Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 10th Apr 2012 21:59 UTC
Google If you ever needed evidence that no, people don't want a browser as an operating system, it's this: Google has updated Chrome OS to pretty much turn it into a traditional desktop operating system. This does raise the question - does anybody actually use Chrome OS?
Order by: Score:
Hmm...
by 1c3d0g on Tue 10th Apr 2012 22:09 UTC
1c3d0g
Member since:
2005-07-06

IIRC, Google themselves said that at some point they'll be merging Android & Chrome OS into one O.S. Perhaps this is a start?

Either way, seeing as how great Windows 7 is (it's a joy to use, IMO), and what a complete catastrophe Windows 8 will be, perhaps it's time to look at the alternatives. ;)

Reply Score: 4

RE: Hmm...
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 10th Apr 2012 22:11 UTC in reply to "Hmm..."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Either way, seeing as how great Windows 7 is (it's a joy to use, IMO), and what a complete catastrophe Windows 8 will be, perhaps it's time to look at the alternatives. ;)


I'm already doing that. Ubuntu doesn't install on my ZenBook, and Linux Mint doesn't have the right processor and power savings optimisations, leaving the processor running at full speed all the time.

While like the idea of having an additional tool to fry eggs on, I'd rather use my laptop to browse for porn.

Reply Score: 7

RE[2]: Hmm...
by MacTO on Wed 11th Apr 2012 05:05 UTC in reply to "RE: Hmm..."
MacTO Member since:
2006-09-21

I'll take fried eggs with a hint of mint over porn any day.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Hmm...
by AdamW on Wed 11th Apr 2012 05:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Hmm..."
AdamW Member since:
2005-07-06

why not install fedora? there's never anything wrong with it!

excuse me while i drink heavily.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Hmm...
by lucas_maximus on Wed 11th Apr 2012 10:07 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Hmm..."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

People always forget OpenSuSE and Fedora.

Far better than Ubuntu or Debian based derivatives.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Hmm...
by Spiron on Wed 11th Apr 2012 11:42 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Hmm..."
Spiron Member since:
2011-03-08

People ALWAYS forget Arch and Gentoo. Much better than those Debian, RH and SuSE based variants. If you're missing my point by any chance, each person chooses the distro they use for different reasons. I personally never liked the Fedora dev team and their decisions, the debian team take too long to release a good stable and I never got on with OpenSuSE after somehow it managed to delete some important files by mounting the NTFS partition. What may be better for you isn't always what is good for everyone to use.

In case you're wondering I use arch and would recommend it to everybody if I thought everybody could handle it, but I know that most people don't want to go to that amount of trouble

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Hmm...
by lucas_maximus on Wed 11th Apr 2012 12:43 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Hmm..."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

If I had time to much about with those things these days I might as well use on of the BSDs which have a better package and ports systems then Arch and Gentoo combined.

Anyway I thought it was pretty clear that the OP wanted a more popular/easier to use distro.

I've been using Fedora lately and it is pretty solid on everything I have ever thrown it on.

Arch and Gentoo tbh aren't worth the hassle and it is arguable whether they are actually any better.

Edited 2012-04-11 12:46 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Hmm...
by drcouzelis on Wed 11th Apr 2012 13:26 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Hmm..."
drcouzelis Member since:
2010-01-11

If I had time to much about with those things these days I might as well use on of the BSDs which have a better package and ports systems then Arch and Gentoo combined. Anyway I thought it was pretty clear that the OP wanted a more popular/easier to use distro. I've been using Fedora lately and it is pretty solid on everything I have ever thrown it on. Arch and Gentoo tbh aren't worth the hassle and it is arguable whether they are actually any better.

My personal opinion about Arch Linux is very different from your personal opinion.

If the DistroWatch list has any merit, then Arch Linux is very popular. I suppose Arch Linux was a "hassle" when I installed it two and a half years ago, but hasn't been since then.

