Slashdot Mirror
GoogleOS Scenarios
ReadWriteWeb writes "Read/WriteWeb offers 3 scenarios for a GoogleOS and suggests it could be less than 6 months away. They say it may be a web based desktop (aka WebOS), a full featured Linux distribution, or a lightweight Linux distro and/or BIOS. They predict that once Microsoft's Vista rolls out, it will present a direct threat to Google's Web properties and so therefore Google will start a more punchy strategy — pushing Firefox and some form of Google OS in order to nullify Vista's potential impact."
"They say it may be a web based desktop (aka WebOS), a full featured Linux distribution, or a lightweight Linux distro and/or BIOS."
They have no idea.
It's not a proper fake news unless it speculates on BeOS, too.
What compels people that know nothing about technology to keep writing these "Google OS" articles? Do they even understand what an OS is?
MS bought into this "web OS" hype over 5 years ago. It was stupid then, and it's stupid now.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
"The GoogleOS, they do nothing!"
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
I think it will be a full featured BSD distro.
Or maybe the return of BeOS.
Or NeXT.
You might download the ISO and run it off a CD. You might not. Maybe BIOS will be involved. Possibly even TCP/IP. It will probably include some kind of menuing system and maybe a ribbonish banner that can be docked somewhere on the desktop or not, that might include items like Vista's Gadgets or OSX application launching capability or possibly some blend of both. Almost certainly the web will be involved.
Or none of the above, who knows.
"Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
Maybe after the 10 year beta test.
"I think that God in creating Man somewhat overestimated his ability."-Oscar Wilde
> How is something like this going to run on non-broadband?
Same as the answer to the question - how is this going to run on systems with 16MB ram, a 256 colour display and no cd-writer:
Who cares?
Linux/FreeBSD, Gnome/KDE, OOo, Firefox, Gaim, on Wii and PS3. At $50 a CD just the Wii with 4 million units to be released by the end of the year it would be a killing.
They wouldn't need to develop it just negotiate with Ubuntu. It's easier to maintain than Windows.
I've even sent Nintendo an email last year. To bad I don't have the finances to fund this.
DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
It was submitted by the blogger himself, and the website is more than 40% advertisement. Here is the article text:
Written by Emre Sokullu and edited by Richard MacManus.
There's no such thing as the GoogleOS in reality - but despite that, it is one of the most talked about Web products. People can't stop discussing it - and even imagining screenshots for it! Seems like everyone expects Google to get into direct competition with Microsoft, by releasing an operating system. However Google refuses such claims and even makes fun of this kind of buzz. Nevertheless we decided to analyze where Google may be heading with their product strategy - and from that determine what are the chances of a GoogleOS.
Possibilities
We see 3 scenarios for a GoogleOS:
* A web based desktop (i.e. operating system)
* A full featured Linux distribution
* A lightweight Linux distro and/or BIOS
We'll try to explain each of these in detail - then in the conclusion, make our prediction. What's more, we think this could be less than 6 months away from happening.
A Web Based Operating System
If you asked "what will a GoogleOS look like?" - most people would answer that it'll be an AJAX-powered copy of the Windows desktop. In other words, a WebOS (aka webtop). To remind you of what a WebOS is, it is basically a virtual desktop on the web and has various built-in applications. Google already has a history of producing web-based products that mimic desktop apps - Gmail was the first desktop client like email reader, and now they have Google Docs & Spreadsheets, Google Calendar and other desktop-like products. Also note that Google's internal open sourced widget toolset, GWT, allows them to replicate any desktop capability.
On the other hand, a bunch of startups like YouOS , Goowy, DesktopTwo, Xin and open source eyeOS are already tackling this exact problem - and have been for a while now. So if Google engineers are not already working on their own webOS project, they may want to snap up one of these! AJAX powered YouOS, which is a yet another Paul Graham investment, seems like the most obvious choice at this time.
Screenshot from YouOS
Besides the startups we've already mentioned, there may be other surprises that Google looks at for WebOS purposes. Meebo, for instance, has created a very large user base with their web-based meta instant messaging product (it enables you to use multiple IM services on the same webpage). IM is a crucial application, because many people spend a lot of time on the computer IM'ing. So Meebo could use IM as a base - and utilize the empty spaces on their page for new applications.
