Comments on: Analyzing Google's Chrome OS strategy

The forthcoming Chrome OS is technically straightforward, but why Google is doing an OS in the first place is a little less obvious.

[lluviaonix]

Google strategy of making profit out of its advertising modules is not a good strategy in this economy where more and more companies are trimming down their marketing investment. An actual product and actual service, should be paid for. Specially when it is that good.
What Google offers for free is very dangerous because it risk the fact that it wont be supported in the future for lack of budget, and will leave a lot of customers unhappy. Also, once it becomes a life-support system like some Google apps, if Google decides to drop, change and start charging. A lot of companies will be hurting and ...maybe we are going to need a bailout for Google in the near/far future.
Be aware, that free service for advertising ....its a business structure that will have to change....!!!! Unless data gathering is involved...and customers are willing to expose *sale* their life to the devil.

[krenick]

Great comment. Totally agree. Everyone loves competition, I surely do. But to me Google is no Microsoft killer. They're just a Microsoft wanna be, that is not asking me money for software. It's asking me for myself for free. Think about it.

[Robert_M_Barga]

Why not just put it on a computer that is free or 100$, a decent laptop, and have ads as a sidebar unremovable

[oldsecurityguy]

Scottlebus, you hit the nail on the head. While there are millions of people who do need general purpose computing, there are probably a billion online users who simply need an information appliance. They don't know how to be sysadmins of their own systems, don't want to know how, and frankly shouldn't need to know how. They just want to do email and get to their facebook community. Those users are not qualified to keep a Windows machine properly configured, patched and tuned....anyone who serves as the "family helpdesk" knows what I mean.

If Google can release a simple OS that has the easy UI of a browser, with an appliance-like set of qualities, it will solve the needs of hundreds of millions of users. The press release said turn on and get online in seconds, that is part of what the consumer market wants. If it is secure by design, and transparently auto-patches, all the better.

It will not kill MS Windows, but it doesn't have to. It just needs to satisfy the needs of those who are failed by the current complex options. Oh yes, doing so at a price point that trends towards $0, vs an MS Windows price that keeps climbing even as all other consumer technology prices drop would be good too.

[Peter N. Glaskowsky]

Even if a trivial OS is valuable-- and the repeated failures of thin-client strategies seem to prove it isn't-- it'd be easier and better for a major OS provider to create it as a derivative product.

And didn't Apple try this already on the iPhone? It simplified Mac OS X, restricted it to Web apps only, and people were totally dissatisfied.

Once Apple built up the iPhone OS and started supporting native apps, everyone was happier. (Still not completely happy, given the lack of true multitasking...)

Apple's got the right idea here, and if it decides to get into the simple-computing market (which I think it will), it could make everyone forget all about this thin-client nonsense.

[mja8b9]

Microsoft and Google seem to think that the key to success is just to get in each others games... Microsoft with bing and now google with chrome (which wasnt even that good when it was just a web browser, but I guess windows isnt a great OS... but I have high hopes for windows 7)

I have been reading these stories and most sites don't think its a great idea... PC world thinks it is but only after their initial 3 story that said that it is not...

http://www.pcworld.com/article/168129/google_successful_failure.html

There was this one site that was looking at all the different angles, but it is pretty clear from it that this is just a bad idea all around.

http://www.newsy.com/videos/google_gears_up_for_os

[mja8b9]

Microsoft and Google seem to think that the key to success is just to get in each others games... Microsoft with bing and now google with chrome (which wasnt even that good when it was just a web browser, but I guess windows isnt a great OS... but I have high hopes for windows 7)

I have been reading these stories and most sites don't think its a great idea... PC world thinks it is but only after their initial 3 story that said that it is not...

http://www.pcworld.com/article/168129/google_successful_failure.html

There was this one site that was looking at all the different angles, but it is pretty clear from it that this is just a bad idea all around.

http://www.newsy.com/videos/google_gears_up_for_os

[tipoo_]

I'm not comfortable with everything being done online. It just screams "Big brother is watching you".

[eCom_Innovator]

Simplicity wins . . . so Chrome OS, if it makes things easier will be a good OS. SaaS has some staying power b/c it is easier . . . less clicks, easily accessible, embedded controls.

On the Netbooks, I still think there is something to them. It is a great non-work, non-TV PC to own and is great for kids, students, and on the go moms. And the price point wins out. I expect them to maintain a spot, though of course they'll alter some to get to steady state of usage and likey may merge into normal laptops but slimmer, lighter and cheaper.

[Peter N. Glaskowsky]

Except as a matter of simple fact, simplicity does not win in the real world. Features win. Software compatibility wins. Glitz wins. Profitability wins.

I don't understand why software as a service is "easier", or how it has "less clicks".

[sk00n]

Yep, compare the web office suites or even OOO (which starts to drift the same old wrong way imho) with this: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/images/word-all-toolbars-small.png

[sk00n]

Heh, funny troll is back (* point at meself), just google search for: netbook sales. What do You get? Maybe its only about Europe or mostly about Europe. Still even in current state of the market You cannot escape the simple $$ argument: Your old pc goes dead, You go for full blown $500 windows pc, whose supplier locks You in, threatens they will drop support in 1.5 years and force You to pay more and more from a toothpick to office suite, or You go for netbook that offers 99% of pc functionality (ok photoshop isnt available there, like I use it once in 5 years or so) at $200 tag? Europe is making their choice now! Hope the same happens in us too, with current unempl figures it might be more of relief than treat, honestly.

[ebowdish]

It's as simple as this: if Google Chrome OS doesn't bring anything new to the table (i.e. faster, easier, excellent compatibility), it is highly unlikely that users of Windows are going to cut and run. Take Linux and Mac OS, for example. They are both arguably much better, more secure operating systems, but the simple fact is that for most people, if it's not an easy switch and doesn't do what they are used to, or at least work similar to what they're used to, they won't change. For Google Chrome OS to be successful, it has to do what made Google famous to begin with: do something everyone is used to MUCH better. It will be interesting to see what Google holds for us and the future of computing.

[Peter N. Glaskowsky]

So your idea of "easy" is that when someone says "how do I do this?" you say "sorry, you can't do that!"??

You might say that strategy worked with the iPhone, and that would be a good point; it sure did. People throw that argument around all the time. But what they're overlooking is that the iPhone is a phone! We all know (or should know) from the Windows Mobile experience that if the "computer" personality of a smartphone gets in the way of the "phone" personality, the computer side loses. If a phone is a bad phone, people won't buy it.

But the "computer" personality is the most important part of a computer! If a computer is a bad computer, people won't buy it.

. png

[fbehmann]

With Google Chrome announcement it appears that we have two roadmaps one for Android and the other for Chrome. The next OS update for Android is Donut - coming soon. Eclair and Flan are planned for later on. Beside ARM, MIPS it is being ported on Atom. The question is will the two OSes converge at some point in the future?? If Android is positioned for smartphone and Chrome for smart book, which one could be positioned for other markets like gaming, engineering applications, digital media, etc??

[Peter N. Glaskowsky]

Whew! A sensible question. I wish I could answer it for sure. But consider: Android and Chrome both use the Linux kernel.

Maybe Chrome OS is really nothing but Android plus whatever additional services it takes to run the full Chrome browser.

If Google really intends to maintain two separate operating systems for two markets that are so similar, someone there is crazy. And I don't think anyone at Google is crazy.

. png