Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Reveals Chrome Hardware Partners

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the because-they-can dept.

nk497 writes "Google has announced the hardware partners for the Chrome OS — so we can expect to see netbooks running the operating system next year from the likes of Asus, Acer, and HP, as well as Toshiba. Dell didn't seem to make the list, at least yet. Google also said it had teamed up with Adobe, which could mean Google is looking to include the Acrobat.com web-based software suite in some way."

11 of 343 comments (clear)

  1. Marketing..... by ITJC68 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Is this just smoke and mirrors. From what I have read this is Linux with a custom GUI on the front end. Depending on how they market it and which distro it is built from will probably dictate how far it goes. I use the *buntu and Suse variants of Linux on a daily basis. Unless this offers any real advantage I won't move to it even it I purchase a netbook with it I would probably format and load Ubuntu on it.

    1. Re:Marketing..... by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's a linux kernel, not necessarily a distribution in any meaningful sense. They could simplify it to the linux kernel, loader, some libraries, and chrome executable. I suppose they would need a shell, scripts, and helper apps for network config and dhcp, but For a browser-based internet device, 99% of a standard linux distro is irrelevant.

      According to Anandtech, which may be mostly speculating, ChromeOS is just enough Linux to run Chrome. All functionality will come from web apps. It's the thinnest of thin clients.

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
    2. Re:Marketing..... by the_womble · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There's also half a chance that the OS will be user-friendly enough for the average end user not to run screaming from, unlike most Linux distros. Hell, they may even be able to use it without ever having to see a command prompt.

      Pure FUD. The only things I have used the command prompt for in the last few months (running Linux Mint, at the machine):

      1) ping and dig - and both of those can be done from the GUI, I just prefer the command line.
      2) Django manage.py commands
      3) ssh into a remove server
      4) Restarting lighttpd

      Now, how many of those are things the average user would need to do? All my average user stuff (installing desktop apps, web browsing, email, etc.) gets done without a command prompt in site.

      Just because the sort of people who read Slashdot need to use the command prompt to get stuff done - stuff that most people have never heard of - does not mean the average user will ever see one.

    3. Re:Marketing..... by BikeHelmet · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No, your post is pure FUD. I bet you're posting from a top of the line gaming machine right? Bought the parts off newegg, and put it together yourself? Good hardware support, right?

      I have an old Dell computer sitting here, which is something the average user would have. Here's the problems I encountered:

      1) xorg.conf needed to be manually configured to fix the resolution and refresh rate. It required a lot of cmdline stuff; not as simple as opening the file in gedit and clicking save.

      2) Ubuntu 8.10 broke compatibility with the SATA controller, in such a way that it booted okay, and then corrupted the disk while running. This took quite a bit of cmdline work to "fix". I wiped out the partition and installed a SATA PCI card to run the drive from.

      3) Permissions wouldn't stick on my ext3 partition. Had to use cmdline rather than Nautilus to get it so users could read files and create new files on the partition. Without doing that, gedit couldn't save anywhere, and I couldn't open anything Firefox downloaded.

      No offense to you, but the average user won't tolerate this crap. They barely tolerate stuff like UAC, and this is way beyond that.

  2. Re:Air by darkvad0r · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm guessing this has more to do with flash than anything else. Maybe we'll finally get a flash plugin that doesn't suck on linux

  3. Will Chrome OS be any different... by bogaboga · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...as compared to this? If not then Google will have a hard time convincing me to switch.

    1. Re:Will Chrome OS be any different... by The+J+Kid · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Also, you can phone up your bank, if their site's not working for you and scream:
      "WHAT DO YOU MEAN, YOU DON'T SUPPORT GOOGLE?"
      and they'll get with the Google.

      Try that with StarForce..

      --
      Moderation: +4. Modded 70% Funny and 30% Overrated. 100% Saturated.
    2. Re:Will Chrome OS be any different... by Corporate+Troll · · Score: 4, Interesting

      As someone who has worked in banks and developed eBanking applications, mod this up... You have no idea how true this is.... I (as a developer) told them countless times not to develop for IE only. They didn't listen to me. However, they completely changed faces when a rich-ass Linux user (no kidding, I was surprised too!) called in to complain. Then they put fire under our (the developers) asses, because they wanted it fixed ASAP.

  4. Re:what is Google's strategic intent here? by museumpeace · · Score: 5, Interesting

    btw, I should have linked the Moblin pages...there is a LOT of activity on their email feed for independent developers. http://moblin.org/

    --
    SLASHDOT: news for people who can't concentrate on work or have no life at all and got tired of yelling back at the TV.
  5. Re:I would absolutely love this by mario_grgic · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How does your company feel about you keeping the presentation data on Google servers?

    --
    As the island of our knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance.
  6. Re:I would absolutely love this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    My presentations are usually outside my office. Relying on a working internet connection for them sounds like a a major PITA to me, considering how much effort is usually involved for accessing a corporate LAN.