Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 15th Oct 2013 17:18 UTC
Google

AnandTech has reviewed the new Chromebook 11 from HP/Google.

Chrome OS is extremely purpose built and it is something that should bring about great concern to those at Microsoft. I personally don't have a problem with Windows 8, but purpose built is hardly a phrase that applies to the OS - at least if you're talking about it on a more traditional PC. I suspect by the time we get to Windows 9, Microsoft will have a better answer to the critics of 8/8.1, but that gives Google and its Chrome OS partners at least another year of marketshare erosion. At the beginning of this mobile journey I remember x86 being an advantage for Intel, and we all know what happened to that. Similarly, I remember Windows/Office being advantages for Microsoft. If Microsoft doesn't find a quick solution for making low cost Windows PCs just as well executed as Chrome OS devices, it'll find itself in a world where Windows no longer matters to entry-level/mainstream users.

Apple's taken over the high-end, Google is taking over the low-end, and in mobile, the company barely registers.

Microsoft's next CEO faces a herculean task.

Thread beginning with comment 574789
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[8]: Comment by Stephen!
by lucas_maximus on Wed 16th Oct 2013 12:40 UTC in reply to "RE[7]: Comment by Stephen!"
lucas_maximus
Member since:
2009-08-18

When did I say anything about it being .NET based?

e.g. I am building at the moment rest API using PHP, that will be deployed to a linux/nginx/mariadb environment on Windows once it has been through QA.

I been building stuff using everything from node.js to traditional .NET applications on Windows.

There is nothing about my development environment that needs to be unixy, for me to deploy to a unix like environment.

Also I have no idea why Microsoft are going to care if you building competing web services while you're paying for their products. One way or another they are getting cash money out of you and if it is significantly big enough they are going to be laughing their way to the bank.

The reason people are rolling their own tech stacks because the new shiny stuff is especially for web stuff is fantastic to work with. e.g. Node.js as far as I am concerned is the best thing since sliced bread.

Of course there is cost ... but normally the software costs pale in comparison to other operational costs.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[9]: Comment by Stephen!
by Shane on Wed 16th Oct 2013 13:25 in reply to "RE[8]: Comment by Stephen!"
Shane Member since:
2005-07-06

Right, so you were talking about the client OS that developers use on their work stations. In which case you could just as easily use Windows, OS X or Linux. It comes down to personal preferences. If you're doing it right you'd be running the web dev environment as a VM anyway.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[10]: Comment by Stephen!
by lucas_maximus on Wed 16th Oct 2013 14:58 in reply to "RE[9]: Comment by Stephen!"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

If you're doing it right you'd be running the web dev environment as a VM anyway.


Why is that so?

I have a VM for checking if I have introduced any environment problems that is close enough to production. In any case it gets tested and QA'd on a two servers that are clones of live environment, any configuration/environmental issues are going to be caught there.

Most of the time I want to work in my OS of choice, not dick about remoting into a VM.

Also "doing it right" is very subjective.

Edited 2013-10-16 15:17 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[9]: Comment by Stephen!
by Shane on Wed 16th Oct 2013 13:31 in reply to "RE[8]: Comment by Stephen!"
Shane Member since:
2005-07-06

Also I have no idea why Microsoft are going to care if you building competing web services while you're paying for their products. One way or another they are getting cash money out of you and if it is significantly big enough they are going to be laughing their way to the bank.


Of course Microsoft won't care. You would.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[10]: Comment by Stephen!
by lucas_maximus on Wed 16th Oct 2013 15:05 in reply to "RE[9]: Comment by Stephen!"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Again it totally depends what percentage of your operating costs are software.

My employer doesn't blink at $200,000 of software for a single pool of servers. At the end of the day that is the same as employing 3 extra developers to build them something similar.

Reply Parent Score: 3