's all about expanding their marketing community so you can be feed more crap to buy - it's AD-ware - ad driven, pervasuive, intrusive, and people just don't flippin' get it.
This Google Chrome OS could be a new cell phone - like technology to them. If it just works and is relatively cheap, they will use. I'll bet my pay check on that.
You minority Windows/Linux/Mac gurus can banter on this forum all you want. The common novice user will dictate the future and Google knows this. It's not the $1000 thick client laptop they'll buy. It's the $99 thin Google laptop they'll be toting around campus and elsewhere from there.
* NetDummie or
* DumbTerminal or
* CloudNode or
* MegaPhone
For those who have no data-files, videos, music or other personal files, as you suggest, this *will* happen. For those who do, though, relying on hard-disks maintained "in the cloud" is a bad idea, unless they are too clumsy to backup (quite common), or have no data of value.
How humorous. Maybe you haven't read the press release, but Google OS is really only a bit of interface candy on top of a vanilla Linux kernel [1] with some bundled Google Apps.
Do you consider all Google OS users to be "minority Linux gurus?"
[1] http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/introducing-google-chrome-os.html
If you really think Bill caares about you must be the biggest megalomanic I have ever seen.
- Jay
Because LInux has more support through online forums. If there is a solution, it is easily findable with instructions for how to do it that you don't need to be a genius to follow. Community support, I have found, is much more useful than normal tech support offerings.
Microsoft was running a special 2-week offer allowing you to pre-order Windows 7 upgrade for $50 (or was it $49)? In this sense, it has been on sale.
But turbotax.com works perfectly with Ubuntu and I found it just as easy to use this year without the hassle of the boxed copy.
What experience have you had? I use Linux (Ubuntu Jaunty) every day, and I've had 0 problems with printing. I even use a network printer without an issue. However, I do sometimes have trouble with printing in Windows 7... and it'll be easier in Chrome OS because everything prints via the print function build into your browser. So you don't have a bunch of different programs using different methods that may or may not work to use your printer.
I'm on my Ubuntu workstation atm. I also use Windows (and would use a Mac if I had one (I did have several NeXTs :-))). I find that browsers work 'better' on Windows, but Linux catches up. We have been moving to the cloud for several years and it's working for us. We do not do a lot that 'needs' Windows.
I just helped a friend that uses iTunes when he is not playing games - he is convinced that he has to have Windows - and for now I think he is right. He is running better than when he called me to help, but he still has a lot of stuff... that is slowing his computer down and should be removed.
I look forward to Chrome OS - to see what extra it brings to the table. For example, a netbook running Chrome OS will be easy to reload. Copy what little local data I have to a USB drive. Reload everything with a clean copy and put the local data back. That assumes the cloud is also clean.
Hmmm... It will not be a perfect world but it will be a lot better than what we have now. And would have made helping my friend an easier job.
Even when I do a "full" boot, it doesn't take "minutes" or even one minute to load. If that's Google's primary selling point, I rather use Windows
Yes this is an interesting potential. Good OSes 'Cloud' which is in the works, does just that. It boots immediately, then runs while Windows boots, and then you can switch over if you want. They're the makers of gOS. Now, I don't think they're going to push the tech envelope as I see Google doing, but its a similar concept, and I can see these simple, instant on OSes starting out as stepping stones to the full one, until people realize they rarely go to the full one and stop buying it.
Even if sleep mode didn't mean Linux/Windows netbooks can already start up in a few seconds, I would still much rather have an OS that takes a minute or more to boot than an OS that boots quickly and then runs stupidly slowly because all the apps are online.
I'm not that old, but as far as I remember, I never could understand the public passivity upon this issue. Why letting one single company decide anything for us ? It was a case of obvious monopoly that I couldn't understand.
Then came Linux, and at last, a faint glimpse of hope appeared.
Since then, Linux has improved a lot. Hardware support is getting better each year. So are the usability and the 'user-friendliness'. There's still a long road until it come to marketable maturity.
But the point here, having Google releasing its own Linux based OS, is that it enlightens the average computer user who most of the time believes Windows is a part of a computer the same way a keyboard or a mouse is.
gOS is one more crack in the Windows unfair hegemony, along with Ubuntu, and Mac OSX. They're all moving in the same direction : toward a Unix standard.
Seriously though, why do people hate MS so much? Since Windows 2000 I have only ever had 3 BSoDs, and they were caused by hardware drivers. Windows 2000, WinXP, Vista, and now Win7 all work fine. Linux and OSX and whatever are fine, but so is Windows.
http://www.thinkgos.com/cloud/index.html
They have had this idea for a while now, and unfortunately, they haven't been able to get a lot of hardware vendors on board with the idea... Now all of the sudden since Google is doing it everyone wants to jump on the wagon.
This talk of a "Windows Killer" is ridiculous. This OS will have very limited functionality. If they wanted to make it a "Windows Killer" they'd have to use a fully functional OS... like.. I don't know... Android?
Sorry if I'm ranting... I'm just very amazed at the public's reaction to an idea that Google kind of stole in my opinion.
Did Good OS develop Chrome or Google Gears or Native Client or O3D? That's what will be needed to pull this off.
- by FF2009 July 9, 2009 5:31 AM PDT
- by minterwute July 9, 2009 5:17 AM PDT "gOS is one more crack in the Windows unfair hegemony, along with Ubuntu, and Mac OSX. They're all moving in the same direction : toward a Unix standard."
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- by celticbrewer July 9, 2009 12:41 PM PDT
- "The world will be better with Unix-Linux Open source "
- Like this
-
Showing 1 of 5 pages (199 Comments)I like this last part. The sooner the better. The world will be better with Unix-Linux Open source :)
I'd love to hear your reasoning behind that. Honestly...
I'm all for making the world a better place. If everyone was on Linux, why would that be best? Do you think that somehow the hackers in China, N Korea, Russia are just going to retire? Do you think if MS goes out of business and all those employees are on the street that the world, or our economy, will be any better? Will child porn magically disappear from the net? Will fanboys on all sides finally unite and have a big group hug? Will all companies produce linux apps and then give them away for free, along with free support? Will hardware companies stop producing crahppy drivers?
There is greed, ego, and evil in the world. That is the problem, and that will never change.