Comments on: Chrome OS for the clueless: What it means for real people

Google's new operating system is certainly something to get excited about, but don't put a new laptop purchase on hold because you want a Chrome Netbook.

[phatose]

Hmm. Looks like bad news for the linux crowd. Either it succeeds, in which case years of open source development fail spectacularly to make a consumer palatable OS until a megacorp steps in and enforces some consistency, making wise men see the major problems with OSS development a little clearer, - or it fails in which case even a megacorp can't make linux into something palatable.

Well, maybe it will quiet them up for a little bit, teach them some humility. If the public face the community puts on in forums like these reflects the character of the movement, they desperately need some humility bashed into them.

[pentest]

Linux is simpler than Windows, more secure, more stable, easier to use, and much more consistent then Windows, which sees lots of things break from SP to SP, and version to version.

I can install programs 10 years old on any Linux distro I please and it will run.

[cvaldes1831]

"Google is saying, with this product, that the modern computer user spends so much time working with Web-based resources that the main control system for the computer should be the browser"

In the year since the App Store opened up, I find myself actually using web browsers less, and the Internet apps far more. Netbook computing might be the niche for a browser-focused operating system, but once you get down to the handheld arena, specialized Internet apps often work far better than a browser.

[pentest]

Those apps are nothing more then a specialized browser.

[mbertwave]

Fortunately the majority of computer users don't have an irrational hatred of Microsoft. They understand what they are paying for and why. And they'll figure out that Google is not providing this free OS out of the goodness of their heart.

I pay for a Microsoft OS about every 3 years. I'd pay that much every year not to have some corporation storing every last piece of info for targeted adverstising. Come on, this creapy and you know it. It is destined to fail.

[drbyte]

How will they deal with the millions of device drivers out there?

I agree that cloud thing is just asking for trouble. I know a woman who's online backed up data was duped, and she found out by seeing pictures of her daughter up on Flickr. Not sure I want to store my personal info online. With 1 terabyte drives coming in under $100, why deal with the cloud or online data storage. Open office, abiword, Gimp can be run privately on your own machine and are free.

[ahickey]

Google makes its money from online search.
If I'm in a desktop application I'm not online.
So, having a complete environment that is online then more Google ads will be seen and clicked on and so Google will make more money. Follow the money - it's always the best motivator.

In the end Google don't care if you use ChromeOS or any other OS as it doesn't make them money directly. It's the fact that you are working online that they care about.

This is not direct competition to Microsoft it is a complete change in the delivery model from PCs.

I'm a big Google fan. To a point. I use the search and (formerly) lab features a lot. But I prefer Firefox over Chrome. My first reaction to the OS announcement and the concept of integrating browser with OS was "hasn't that been done - and critized - before?!!?" I don't mean to nitpick but if it was a poor idea for the folks in Redmond (of whom I'm not a big fan), why is it suddenly manna from heaven for the Mountain View gang?

IMHO always and of course. :)

I like Google and a lot of the very clever goodies. But I'm not always online and really like to control when and where I use my apps. I use Google docs but mostly to open things to be sure I trust their content before opening on my local machines.

I guess I have a problem with an online-only OS.

[Atomic1fire]

Because if google was stealing your identity, or looking at your information, no one would use it, or far less then they do now. It only takes one scandal for people to hate something.
secondly, Linux comes in many different flavors, so Google probably won't corner the market in that regard, though they may become popular.
third,
Microsoft can always play the safety card, make a few dirty tactics like saying windows prevents identity theft (which probably isn't true, due to things like security holes and exploits that need to be patched on Tuesdays), use a few good moves, like looking like they care about people, and turn it into a political campaign.
finally
The Feds would eventually investigate, Google's profits would probably free-fall, and then we would all be part time owners of another company thanks to the Obama administration.

[jessiethe3rd]

It's a simple formula of attack surfaces. Windows with data stored locally where you own it presents less of a risk then one location where all your data is stored. I'll keep my information local and free from profiteers. I want to keep all my personal stuff MY personal stuff and I do not need anyone rooting through my files hooking me up with keywords chopping up my profile and serving it up to anyone it deems fit. Google makes money and the government bends to the rule of corporations. It takes a lot to get his to change.