As for Arch Linux not being "better" than other options, I wanted to use Linux (for the hardware and software support that I desire) and I wanted rolling release software updates with a good binary-based package manager. For those reasons, Arch Linux is not only a better operating system compared to others, it's the best operating system for me.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Hmm...
by lucas_maximus on Wed 11th Apr 2012 15:12 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Hmm..."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

:sigh:

Best operating is subjective.

If you like pissing about with configuration files to get a working system, go for it.

I can't be bothered with that crap any more, if it doesn't work out of the box, I am not interested.

I know how to do it, I just rather do other things.

Edited 2012-04-11 15:14 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Hmm...
by aliquis on Wed 11th Apr 2012 20:00 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Hmm..."
aliquis Member since:
2005-07-23

Arse Linux ... It's all in the name.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Hmm...
by BluenoseJake on Wed 11th Apr 2012 15:35 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Hmm..."
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

Debian takes a long time, but when they are done, it kicks ass. Gentoo is too baroque, it's like a bad clone of FreeBSD's port system, and why go for the bad clone when you can just run FreeBSD?

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Hmm...
by aliquis on Wed 11th Apr 2012 19:59 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Hmm..."
aliquis Member since:
2005-07-23

People always argue Linux distributions when they should had installed FreeBSD.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Hmm...
by earksiinni on Wed 11th Apr 2012 09:30 UTC in reply to "RE: Hmm..."
earksiinni Member since:
2009-03-27

Thom, run "pm-powersave true" on your command line. I've added it to my ACPI scripts so that it runs every time I unplug my laptop, but adding it to /etc/init.d/rc.local or w/e script it is would activate power saving features every time you turn on your computer.

It's a really great tool and really, really poorly marketed, but I think it comes standard on all modern distros.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Hmm...
by WereCatf on Wed 11th Apr 2012 09:31 UTC in reply to "RE: Hmm..."
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

I'd rather use my laptop to browse for porn.

Now that I want more information on : what kind of porn does Mr. Holwerda watch and how does it relate to OSNews?

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Hmm...
by Ultimatebadass on Wed 11th Apr 2012 09:34 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Hmm..."
Ultimatebadass Member since:
2006-01-08

You don't want to go there. I'd say there's a good chance it involves some unicorns...

Reply Score: 8

RE[2]: Hmm...
by lucas_maximus on Wed 11th Apr 2012 10:17 UTC in reply to "RE: Hmm..."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Fuduntu ... distro with Jupiter Power Saving.

http://www.fuduntu.org/

Edited 2012-04-11 10:17 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Hmm...
by OSGuy on Fri 13th Apr 2012 11:21 UTC in reply to "RE: Hmm..."
OSGuy Member since:
2006-01-01

And to both of you, why look for something else just because a new Windows OS gets released? You do NOT have to upgrade (yet another good thing of local/non-cloud computing). Why upgrade if the older version works? I skipped Vista. I went from XP directly to Windows 7 and I have never regretted - well spent money!

I agree, Windows 7 is a joy to use and would never have Windows 8 as a permanent OS. I have the CP installed for testing my programs only.

If you really want to try a true competitor to the Windows 7 (or any other Windows) experience in terms of functionality, logic and sense and a professional graphical user interface, as weird and funny it may sound, I strongly advise you to try the Kubuntu-TDE edition available on TDE's site.

Edited 2012-04-13 11:29 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Hmm...
by calden on Sat 14th Apr 2012 20:28 UTC in reply to "RE: Hmm..."
calden Member since:
2012-02-02

That's strange as I'm posting this right now from Ubuntu installed on my Zenbook 11". What kind of problems have you run into?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Hmm...
by modmans2ndcoming on Wed 11th Apr 2012 01:08 UTC in reply to "Hmm..."
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

Windows 8 is not a catastrophe.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Hmm...
by nej_simon on Wed 11th Apr 2012 11:04 UTC in reply to "RE: Hmm..."
nej_simon Member since:
2011-02-11

Not yet at least. ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE: Hmm...
by jbauer on Wed 11th Apr 2012 09:45 UTC in reply to "Hmm..."
jbauer Member since:
2005-07-06

IIRC, Google themselves said that at some point they'll be merging Android & Chrome OS into one O.S. Perhaps this is a start?

