Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 2nd Oct 2017 21:56 UTC

The Pixelbook has a lot in common with the previous Chromebooks that came directly from Google, with a high price tag and a spec sheet to match, but the Pixelbook will showcase the two newest enhancements to Chrome OS with stylus support and a hinge that allows for fold-over convertible use as a tablet. Neither of these things is new (convertible laptop designs have been a Windows staple for ages) but both are new for Google.

Including these features in Chrome and putting them on a high-priced Chromebook aimed squarely at developers and enthusiasts means Google really wants them to become a natural part of the Chromebook experience, and ultimately part of the web experience. So we have to ask, is Chrome finally ready to be a replacement for your tablet?

The answer is a mixed bag. It seems like answers are always that way. And Google needs to lead by example, then get everyone else on board.

Earlier this year, I replaced my aunt's aging Windows Vista (...) laptop with a Chromebook - a nice, solid, aluminium laptop with a good screen, solid trackpad, and amazing battery life. Since I set it up for her, I got to use it for a week before sending it off to my parents, who also used it for a week, after which we sent it to my aunt. All of us - my aunt, my parents, myself - were impressed with just how effortless of a machine it was. No fuss, no fiddling, no extraneous, outdated junk from 40 years of desktop computing getting in the way of browsing, e-mailing, and working with some simple documents.

Chrome OS is a great platform for a large group of non-demanding users, which is why I'm baffled by Google trying to sell us these upscale, fancy Chromebooks with insane amounts of power, and now, apparently, with stylus support and tablet mode? This feels exactly like the kind of extraneous, useless features that will only confuse and get in the way of the kind of people I personally think Chromebooks are great for.

Who is this upcoming Pixelbook for?

Thread beginning with comment 649452
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Nailed it
by Megol on Tue 3rd Oct 2017 16:45 UTC in reply to "RE: Nailed it"
Member since:

HD screen? Yes, web devs love to create websites optimized for 1920x1080. It's annoying.

Web developers shouldn't optimize for a certain resolution. They shouldn't even optimize for a certain screen aspect ratio (or at least detect it and switch to a useful layout).

In reality most web designers are incompetent hacks* that couldn't make something functional if their life depended on it. Even large sites like Intels web site have been contaminated with the looks-and-no-function syndrome.

(* not related to hacker which they are _not_)

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: Nailed it
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Tue 3rd Oct 2017 18:10 in reply to "RE[2]: Nailed it"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:

I don't think Intel cares enough to pay for any thing more than what they have. Its fine. What doesn't function on it?

Spending a ton of money on web sites doesn't result in a corresponding revenue jump.

" I was going to buy an intel processor, but the website is so terrible, you know. So I bought AMD instead"

Said no one, ever.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Nailed it
by darknexus on Tue 3rd Oct 2017 18:57 in reply to "RE[3]: Nailed it"
darknexus Member since:

" I was going to buy an intel processor, but the website is so terrible, you know. So I bought AMD instead"

Said no one, ever.

Substitute "HP" and "Dell" in that sentence and I've come damn close to saying exactly that. ;)

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[4]: Nailed it
by Adurbe on Wed 4th Oct 2017 09:15 in reply to "RE[3]: Nailed it"
Adurbe Member since:

I like my Ryzen and don't like the Intel site... so in a way, I did

Reply Parent Score: 4