Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft, Other Rivals Slam Google Chrome OS
CWmike writes "Microsoft is, predictably, not all that impressed by Google Inc.'s demonstration of its upcoming Chrome OS. 'From what was shared, it appears to be in the early stages of development,' a Microsoft spokeswoman said. 'From our perspective, however, our customers are already voicing their approval of the way Windows 7 just works — across the Web and on the desktop, and on all sizes and types of PCs — purchasing twice as many units of Windows 7 as we've sold of any other operating system over a comparable time.' But neither were potential rivals who make Linux and instant-on operating systems. Chrome OS claimed 7-second boot times and the ability to run Web apps within another 3 seconds, which failed to impress Woody Hobbs, president and CEO of Phoenix Technologies, a long-time BIOS software maker that has re-invented itself with a Linux-based instant-on OS called HyperSpace. 'Instant-on is about being able to access your Internet applications in one second. Seven seconds is too long,' Hobbs said. 'There is no such thing as "cold boot" for today's mobile PCs such as netbooks and smartbooks. You should be able to use your netbook like you use your smartphone — a press of a button and you are "on."' Mark Lee, CEO of DeviceVM Inc., said Google's favoritism towards its own browser and Web apps could rub some users the wrong way, especially those outside of the US. 'In China, users prefer Baidu, not Google,' Lee said. DeviceVM's Splashtop platform boots into Firefox within seconds and uses Yahoo or Baidu as default search engines instead of Google."
I was already contrarian in yesterday's Chrome thread. Some people are asking "Does Chrome OS Spell the End of Desktop PCs?" I think the thing that's in the most danger of being taken over by Chrome OS is slashdot. Some people will make some interesting builds, and it will be a lot of fun to play with. It's doubtful much more will come of it than that.
But of course Microsoft and their friends at Forrester and Gartner, PC World and news.com.com.com will be declaring it a greater threat to world peace than Scientology, claim it causes genital warts, say that it may damage both your computer and your self esteem. The funniest thing I've seen along this line is this one.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
They are competing directly, but Google's friendlier. Google is making an appliance OS, where as SplashTop is designed as a light fast-booting OS.
But almost everyone is using a strawman (as Microsoft is). The point is not to replace Windows, it's an OS for web surfing. It's not for playing World of Warcraft, doing heavy photo editing, video editing, etc. Everyone is writing the "Google vs. Microsoft" article they want to write, instead of the tougher article about how Google is basically working to define a new class of computer (something of a netbook that's not running a general OS).
It's web-TV, but not on TV and not horrible. It's an email appliance OS that lets you read the web pages people link to in their emails.
It's not a direct shot at MS and Apple.
Gruber gets another one right.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
You know, my first thought when I read "seven seconds is too long" was "you've got to be kidding" - but then I remembered how some of the people we support (academic faculty) have wasted hours of our time with complaints when their IMAP email messages were taking four seconds to open on one particular day instead of the usual one second... (and yes, that was a verbatim complaint).
#DeleteChrome
purchasing twice as many units of Windows 7 as we've sold of any other operating system over a comparable time.
So right here MS themselves admits that VISTA was such crap that people were flocking away from it at record times.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
And it "just works" on ARM processors? So "PC" should really be "x86-based PC".
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
'From what was shared, it appears to be in the early stages of development,' a Microsoft spokeswoman said.
Thanks for the advice but it's not a problem - I never buy any software from Google until the third release.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
The reason your customers won't be interested in Chrome OS as a replacement for 7 is the same reason pickup-truck drivers aren't interested in motorcycles as replacements.
It's scratching a different itch, although I'm a little skeptical that anyone's seriously itching hard for a minimal OS capable of running only a web browser.
If they're all so scared enough to give it this much attention, it /must/ be good.
Ah, but you can dump your Excel for something cloud-based that will likely look nearly exactly like Excel, function nearly the same way, and read Excel files. Add that to the boot and app launch times, and you have a serious competitor for the specific segment of hardware that Google is aiming for.
smartphone — a press of a button and you are "on."'
I don't know what smartphones they are referring to. My iPhone and my laptop are seldom 'off'. They both go into standby when i'm not using them, the times to come out of standby are very similar, and if I actually had to type a password into my iPhone to bring it out of standby the computer would beat it by far.