Either way, seeing as how great Windows 7 is (it's a joy to use, IMO), and what a complete catastrophe Windows 8 will be, perhaps it's time to look at the alternatives. ;)


How about Windows 7 as an alternative?

Reply Score: 2

Seen only 1 Chromebook in the wild
by gan17 on Tue 10th Apr 2012 22:23 UTC
gan17
Member since:
2008-06-03

I've only ever seen 1 person using a Chromebook.

I think the main problem is price. Where I live, for maybe a bit more money (+/- US $25) I could get a decent netbook with extended 6cell battery + a previous gen 40GB Intel x25V SSD.

That's what I'm running right now, as a matter of fact. Boots in similar short times (ArchLinux + lightweight WM), has better battery life than any available Chromebook (albeit with Linux-PHC undervolting configured), plus I can use it for offline stuff.

I figure most people could get Win7 netbooks with extended batteries for similar or lower prices.

Edited 2012-04-10 22:25 UTC

Reply Score: 4

Lennie
Member since:
2007-09-22

I believe were Chrome OS strengt is, is in lease plans.

You don't buy such a thing, you pay a small amount of money and Google handles the hardware, software and data side of things.

In a larger organisation, you have X amount of users with such a device and X+a few of these devices, when one breaks, the user logs in on other device and keeps on working just as before.

No interruption.

Because all the data, settings, everything is saved 'in the cloud'. Google sends you a replacement device and will also send you new devices every few years.

The same when a device is stolen, if the username/password of the user is unknown the data on the device is encrypted. Any data on the device is just a cache anyway.

Obviously many companies have already setup everything in similair fashion, but in comparison there is a lot more (upfront ?) money involved.

If your business is already handled online (think: salesforce, services from 37signals.com and so on) then a transition should be easy or small parts can be run on a 'terminal services'.

Edited 2012-04-10 22:30 UTC

Reply Score: 5

Insufficient processing power
by chithanh on Tue 10th Apr 2012 22:35 UTC
chithanh
Member since:
2006-06-18

The weak Intel Atom CPUs are a major drawback of current generation Chromebooks. It is a shame that Google did not launch with AMD Brazos which was better in almost every regard.

Next generation Chromebooks will become more interesting, thanks to Coreboot and new Atom platform with more CPU/GPU power.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Insufficient processing power
by Kivada on Wed 11th Apr 2012 08:49 UTC in reply to "Insufficient processing power"
Kivada Member since:
2010-07-07

Yeah, I don't get why we aren't seeing more Bobcat hardware out there, with the 5.9w Z-01/HD6250, 9w C-60/HD6290 and 18w E-450/HD6320 they're killing Atom in performance per watt across the board and that only gets better with the soon to be released 18w E2-1800/HD7340 and 4.5w Z-03/HD6250 for tablets.

Any of those in a 10" 1280x800 tablet or netbook... AMD's Gallium3D drivers have gotten pretty good as well...

Reply Score: 2

chithanh Member since:
2006-06-18

Demonstration of a Coreboot based Chromebook, 5 seconds from power on to browser:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RypqMqtTPs8

Reply Score: 1

Kivada Member since:
2010-07-07

Big deal, AMD has already released everything needed to implement Coreboot on all of their current hardware, that and anything can do that with an SSD.

Now though, what can you actually DO after you've booted? Can the Atom hardware handle WebGL based games? handle 60FPS H.264 1080p video acceleration to connect to a TV?

Intel GPUs are still quite lacking, especially on the low end and thats whats in current Chromebooks, GMA 3150 Pineview GPUs. So thats technically OpenGL 2 and Shader Model 3.0, but it's only a mere 2 pixel pipelines @ 200Mhz, no VC1, AVC, H.264 or VP8 hardware acceleration, only MPEG 2, it doesn't even support OpenCL.

So why exactly are they using Intel Atom hardware over low end AMD hardware? If you're looking to go internet only then you're better served going CPU light and GPU heavy.

Reply Score: 2

Kivada Member since:
2010-07-07

Oh, forgot further proof, The GMA 3150 can only fluently play ancient games like Quake 3 Arena http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Graphics-Media-Accelerator-3150....


