Google Chrome OS

[Robert Maxwell]

Yeah, I didn't even bother criticizing Chrome OS as an actual operating system, because really, it's just another Linux distro. After so many years, Linux on the desktop still isn't happening. Maybe Google thinks it'll be different this time, but we'll see.

Except they're not targeting desktops. Anyway, one of the main reasons why Linux can't get a real foothold in the desktop market is the GUI and ease of use. Taking something like OSX as an example, the fact that it's a BSD derivative doesn't matter at all... what matters is what it presents to the user. Similarly, it doesn't matter that Chrome is just a Linux distro, what matters is what it presents to the users. Which, for people using netbooks as a mobile supplement to their "real" computer, seems pretty good.

I haven't actually used it nor am I really ever intending too as, well, I don't have a netbook. I'm just sayin' that there's a clear target market here that currently is only being served by cramming Windows into a space where most of its features are extraneous.

Have you used a Linux distro in the last 5 years? The GUI, whether you go with Gnome or KDE rocks! On my netbook I have Win 7 and run Ubuntu netbook remix from a usb key. I have to say ubuntu is the better OS for the situation.It looks better, has a stronger feature set and runs faster. The only thing keeping me from wiping Win 7 and going to Ubuntu full time is game access. I want to be able to access WoW on the netbook. While I could try that with ubuntu, it's a pain. If they ever release a Linux client for WoW or some of my other games Windows is history.

Still can't see a reason for Chrome OS.

Ubuntu is really nice, but it's still Linux. Windows doesn't cost anything as far as most people can tell, because it comes preinstalled with their computers. If they never see how much the "Microsoft tax" is when they buy, they really have no reason to switch.

What advantages does Linux--any flavor--offer over Windows or Mac, to the average user? Therein lies the entire problem.

Linux is great for enthusiasts, power users, developers, and server environments. As a desktop for everyday Joe Sixpack use, though, it lacks a "killer app" to make it a genuine Windows or Mac replacement. It doesn't suck out loud like it used to, but it's still following the lead of its entrenched competitors.

Chrome OS, whenever the real deal comes out, seems like it is meant for a more "thin-client" approach. Problem is, netbooks are becoming more powerful, not less, while remaining in the sub-$500 range. Unless we're going to end up with $50 netbooks running Chrome OS where you just pay for Internet access, there's not a good niche for these.

Basically, I think they can be successful if and only if they come on absurdly cheap ($100 or less) netbooks that have been stripped down to the bare essentials. Otherwise, there's no reason to cheat yourself out of a fully-functional OS if you've got the hardware to run it.

 

[Candlelight]

Am downloading it now. Looks interesting.

Then again I've got so many VMware images on the go...

 

[Candlelight]

Does anyone know what Linux build this is based from? I'm trying to get my VMware image going but VMTools won't install cos it's not based on the right kernel.

 

[Colin Xavier]

Does anyone know what Linux build this is based from? I'm trying to get my VMware image going but VMTools won't install cos it's not based on the right kernel.

I think its based on Debian since Google has teamed up with Canonical to work together on the OS.

Link

 

[PurpleBuddha]

...I do feel, however, that Google have missed the boat here. Now that windows 7 will run on Netbooks Google have to face down not the bashed linux and ancient XP previously supplied but the latest and greatest (and frankly damned good) Microsoft OS.

It seems that Windows 7 is as much of a success as Vista was a failure, so will Chrome OS be very late to the party? Especiallly when you consider we will be on SP1 of Win7 before Chrome gets onto Netbooks in any quantity.

I highly doubt Google plans or expects to make money off of this. Given how difficult it is to get into the OS game, this seems more like a learning thing for them. Getting the OS out into the market, even if used by a very small number of people, will provide Google with a lot of knowledge and give them a spring board to continue to fully develop the platform. It thus makes perfect sense that this will be basic and bare bones, so they can build out from it.

Expect Google Chrome OS 2.0 to be a lot more interesting, but even then they will probably have a long way to go. Make no mistake, this is simply the beginning of a very long term project.

 

[USS KG5]

I highly doubt Google plans or expects to make money off of this. Given how difficult it is to get into the OS game, this seems more like a learning thing for them. Getting the OS out into the market, even if used by a very small number of people, will provide Google with a lot of knowledge and give them a spring board to continue to fully develop the platform. It thus makes perfect sense that this will be basic and bare bones, so they can build out from it.