Funny thing is media is the source to get the information but 9 times out of 10 they are sided with some special interest... and the world turns! :)

[prwnkl]

The ChromeOS moniker is a way for Google to distinguish what is now the Chrome browser from what will become the Chrome Desktop. Everyone acknowledges that the operating system is Linux. Chrome is NOT going to become the layer that interfaces with the hardware of the computer. Google won't get into the OS business for the same reason Apple abandoned the OS business with OS9 and adopted BSD Unix and the Darwin desktop environment, aka OSX. Neither is Chrome going to be a "browser" in its new incarnation. It will be a desktop application that looks like and acts like the browser we now know as Chrome.
There are other Linux desktops; GNU/Linux desktop, Linux XP desktop, etc. Search for "linux desktop" and lots of them show up. Well, ChromeOS will be yet another. The difference will be that, and no offence to Richard Stallman's Free Software Foundation, them ord'nary folk don't know what GNU is or GNOME, but they surely know Google. They won't understand that the machines coming out in Q3 or Q4 of 2010 run Linux and boot a Chrome desktop that resembles Google's Chrome browser. But Google is betting that ord'nary folk will fell just as warm and fuzzy about being in a Google/Chrome-ish environment as they are in a Windows/Vista-ish one.
And please guys and gals, don't try to explain this to them, their eyes will glaze over ...

[SteveMcQwark]

Well, straighten your facts out just a little. I mean, you kinda missed the point. Desktop Environments are things like GNOME, KDE, E17, Xfce... Darwin is the *nix built from parts of FreeBSD and NEXTSTEP (another *nix) And the difference is that applications don't run on linux, they run in the browser. Meaning they can run in other browsers that support the tech. Cool, eh? So its not just going to run normal apps like GIMP or OpenOffice.org in Chrome looking thing. That's the point.

[pentest]

So the point is you can't use the apps you need to work?

Sounds like Chrome is pretty pointless.

[ofmyony]

If Google can find a good way of storing your files that makes it more feasible to store in the cloud this will work. I like knowing that I can have access to my media where ever I am.

The media features will be their biggest challenge. Creating a media player that matches Windows Media Center or Itunes will be difficult. Google does nuts and bolts well they don't do pretty! Picasa is probably their best dressed application. If they can make a clean and beautiful GUI they should do well. Chrome the browser is not it.

[R_Parson]

Chrome OS is starting to make me think of Windows 3.1= a graphical shell over DOS.

[SteveMcQwark]

In what way? That its built on the Linux kernel? All operating systems are built on kernels, including Windows 7.

[R_Parson]

Win3.1 was little more than a gui between DOS and Excel (or whatever early Windows program you chose). Based on what little has actually been said so far, it sounds like this Chrome OS is going to be little more than the browser as the middle man between linux and googledocs (or whatever web-based app you prefer.)

I think there's still too much that's not known about this, and any grand pronouncements are premature (most of all mine).

Google wants to do this, fine. Let 'em. If it looks like something I'll find useful, I'll use it. If not, I don't think they'll miss my business too much.

OK, here is the REAL issue:

Before there was Windows, you had the Digital GEM (Graphic Environment Manager) that worked similar to Windows 3.1.

Before that you had the GEOS (Graphics Environment Operating System)

Today we have the MacIntosh OS X and the Linux variations by several companies, and of course Windows.

Now, let's look at WHY Microsoft has 90% + of the market, and why Linux is down to 4% on Netbooks:

1. General Software Availability. I can't even get SimCity Societies in any flavor other than Windows easily. There are few options for GPS tracking for MAC, and even less if any for Linux. These are just examples, I could go on...but I won't, for now.

2. Customer adoption: Even with giving it away as Linux has done for more than a decade, and you STILL have people choosing Windows (myself included) because it is easier to install and maintain.

3. Lack of organization: If Google can put together a team of people to support and get the OS to be as easy to manipulate as Windows, and make deals with the likes of Apple (iTunes and Quicktime), Electronic Arts, other major software manufacturers, and have plenty of popular hardware drivers and some of the more used hardware drivers available, then you have a recipe for a successful OS.

Microsoft has a 25 year head start on all this. They abandoned work on the OS/2 OS years ago when they decided not to replace the Windows OS with it, and made Windows 95, and for good or ill, the successors.

I have tried Linux, and I will not employ a MAC OS X till Apple releases the OS openly. It is the ONLY OS that stands a good chance at success at beating Microsoft, but they need to stop being greedy about the hardware and let people build power units like they do for PCs. Even I would go to the OS if it doesn't continue to be hardware specific.

If Google doesn't decide to abandon its OS project, they may actually make a difference, but only if development of the Hardware and Software support follows. If not, then Microsoft will win, and they won't even have to try.

[pentest]

1. Sim Cities Societies? Seriously? Linux has plenty of GPS tracking options, I have run many different brands of GPS devices and they all worked flawlessly in Linux. Just because you are ignorant about Linux doesn't mean it is lacking.

2. Linux is a 3 click affair to complete install and config, and that is everything. No one with a clue chooses Windows. No one. You will eat anything forced under your nose. Just because you are ignorant about Linux doesn't mean it is hard to use.