While the Z-01/HD6250 can handle World Of Warcraft, Sims 3, Halflife 2, Trackmania Nations Forever and even comes within spitting distance of playing Anno 1404. http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-HD-6250.40958.0.html

So with new games like Mini Ninjas or Wakfu having really low by today's standards system requirements are still by far and away too heavy for the GMA 3150.

Edited 2012-04-13 02:05 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Wayland
by tuma324 on Tue 10th Apr 2012 22:35 UTC
tuma324
Member since:
2010-04-09

Is this new WM built on Wayland?

Edited 2012-04-10 22:53 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Yes, I use Chrome OS
by wereling on Tue 10th Apr 2012 22:46 UTC
wereling
Member since:
2006-05-15

Yes, I do use Chrome OS. I was one of the people lucky enough to get a CR-48 (which means I won't get this update, unfortunately) and I use it on a regular basis.

I'm quite happy with it, actually. Provided I've got either wifi access or a cell signal I've found that I can do about 80% of the things I need to do on a computer with it. I use Google Docs, and when I want to write something out and I'm on the road I find it's easier (and faster) to deal with that editing on the touchscreen.

Would I buy one to use? Probably not. Frankly, ChromeOS' greatest strength is the "instant on" aspect. A Windows/Linux/mac laptop in standby mode isn't much slower, and modern battery life means that they can stay in that mode for a while. I LIKE Chrome OS, but right now it seems to be answering a need that few people have. If you need a lightweight, inexpensive laptop that is instant on with great battery life and you don't care about limited utility then ChromeOS is for you. Otherwise you can spend less money and get a cheap (nearly disposable in some cases) netbook and be better off.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Yes, I use Chrome OS
by mrstep on Wed 11th Apr 2012 13:26 UTC in reply to "Yes, I use Chrome OS"
mrstep Member since:
2009-07-18

The funny thing to me is that if I need 80% of my laptop's functionality, I already get that on my iPad - and with a nicer form factor to boot - and with native apps as well in addition to the web.

It's really not clear what the intended audience for ChromeOS is (was?).

Reply Score: 1

Make it run android apps..
by reduz on Tue 10th Apr 2012 23:35 UTC
reduz
Member since:
2006-02-25

If google makes a desktop OS that runs android Apps, that sounds like a huge improvement to me..

Reply Score: 3

RE: Make it run android apps..
by No it isnt on Wed 11th Apr 2012 08:21 UTC in reply to "Make it run android apps.."
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

Why? Most good Android apps are good because they make good use of a phone's form factor and limited capabilities, or capabilities a desktop doesn't have or need, like a GPS. I can't think of a single Android app I miss on my computer. Maybe Wordfeud, but it would be easier to implement that in HTML5 than to make Android functional on a desktop.

Reply Score: 2

Android / Webtop
by btrimby on Tue 10th Apr 2012 23:45 UTC
btrimby
Member since:
2009-09-30

I find these changes bringing it closer to a desktop interface interesting, considering where Motorola seems to be taking their webtop solution. If you haven't seen the videos, when docked into a lapdock, the phone running ICS goes into something more like tablet mode. Since Chrome beta runs on ICS, that would already be far better than Chrome OS for my purposes. Now I just need Motorola to hurry up with their updates to find out if I'm right.

I'm actually posting this from my Motorola phone running webtop. The current version isn't exactly ideal, to be honest. It's really just Firefox and a file manager with a windowed view of my phone.

But the potential I see in those webtop 3 beta videos... I can't wait.

Reply Score: 1

The real problem with Chrome OS
by RichterKuato on Wed 11th Apr 2012 00:08 UTC
RichterKuato
Member since:
2010-05-14

I don't think anyone has a problem with using a browser as an operating system. I think the real issue is it was designed to solve Google's problems and not consumers problems. This is at the heart of their sad positioning as a enterprise product.

The whole Cloud OS push is to get you to trust them with your data. The requirement that you log into Google before you can use regular browser features (bookmarks, history, password manager etc.) is just part of their Facebook strategy.

