Slashdot Mirror


Google Releases Source To Chromium OS

Kelson writes "Google has released the source to what will eventually become Chrome OS, and will begin developing it as an open source project like Chromium. The OS differs from the usual computing model by (1) making all apps web apps (2) sandboxing everything and (3) removing anything unnecessary, to focus on speed." Reader Barence adds "Google said consumers won't be able to download the operating system — it will only be available on hardware that meets Google's specifications. Hard disks are banned, for instance, while Google said it will also specify factors such as screen sizes and display resolutions. Google said it plans to officially launch Chrome OS by the end of next year."

8 of 664 comments (clear)

  1. Um, Thanks But No by lenwood · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Everything runs in the cloud? Hard disks are banned? Wow, they are aggressively pursuing their thirst for all of the world's data. No thank you.

    --
    -Chris (aka Lenwood)
    1. Re:Um, Thanks But No by badboy_tw2002 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Hey man, information wants to be free. What, you didn't think that applied to YOUR information?

  2. restrictions by Eric+Smith · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If it's open source, the only enforcement they'll have over things like hard drives being banned, screen size restrictions, only web apps, etc. will be control of their trademarks. If Chrome offers something sufficiently compelling that people want to run it on "noncompliant" hardware, or run non-web-apps, they will fork it.

  3. Going back to sleep now... by Angst+Badger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The OS differs from the usual computing model by (1) making all apps web apps [...]

    Well, I guess we were overdue for another well-funded attempt to flog the dead horse of thin clients again. I'd read the press release to see how many lines I have to scan before the first appearance of the word "convergence", but I feel too overwhelmed by indifference...

    --
    Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
  4. Re:Hmm.. by MyLongNickName · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I plan to move our company to a "dumb terminal" model over the next couple of years. You say that the cost of hardware just gets "shifted", but this is not entirely accurate. I have roughly 60 users. Each machine must be spec'd to handle the biggest workload, even if that only gets hit during some small fraction of the day. For 99%+ of the day, I have a powerful machine doing very little. With a centralized model, I can smooth that out.

    But that isn't the biggest reason I am going to this model. I have folks who can be working in our central office, satellite office, on the road, or at home. I need ways to give my workforce the flexibility they need to work anywhere.

    From a cost standpoint, PCs are awful. Maintenance is generally more than the hardware costs. Software installation and configuration alone costs us about 1/4 of a FTE. By centralizing, I am expecting that number to drop by 2/3.

    Now, granted, my network is either local, or connected by dedicated T-1's except for our road folks. So, while I think this is a great idea for my workplace, I don't think it makes a lot of sense for me at home.

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
  5. Re:Looks pretty shit by Trepidity · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Does the 3rd world really have always-on mobile internet with unlimited data, such that all apps being webapps is a good idea?

  6. Reminds me of something by Giuseppe+(ot) · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "[Netscape will soon reduce Windows to] a poorly debugged set of device drivers." 1995, Marc Andreessen

  7. Re:Hmm.. by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How quickly does gmail open for you, barring load times?

    3-5 seconds, tops.

    How quickly are emails sent? Have you ever seen the word "loading"?

    1-2 seconds to send an email. Yes, I've seen loading before. It lasts no longer than 5-10 seconds at a time, faster than it takes to load outlook.

    The answer is that loadtimes are not instant. How fast does someone else editing a google doc with you see updates? Not instant.

    How long does it take to load Outlook, or load Word? Send emails in Outlook? Have it load hundreds of emails? Not instant.

    There is an acceptable latency, but lots of things get around it which are also things that don't need good latency.

    That's why you build your webapp to handle latency properly. I've used Gmail on an Iridium modem in the middle of the ocean. And it works. Is it snappy fast? Not like a 100Mb/s pipe. But they have all my mail stored redundantly somewhere, which I can search from anywhere with an internet connection, from any device with a web browser. Data stored remotely but cached locally during use is a natural progression for applications, now that storage and data transmission is evolving quicker.