Expect Google Chrome OS 2.0 to be a lot more interesting, but even then they will probably have a long way to go. Make no mistake, this is simply the beginning of a very long term project.

Totally accepted - but make no mistake they intend to make a lot of money out of this. It is a logical step to extend their lead in web apps (out of which they make a lot of money through advertising) by putting out an OS that can only use web apps.

The only question remains whether they have got it right or wrong. You are right however that 2.0 will be much more interesting.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

I highly doubt Google plans or expects to make money off of this. Given how difficult it is to get into the OS game, this seems more like a learning thing for them. Getting the OS out into the market, even if used by a very small number of people, will provide Google with a lot of knowledge and give them a spring board to continue to fully develop the platform. It thus makes perfect sense that this will be basic and bare bones, so they can build out from it.

Expect Google Chrome OS 2.0 to be a lot more interesting, but even then they will probably have a long way to go. Make no mistake, this is simply the beginning of a very long term project.

Totally accepted - but make no mistake they intend to make a lot of money out of this. It is a logical step to extend their lead in web apps (out of which they make a lot of money through advertising) by putting out an OS that can only use web apps.

The only question remains whether they have got it right or wrong. You are right however that 2.0 will be much more interesting.

They won't make money directly from the OS--as in selling or licensing it. However, they can make money from it the same way they do everything else: ads!

 

[USS KG5]

I highly doubt Google plans or expects to make money off of this. Given how difficult it is to get into the OS game, this seems more like a learning thing for them. Getting the OS out into the market, even if used by a very small number of people, will provide Google with a lot of knowledge and give them a spring board to continue to fully develop the platform. It thus makes perfect sense that this will be basic and bare bones, so they can build out from it.

Expect Google Chrome OS 2.0 to be a lot more interesting, but even then they will probably have a long way to go. Make no mistake, this is simply the beginning of a very long term project.

Totally accepted - but make no mistake they intend to make a lot of money out of this. It is a logical step to extend their lead in web apps (out of which they make a lot of money through advertising) by putting out an OS that can only use web apps.

The only question remains whether they have got it right or wrong. You are right however that 2.0 will be much more interesting.

They won't make money directly from the OS--as in selling or licensing it. However, they can make money from it the same way they do everything else: ads!

Exactly.

 

[Nick Ryder]

Well I've been rep'ing the Google Android OS phones at Best Buy these past few weekends and I have to admit, for a lot of people, the "more power! arr arr arr!" mentality is out the window for "what can I do?" "how well does it work?" "is it easy?" Some people would gladly trade a laptop or a netbook for a little android phone and just do all their mobile e-mail checking, facebooking and other stuff instead of "lugging around a netbook".

So yeah, while you CAN do a lot with a netbook, honestly if I've got $500 to spend on a "secondary" computer, I'll buy a regular laptop running the FULL version of Windows. If I'm looking for a little e-mail checkin' thing where I can do a few basic things when I'm on the go, then yeah I'll go for a little pocket device.

For Chrome OS to basically be a real contender, they need to work with some manufacture to come up with a cheap, easy to use, and maybe subsidized through service netbook. No more than $200 to get out the door with a GoogleChromeOS netbook. Something that's open source enough and compatible with enough things so that people won't feel like they're buying a closed system. Like some of those glorifed word processors they used to sell in the late 90s that "looked" like a real computer, but you couldn't really do much more than some very simple games, do word processing and spreadsheets and do shitty e-mail. No such thing as web browsing. So this would be my dream gOS device...

Small - larger than an Archos internet tablet. Slide out keyboard - if you want to run it fully touch screen based, which is sort of the new trend anyway. Honestly it really needs a touch screen or at the very least an intuitive touch pad system with multitouch like a MacBook. Should have built in wifi and maybe a sim card slot so you CAN link it into a 3G network - the device should be at best carrier agnostic. Something you can use anywhere and WITHOUT a carrier plan if you don't want to.
An Android Market like thing for free and paid apps. An ability to USE Android apps would be be a HUGE plus, especially if the screen had a touch interface. Of course then you probably need to build in a GPS antenna which would drive up the price. So...

But let's look at what people actually would do with a Netbook "at large".

E-mail. - Any device nowadays can e-mail, but easy synching would be very nice.