Considering that they're targeting enterprise and government rather than consumers it's obvious why they aren't very popular with the general population. This is likely a last minute reaction to the iPad cannibalising the Netbook market (which they didn't find out about until after it's announcement).

It's benefits to consumers are only coincidental and not explicitly there on purpose. That's too bad because when I first heard about it I thought it had great potential in consumer devices because of it's really simple interface and the ability to run on the low end hardware. Now it looks like that's what Android is destined for.

Reply Score: 10

RE: The real problem with Chrome OS
by tomcat on Wed 11th Apr 2012 00:47 UTC in reply to "The real problem with Chrome OS"
tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

I think the real issue is it was designed to solve Google's problems and not consumers problems.


And there's the heart of the matter: This is a solution looking for a non-existent problem, IMHO. Google obviously started with "what do we need as a company" and tried to get others to buy into it. Epic fail. It's no wonder that it's struggling. Focus on the customer first, Google!

Reply Score: 7

RE: The real problem with Chrome OS
by phoehne on Wed 11th Apr 2012 04:56 UTC in reply to "The real problem with Chrome OS"
phoehne Member since:
2006-08-26

I agree that it was a google heavy approach, but I wouldn't entirely agree that it's a non-existent problem. For most people a general purpose computer is too much overhead for little gain. For example, my retired parents use e-mail, occasionally use a spreadsheet, and surf the internet. Their #1 priorities are printing pictures of the grandkids and keeping up with friends.

In his 70's, my dad got tired of mucking around with Windows and paying Microsoft for the privilege to do so, that he loaded Ubuntu on his desktop and hasn't looked back. It is much less of a headache for him to maintain. When the hard drive went south on their desktop, my mom was very upset about the possibility of loosing emails. (Grandkid pictures are backed up.) Even though my dad is much happier with Ubuntu, there's still a maintenance burden. He's now trying an iPad to see if that's a better solution. Like many people he wants to use his computer when he needs it, but would rather be doing many other things than fiddling with computer.

If you think that's fine for retirees, but what about people doing "real work," I would just say that a lot of non-technical people use e-mail, word processing, some spread sheet, and a lot of applications that are now web based. For example, most major accounting packages are web based. A lot of in-house or line of business applications are web based. Having a PC on their desk is over-kill and a relatively expensive maintenance proposition. You could replace much of what they do with a thin device or tablet. One of the biggest complaint I hear from the few non-technical people I interact with is what a POS our company laptops are and how long they take to boot up.

From that standpoint the Chrome book seemed like a pretty good idea. Give people just about everything they need through the web. Take away most of the maintenance burden. And no one loses any more data because it's not on the device, it stored in shiny, professional managed data centers. I tried it, running a homebuilt copy on a HP mini 110 that I got free with my Verizon subscription. Maybe the idea has merit, but the execution I thought was okay, but not great. To really get people to move away from what they know you have to wow them.

And that's where I think Chrome dropped the ball. Had Chrome books been "wow" products, I think a lot of people would be happier with a near zero maintenance device. Some argue the price should have been lower, but iPads are selling well at premium prices because there's something of a wow factor.

Reply Score: 3

Yes I have it, and it's pretty nice
by billycub on Wed 11th Apr 2012 00:24 UTC
billycub
Member since:
2010-08-18

This isn't intended to be a full review, since I only got the update last night. But yes, I have a Samsung "Series 5" Chromebook and I updated to the dev channel last night to see what all the fuss is about.

This update is really great. Chrome OS is dispensing with browser-as-OS because it just didn't work very well. Now, with window management and a task bar, it actually FEELS like there is more desktop breathing room to do all my work in. It's a psychological change but a welcome and very striking one.

They've done some very nice things with window management, pulling tricks and inspiration from both Windows and Mac OS. It feels like neither, but will be familiar to users of both.

It's also now much easier to launch web apps in dedicated windows that FINALLY feel like "real" applications. It's amazing how far that goes to making it seem like a cohesive experience.