3. Windows is the most user unfriendly OS on the planet, by any metric.

Basically, all your "points" do is show how ignorant you are of Linux and computing in general.

[yoon shay choo]

" Customer adoption: Even with giving it away as Linux has done for more than a decade, and you STILL have people choosing Windows (myself included) because it is easier to install and maintain. " With perhaps the exception of Windows 7, all previous windows are simply not easier to install and maintain. I have 5 pcs, 3 are running on Ubuntu, one on OXs and one on Windows 7 RC. Three were on Windows XP until I had them upgraded to SP3 when it starts giving me problems. The latest pc i have was on Vista Home premium and too gave me problem after Adobe reader update.

[yoon shay choo]

Sorry, I meant OSX.

[rmf]

Google is not in the OS business. Nor is it in the browser business. It is in the data collection business. If you run their OS and mention in an IM to your sister that you lost last years vacation pictures. Presto! Look again, they will be back on your machine.

[SteveMcQwark]

lol :) I highly doubt it'll be like that :D

But if you have lose locally stored copies that you've opened in a web version that stores them itself, you would be able to retrieve them. :P

[jtmonrow]

Did I read that the release date for this Chrome OS is sometime in the last six months of next year? Don't get me wrong, I love Google -- but are we going to be reading about this for the next year minimum? Boor-ing....... This is a lot like the Chevy Volt, lotsa press no substance.

[SteveMcQwark]

Its "release" is later this year (though this will be a developer release, it will be available to try out). Its availability on netbooks is in the second half of next year.

[exactlyy]

guys please , wakeup , i dont know if i am dreaming or you are dreaming, but the chrome OS isnt even out or coeded yet , and you all talk about how great it is and how its going to own MS and Apple .
the same happend a year ago when chrome was released , chrome has been there for almost a year , and its still the same like a year ago , no master password, no addons , no bookmarks management, no nothing and still crashing , you are talking about how fast it is , but thats cuz its the only thing you can talk about, who cares about its speed ?? all the new browsers are fast enough ,when you have T1 or even dsl with 512 or more, you cant even tell which browser is faster in loading a page ,we are talking here about maybe less than 2 miliseconds that chrome can load a page faster than IE or Firefox or safari .. so talk about options, what can your browser do ? if all you got is speed then please enjoy your broswer but stop talking about how great it is .. the same is going on with chrome OS , this OS w'll offer nothing other than the fast boot time , why w'd i use it ?? after all i'd rather to keep my information on my pc not on google servers , and talking about a browser that can does all..well if you still remember windows 3.11 , it was the same .

[deowll]

Chrome has 3% of the market and this OS allows you to run Chrome. That's it. Unless you are one of the 3% that like Chrome the answer is it should have no impact on your behavior in any shape form or fashion.

Even if you like Chrome a typical smart phone has more functionality than Chrome now promises so forget it.

[costini]

These are definitely different times then the anti-trust of the early eighties going into the late nineties, Google must move in this direction of open source because the powers at be "Microsoft" have been working hard (hacking), to stay there. This is Google's Way to bring the wave. I notice every time I try to run competing products on their direct competition, they all have barriers. I think the people should decide what operator and what browser they will use. They maybe a 9 million pound guerrilla, but this is a new age and will continue to run at an exponential rate, windows has carried the torch too long at half mass. This world is tired of sub par production for their hard earned dollars/yen/euro/etc.. Let the new kid play!! Thank you for your time

[techpops]

Excellent analysis of what little there is out there about Chrome OS.

Off topic but here it is anyway, I really didn't like Rafe much on BOL but over time I've really come to like him and trust in his opinions on what's happening in tech. This article is a prime example of why that is. I'll have to start reading more of them.

[beelissa]

I have 2 netbooks, Asus Eee PCs running Linux. We have one set up to use KDE and the other runs the Asus easy desktop which gives you tabs and large icons -- my younger son likes that since it's all he needs to use. I have yet to figure out how to install programs on it. I would love to put The Gimp on it to edit my photos and do scrapbooking, but I don't know how. I hope this Google OS will be easy to customize and add things to.

My other concern is with this cloud thing. The cloud's great, but I still find I'm doing a lot of my work offline. Is there an online app the has the depth of function that Photoshop or The Gimp have? And I haven't found an online app that comes close to giving me the options and flexibility I have with Microsoft Publisher. We need developers getting ready now to make sure their desktop apps are compatible with this new OS and we need Google to make sure installing programs is easy enough for the average user to do -- as easy as it is in Windows, anyway.

If they can pull that off, I'm sold. Did you say it's free? :-)