Meebo OS with fictional Calculator application (taken from YouOS)
30 Boxes also has a webtop offering, but it looks less promising than their calendar. Start pages like NetVibes, PageFlakes and WebWag could also potentially enter the webos business.
A Full Featured Linux Distro
Another possibility for Google is to create their own Linux-based operating system. The free license of Linux allows anyone to create their own version of Linux. Although Linux is the most popular operating system in the server market and it's free, it is still far behind Windows and MacOS in the desktop market. Some believe this may change with the latest enhancements to the Linux user interface.
This scenario is a more traditional model to replace Windows - with a direct competitor, instead of creating a web-based replacement. Indeed this has already been widely speculated - Ubuntu, a semi-free Linux derivative, was rumored to be acquired by Google.
If this scenario happened, Google may open up their operating system as a free download and promote it on their homepage - as they once did with Firefox. They could also make a networked file system the default, instead of the complex UNIX file hierarchy of Linux - which is another reason why Linux struggles in the mainstream
I think the way that Google will go is to make thin client apps that will run on any old computer. They could use a simple file system to install on peoples old and insecure desktops to secure them, and have something to run Firefox or whatever client will access their products. And they will have all their other apps put together in a nice form or package. Whatever file system people install on their desktops will allow them to install third party software.
Really it's a hard sale for most people. Do you want all your info, or say just all your email, documents, video, and whatever else (depending on what products they create) on Google servers. Does Google want to compete with M$ in this arena? Of course the Google OS would be free as in beer with labels. I'm not sure.
I think the more likely scenario would be a Google OS for Servers. To be sure, they are using a custom file system, and they have that down pat. An end-user product is less likely. If it isn't perfect, they likely won't release it.
I'd like to see a Google OS, if only because I have enough of a Discordian streak to appreciate all of people's systems, work, and data based around an "I'm Feeling Lucky!" button.
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
Let me get this straight ...
Google is expected to release an entire operating system that's supposed to compete heads on with Windows Vista, which is the result of years and years of work and billions of dollars invested? Say what you will about Windows, but it certainly is a massive behemoth with sh*tloads of functionality. You don't just shake something like that out of your sleeve in a few months.
And what's the supposed rationale behind a GoogleOS? Better integration of Windows Vista with Microsofts Live Search, or whatever they call it. Here's where the flip side of the coin comes in. Google has, for their part, invested years and years and billions of dollars in creating the best search engine out there, bar none. Is Microsoft suddenly going to undermine their user base by making their search engine integrated into Vista? I don't think so, Tim. People aren't total morons. They know how to type google.com into their search bars when they want to use a real search engine. It's no small cooincidence that the verb 'to google' has become prevalent among the English speaking, and has even been adopted and localized by many other nationalities.
There is absolutely no logical basis behind these speculations. Sheez.
I hear there's rumors on the Slashdots
I wrote this hyped up nonsense in order to place ads on it and make a lot of money for my 10 min of effort. You're free not to visit or promote my page, but please don't steal my intellectual property.
:)
There, I fixed that for you.
And thats what is great, they are an ad agency willing to create brand new technologies just to push their ads. Hell they encourage their employers to create random technologies with 20% of their paid time that may or may not do Google any good.
They'll make them cheap enough (or subsidize them). It's a compelling set up. Consumer Joe buys a thin client for $100, plugs it into his broadband connection and connects to apps running on a terminal server in the shipping container nearest his home. For less than the price of Vista or a new PC, he satisfies all his computing needs. He never has to install any software. He never has to worry about viruses. The terminal server is maintained by professional sysadmins. The heavy lifting is done in the shipping container, so the thin client is relatively "future proof". All the client ever has to do is run an X server, and that requires a fairly fixed set of resources.
The only thing I'd worry about is privacy. Maybe they'll let Joe use a thumb drive to store his data. Or maybe Joe doesn't care about his privacy. Google then has control of the desktop, so ads are not limited to the web browser. We'd better hope they stick to the "Do no evil" thing.
In theory, practice and theory are the same. In practice, they're not.