The visual refresh, fancy animations, and excellent smooth-scrolling support on the trackpad (also, FINALLY) make it feel like I just got a brand new machine.

BUT.... I must agree with the assessment that this makes Chrome OS less like an OS inside a browser. The real benefit is in the no-local-storage, dead-simple-updates business proposition. I don't think these devices are ever going to catch on for casual users looking for a second machine.

This update is actually quite a nice piece of work. Looking forward to faster, lighter hardware in the future. Because without that, it will never go anywhere.

Reply Score: 6

"What is the purpose of Chrome OS?"
by ronaldst on Wed 11th Apr 2012 02:25 UTC
ronaldst
Member since:
2005-06-29

A commodity personal computer. I'd recommend it to family members. Replace the overpriced Intel CPU (poor Price/Watt performance) with an ARM flavour, add regular printing support that doesn't require uploading print jobs to Google servers and this one is a long stretch: external desktop HDs that serve as local/personal Cloud but with proper integration. Something a little more functional than DLNA.

Personaly, I wish the ChromeOS team would stop with the wedging in the WIMP metaphor. It's so last century. But then Google always had the worst UI designers out there (leave YouTube alone). There's so much stuff missing from ChromeOS.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by allanregistos
by allanregistos on Wed 11th Apr 2012 03:01 UTC
allanregistos
Member since:
2011-02-10

At this point, I do have to wonder - what is the purpose of Chrome OS? Does anybody use it other than as a novelty? Is there any real reason to go with Chrome OS over Windows 7 or Mac OS X?


Thom, it is a well known fact that Chrome OS is not a replacement of your aforementioned OSes, regardless of the success of Chrome OS.

Reply Score: 2

Getting Aura running on Cr-48
by matthewp131 on Wed 11th Apr 2012 03:17 UTC
matthewp131
Member since:
2011-09-21

How dare Google not release this update for the Cr-48! Don't you dare tell me that hardware can't handle window management when it runs Ubuntu just fine! In fact, on my Cr-48 I use Ubuntu almost exclusively because it is actually faster that Chrome OS in every way.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Getting Aura running on Cr-48
by fran on Wed 11th Apr 2012 19:37 UTC in reply to "Getting Aura running on Cr-48"
fran Member since:
2010-08-06

Good news
http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/04/google-chrome-microsof...

The CR48 has only been skipped in this update. The next update though the CR48 will get the full treatment.

Reply Score: 2

braddock
Member since:
2005-07-08

I ordered a Chromebook - largely to watch Netflix on it and dual boot to Ubuntu Linux. But then I found out that if you unlock the bootloader for dual-booting, Netflix stops functioning under Chrome OS. I quickly canceled my order.

This has shown me the future. If you turn off the new generation of signed bootloaders to dual-boot to an alternative OS, I expect your Windows installation will be crippled and all DRM will cease to function.

-braddock

Reply Score: 2

v Thom might think I'm acting like a child,
by MollyC on Wed 11th Apr 2012 03:45 UTC
v Addendum
by MollyC on Wed 11th Apr 2012 04:58 UTC in reply to "Thom might think I'm acting like a child,"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Nearly every other thing they've done has been either a blatant rip-off (for example, Google's image search is a shameless ripoff of Bing's original image search), or was purchased from some smaller company (e.g. Android).


Name something Apple or Microsoft has invented, instead of bought/copied.

Reply Score: 4

Adurbe Member since:
2005-07-06

the GUI! *hides behind sofa*

Reply Score: 2

BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

Microsoft invented the Blue Screen of Death, and Apple invented the triple venti non-fat latte.

Reply Score: 5

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

At least Windows is advanced enough to generate a blue screen of death.

Reply Score: 2

cyrilleberger Member since:
2006-02-01

For MS, Basic (/me go hide under the sofa)

Reply Score: 2

BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

Basic wasn't invented by MS

Reply Score: 2

earksiinni Member since:
2009-03-27

Argh, will people stop being idiotic?