Web browsing - a fully capable browser like Chrome but with more support for plugins. I don't want to feel like "damn I can't use Chrome to view this site? That sucks!" I run into that sometimes and it bugs me.

Social media updating - Make it easy - easily linked apps on the desktop for status and the like.

Media Player - this is an easy thing, but still if it has a sweet interface and could link to iTunes or eMusic or Amazon or all three that'd be awesome. Something that also plays nearly every file type - so a VLC like player would be another must.

Photo editing - Fuck GiMP... that's all I gotta say. There HAS to be a better and more Open source app that could be made for Chrome and for netbooks so people can do some basic and advanced image editing.

Built in webcam would be an easy add in, but they should make sure its there.

PLENTY OF USB ports! Hell I'd even say if they could add in an HDMI out people could use it like a media center PC!

Plus the OS has to just work. Intuitive, no steep ass learning curves. Easy enough for Windows users to figure out, easy enough for newbs to figure out too.

And they really should keep the price below $300 to be a contender. I could see ChromeOS being a great little OS for people who don't really get as techy as some of us do... but it would be neat if it could live side by side with a Windows install too.

And let's get to that idea they had waaaaaay back when of basically free computers with internet access. If a hardware company can make it cheap enough, durable enough and maybe would be amiable - get a Chrome OS netbook when you sign up for a certain internet service plan. Or free with a phone network or something. Get the OS ubiquitous. Get people that would even just use it for a couple things. People could give a flying fuck about the OS they're running as long as its stable, doesn't crash often, has enough programs they can play with - as well as games. And I agree with a prior poster who said the gaming companies need to be involved in these OS's. I also think they need to be more involved with the hardware. I personally think that PC gaming is going to die sooner than later. Other than MMORPGS and some sim type games, most people WILL be playing games on a mobile device like a PSP or DS or on their consoles OR on their cell phones. PC game requirements have been getting out of control. Compare game specs from a game from even 3 years ago to one that's on the shelves now. Sure a new computer every few years is awesome and a good idea in some cases... but c'mon. Let's get real. I REALLY need 10 gigs just to INSTALL the game, not even counting saves and additional content? PLUS you want me to keep the DVD in the drive while I play too?

If a few good gaming publishers could work up a great gaming netbook... they'd have a really killer app. Plus the unit would be far more capable.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

I highly doubt Google plans or expects to make money off of this.

Says The Register: "With Chrome OS - due in netbooks at the end of next year - Google has shunned local applications and local data. All apps and all data are handled inside the browser - Google's browser. You can't install another local browser on a Chrome OS machine without, well, rewriting Google's operating system."

There's a reason that's significant. If Google controls your browser, they can ensure you see their ads. Since that's where Google makes their money, it's in their interest to lock out browsers that allow for ad-blocking.

They won't make money directly from Chrome OS, but Google can ensure that their revenue stream isn't interrupted.

 

[Colin Xavier]

I highly doubt Google plans or expects to make money off of this.

Says The Register: "With Chrome OS - due in netbooks at the end of next year - Google has shunned local applications and local data. All apps and all data are handled inside the browser - Google's browser. You can't install another local browser on a Chrome OS machine without, well, rewriting Google's operating system."

There's a reason that's significant. If Google controls your browser, they can ensure you see their ads. Since that's where Google makes their money, it's in their interest to lock out browsers that allow for ad-blocking.

They won't make money directly from Chrome OS, but Google can ensure that their revenue stream isn't interrupted.

Google can't stop you from installing third party add ons from places like Chrome Extensions

 

[PurpleBuddha]

I highly doubt Google plans or expects to make money off of this.

Says The Register: "With Chrome OS - due in netbooks at the end of next year - Google has shunned local applications and local data. All apps and all data are handled inside the browser - Google's browser. You can't install another local browser on a Chrome OS machine without, well, rewriting Google's operating system."

There's a reason that's significant. If Google controls your browser, they can ensure you see their ads. Since that's where Google makes their money, it's in their interest to lock out browsers that allow for ad-blocking.

They won't make money directly from Chrome OS, but Google can ensure that their revenue stream isn't interrupted.

Understood that this is how Google will make revenue from their free OS. My point is only that this early in the game I highly doubt their expectation is that this release will be profitable. They probably won't view it as a success or failure based on how many people adopt it, but rather based on how much they learn to improve it for future adopters. This is simply an experiment.