Slashdot Mirror
Slate Speculates on Internet Operating Systems
Slate features a discussion of possible internet operating systems, a Google OS foremost among the potential contenders. The author views the fledgling YouOS as a proof-of-concept that an Internet OS is feasible. He dismisses the idea of a Google-built thin client, arguing that Google would rather build a service available from any Internet-capable device. Google's already-fast service would theoretically translate easily to other web-based applications. From the article: Dollar for dollar, network-based computers are faster. Unless you're playing Grand Theft Auto or watching HDTV, your network isn't the slowest part of your setup. It's the consumer-grade Pentium and disk drive on your Dell, and the wimpy home data bus that connects them. Home computers are marketed with slogans like "Ultimate Performance," but the truth is they're engineered to run cool, quiet, and slow compared to commercial servers. The author compares Eric Schmidt's denials of a Google OS to Steve Jobs's denials of a video iPod. However, he notes that potential obstacles to a Google OS adoption include: the desire to own things; the requirement for fast, flawless networks; and, the trust-deficit when putting personal information on web-based applications.
I'm assuming it's a buzzwordy way of saying thin-client, netboot, or referring to actually having all your applications as fancy AJAX things. When they say OS I don't think they mean it in a managing the hardware computer science sense, but more referring to the desktop environment.
From Wikipedia:
An operating system is a software program that manages the hardware and software resources of a computer. The OS performs basic tasks, such as controlling and allocating memory, prioritizing the processing of instructions, controlling input and output devices, facilitating networking, and managing files.
This is a bunch of web based applications with a slick interface and some persistant storage.
"your network isn't the slowest part of your setup. It's the consumer-grade Pentium and disk drive on your Dell, and the wimpy home data bus that connects them"
Speak for yourself, mister.
My Verizon DSL 768 Kbps/128Kbps service is a lot slower than my mighty 2.5" 5400 RPM Seagate ST9100823A (sustained transfer rate 38 MB/sec). Approximately fifty times slower "reading" (downloading), 300 times slower "writing" (uploading). No, wait... the DSL speed is in bits, the disk speed is in bytes. Make that 400 times slower "reading" and 2400 times slower "writing."
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
>your network isn't the slowest part of your setup.
The only things on my computer slower than my DSL line are the legacy serial and parallel ports. To match the PCI bus I'd need an OC-24.
>Home computers are marketed with slogans like "Ultimate Performance," but the truth is they're engineered to run cool, quiet, and slow compared to commercial servers.
Last I heard, the Googleplex was running on dirt-cheap commodity boxes, with IDE drives even. A GoogleOS probably won't be running on heavy Sun iron.
While that is true, FreeNX pretty well solves that problem.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Slashdot is more than a web page. It is an Internet Application. Although this particular app would be immensely boring to use on a disconnected PC if a heavy client were created.
The boundary between web page, web application, internet application, distributed application, and dedicated heavy apps are blurring very heavily. These Internet OS's may or may not be a wise way to enable a better future for merging all of these into something more cohesize to the end user, but whether or not these Internet OSs will play any roll in our future, does not invalidate that someone is trying to make progress toward our future of computing.
When I first saw Mosaic 1.0 I thought it was stupid and a waste of bandwidth. I said no one would ever want to use the World Wide Web. This was in 1993. Obviously I was way wrong in my assessment for how wasting currently valuable resources would become irrelevant for a greater good in the future. I *could* have been right. But the point is.. what makes sense to us today by our measures today, will not apply tomorrow as these new concepts will enable things we cannot do at all today.
There are lots of examples of distributed and online applications that you use all of the time. But you see them as a web page. Does it really matter where the source code lives, if it is statically compiled or dynamically interpretted, if it is rendered on the server from one form into another (say PHP to HTML) or rendered on your desktop (Flash), or even used with an locally installed heavy application (Goodle Earth, Quicken, online gaming, etc.)? The boundaries are not as simple as Web Page or Software Application anymore. You can fight it.. but the desire to distribute will win in the end. Who knows what it will look like.. I'm sure the fabbled Web 2.0 will play a big role in all of this.
Slashdot.. where people join together in deliberate ignorance.