Reply Score: 1

We don't need another desktop OS ...
by MacTO on Wed 11th Apr 2012 05:22 UTC
MacTO
Member since:
2006-09-21

Desktop and laptop computers are a dying breed outside of professional users and a few dedicated home users. In all likelihood, the market is going to look a lot like it did in the mid-1990s and what we ask of our desktop operating systems is going to resemble what we asked of our desktop operating systems in the mid-1990s. At least in terms of the user interface. (The technical underpinnings will continue to advance.)

The reason for this is simple: very few people bought into the computer craze. What they actually bought into was the Internet craze. Now that devices are coming along that simplifies the interface and makes viewing media more convenient, the general purpose computer is going to drop off their radar.

Reply Score: 4

No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

New devices aren't simplifying the interface, they're only making it more portable. Hell, you don't even get mouse-over on links when using a tablet. Even basic things like copy and paste are decades away from the PC on any phone OS.

Reply Score: 4

ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

Desktop and laptop computers are a dying breed outside of professional users and a few dedicated home users. In all likelihood, the market is going to look a lot like it did in the mid-1990s and what we ask of our desktop operating systems is going to resemble what we asked of our desktop operating systems in the mid-1990s. At least in terms of the user interface. (The technical underpinnings will continue to advance.)

The reason for this is simple: very few people bought into the computer craze. What they actually bought into was the Internet craze. Now that devices are coming along that simplifies the interface and makes viewing media more convenient, the general purpose computer is going to drop off their radar.

That's a wonderful theory. Too bad the desktop sales figures completely disagree with you however. +1 for effort though!

Reply Score: 3

cyrilleberger
Member since:
2006-02-01

When Google started Chrome OS, it was at a time where html applications were very hype and it looked like people would stop using native applications and do all their work with html applications. But somehow, the iphone (and android) killed that idea, now people want small native apps that connect to remote services. Mainly because those apps usually offer a better user experience than what you can get in a browser (it will be interesting to see if HTML5 can reverse the trend). If HTML application had succeed, then it would have been a totally different story, and Chrome OS would have been what people needed.

What I really don't understand is why Google did not stop the Chrome OS project to focus all the effort on making android great for tablets and notebooks.

Reply Score: 6

vaette Member since:
2008-08-09

Implementing apps using web technologies still looks like it has a future, many Android/iOS apps are decorated web views (that is, a specialized webpage with extra widgets and menus suited for the platform added). It is not an entirely popular model, but it has gotten better and better to the point where I think few people have much idea of what apps are actually decorated webviews and which are based on a more classical model. Microsoft is also making a big bet in that direction in WinRT, allowing HTML/CSS/Javascript to be used to build first-class applications with access to all WinRT has to offer.

The problem with ChromeOS really is that everyone else offers all the same functionality in addition to all the other features and conveniences we have gotten used to. As a notable example Chrome on PC offers pretty much exactly the same experience, but as a single facet of what your PC can do.

Reply Score: 2

Standard Linux at last?
by dsmogor on Wed 11th Apr 2012 09:16 UTC
dsmogor
Member since:
2005-09-01

Could it become the desktop linux standard that we've been waiting for so long?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Standard Linux at last?
by nej_simon on Wed 11th Apr 2012 15:16 UTC in reply to "Standard Linux at last?"
nej_simon Member since:
2011-02-11

I hope so! I would love to once and for all ditch windows for a Linux based OS. I don't think the current Linux distributions are good enough. They often require you to update the whole OS just to get updated drivers and software. But judging from what google accomplished with android I really think they can pull this off!

Reply Score: 1

Re:
by kurkosdr on Wed 11th Apr 2012 09:38 UTC
kurkosdr
Member since:
2011-04-11

"pretty much turn it into a traditional desktop operating system."

[citation needed] If it doesn't have local storage and a media player, it's not a traditional desktop system. Hey Google, my harddrive has much faster transfer times that my internet connection. While everyone at Mountain View has a FiOS link, what they don't get is that most of us outside the USA and Japan are on ADSL, which means slow upload speeds. And mobile internet here has 500MB data caps (best case). I don't want to wait for hours for my camera videos to upload to youtube, when I can just transfer them to my HDD, or blow my whole data plan just to empty my camera.

Edited 2012-04-11 09:39 UTC

Reply Score: 3

Still a non-personal computer
by flypig on Wed 11th Apr 2012 09:41 UTC
flypig
Member since:
2005-07-13

Personally I think there are real benefits in separating data from hardware. Even with the explosion in mobiles and tablets, we still store most of our data on the device and assume we'll only use our own devices to access our data (even when our data's stored elsewhere). This is backwards and constraining. I should be able to go up to any device in the world, log in and be presented with my desktop or mobile configuration.

Computing has been heading in this direction for a long time, but none of the main operating systems allow for this. I've not used Chrome OS, but as far as I can tell none of the latest changes seem to suggest it's moving away from this. If Google gets it right, it might still have the potential to really change the way we use computers, and demonstrate how useful the cloud really can be.

Reply Score: 1

I've used ChromeOS
by sorpigal on Wed 11th Apr 2012 12:11 UTC
sorpigal
Member since:
2005-11-02

I picked up a chromebook last month as a novelty. I got a cheaper model and have yet to figure out a use for it other than lending it to guests for trivial browsing. Currently it's sitting on my dining table with the battery depleted--exactly where it's been for the last week.

I found it to be sluggish and choppy, even with the pre-installed games, certainly bad if I open more than 3 tabs. If all you want is facebook and maybe email you might be okay with it, but surprisingly few people do that little with their computers.

Reply Score: 2

It will just follow Wave's footsteps
by moondevil on Wed 11th Apr 2012 12:24 UTC
moondevil
Member since:
2005-07-08

I never believed in ChromeOS and I think it will most likely be eventually discontinued.

This only goes to show that Google is no longer secure what they want to do with it.

Reply Score: 3

40hz
Member since:
2012-03-16

I think Google is cleverly providing a nice hedge to allow people to keep what looks and acts (mostly) like a traditional desktop. Especially now that Apple, Microsoft, and Ubuntu are hell bent on shoving a walled-garden tablet metaphor down everybody's throats whether they want it or not.

Who knows? Maybe Google will become "the desktop for the rest of us" once all the former OS/Software makers start manufacturing nothing but media consumption appliances.

Too bad we really can't trust Google any more than we can trust the rest of these guys.

Reply Score: 1

Chromebook
by thegman on Thu 12th Apr 2012 10:26 UTC
thegman
Member since:
2007-01-30

I have a Chromebook, and use it every day. I used to have an Eee Pad Transformer, but use the Chromebook far more. The reason is basically that it's a fast booting, quick little laptop for web browsing. I have a Windows laptop too, but it runs hot and can take a while to wake up.

I ditched the Eee Pad because web browsing was simply not very good, text entry into forums was very slow and the UI was sub-par. Now that Chrome is on Android, that has maybe changed.

Sometimes the Chromebook frustrates me, and I have to use my Mac or PC, but 95% of the time it's OK. I find it more usable as "sofa computer" than a tablet. If I were to replace it, it would not be for a tablet.

If we think about what we do with computers, outside of work and games, then a web browser can do most of it, and Chromebook excels at that where tablets do not. Tablets excel at simple apps and games, and I need nor want those.

Reply Score: 1

Chrome OS
by OSGuy on Fri 13th Apr 2012 11:32 UTC
OSGuy
Member since:
2006-01-01

Comment removed by me.

Edited 2012-04-13 11:40 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Comment by calden
by calden on Sat 14th Apr 2012 20:27 UTC
calden
Member since:
2012-02-02

Well I guess I'm the only one who actually owns a Chromebook on this forum and actually likes it. This new version is quite impressive, I now get 9 hours of battery from my Samsung Chromebook 3G. There isn't a program that I haven't been able to replace with a online version. I'm able to program my PHP, Python, heck even my C++ stuff.

Everyone is worried about privacy, them stop with the pornographic sites, stop with sites like Facebook and Twitter where you open your selves up. Keep your emails clean and simple. There is no longer any privacy on the web, you are kidding yourself if you think you are surfing in private. It doesn't matter what OS you are using.

Reply Score: 1