Has Mr Hobbs never turned a smartphone on from a complete off state? There is a negligible difference between booting my iPhone vs my Windows XP laptop. My old HP iPaq wasn't much different.
So instead of leaving xp, they're staying in droves!
Ice Cream has no bones.
I just don't get the point. Everything Chrome OS runs can already be run by any other OS, so why not just use some other Linux distro that's not restricted to web apps?
Tech blogs have been extrapolating from minor leaks ands rumours, generating the 'perfect' OS in their minds. When Google released what they think is going fill a niche - a smartphone on steroids - the tech blogs where crushed. Microsoft steps in to assure them that they will continue to have a hype cycle to satisfy their lust for ad revenue, and all is well in the Techblogosphere.
In three or four years, when you can only get Chrome OS on a netbook, the geeks will turn against Google as well. It will be the same fight that was fought for the desktop, but this time it will be Ubuntu that that people will say doesn't let you mount a hard drive out of the box, since it is only SSD, which will be too difficult for the 'common user', and the geek culture will implode on itself as it struggles with it's fanatical devotion to a dumbed down Linux and their realization that Google and Canonical are run by the same type of people that cause them constant strife in their underpaid IT jobs.
Either that, or like when Firefly was canceled, they will just go outside for a week, and wait until they are drawn back in....
-- I care not for your foolish signatures.
... it's part of their paycheck to not be impressed with anything let alone admit it to the media.
Do they use a press release response form ticking the checkboxes for all the usual lines?
Oh come on, Chrome is no threat to desktops, because people will still need their rich apps on high-spec hardware, therefore desktops will be still around as a do-everything machine. Partly though, because laptops netbooks and smartphones haven't killed desktops yet. I fear though, Microsoft has for a long time been making Windows a one size fits all requirements OS, the indentical OS gets put on netbooks to top end workstations. Chrome OS will appeal people who just want web and social networking and a bit of mucking around with their digital photos, but previously had to fork out for more than they needed in a laptop and desktop.
Having played around with the virtual machine images circulating, I don't think it's a threat to anything, but it looks pretty solid for a beta OS, but finally the ideal OS for the focused web tablet we've all been wanting for a long time. I also imagine the code could be rolled into existing linux distributions. It could coexist alongside other desktop environments ie KDE/Gnome, although I don't think Chrubuntu would be a very catch name.
Oh and it's Linux, open source, if it is lacking any features we will fix it okay?
After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
I'm not sure what type of phone ol' Woody Hobbs uses... but I think that's kind of a flawed analogy at best. Over the years, my phones from a cold start have taken easily 5 - 10 seconds to post up (...and that includes the gracious amount of Verizon Wireless foo that flashes around at the beginning) Regardless of the pounding Chrome OS is taking, 7 second boot up time with instant access is killer. Really that's not any less/more than my Acer AspireOne + LinuxMint coming back up from hibernation mode. I'm really anxious to give Chrome OS a spin. Just like people argue for the sake of arguing, I think it's safe to say people also ridicule for the sake of ridiculing.
Anyone who thinks that once Google perfects this, they're going to be content to simply sit idle on the cloudbook (I'm making that word up; consider it public domain) market with it is fooling themselves.
Google is also working on implementing 3D in the browser. They're also saying that for most features users use, Google Apps will be caught up with Microsoft Office in a year. They're also working VERY hard on developing a standard codebase to implement a desktop UI within a browser, and they're making very good progress.
Is Google overly optimistic? Maybe, but what company isn't? My point, though, is that they've got a LOT of really good things going for them. Don't dare think of Chrome as forever relegated to "OS-lite," or else you'll be making the same fundamental mistake that many other companies have made with Google. (And indeed, that a lot of them made with Microsoft in the past. "Oh, Internet Explorer will never catch up to Netscape." "Excel is like a scaled-down Lotus 123." "Our company has invested way too much in Netware to change." "Visual C++ is neat, but for serious development, go with Borland.")
It's really kind of fun to watch a company out-Microsoft Microsoft, except in a good way. As far as I'm concerned, I hope Microsoft continues to think of ChromeOS as just a toy that will never be a serious contender with Windows outside of very limited niche devices.
Richard Stallman says using cloud apps is stupid.
On comp.os.linux.advocacy, about the only thing the anti-Linux trolls and the pro-Linux trolls agree on is that they aren't trusting their data to the cloud, so Chrome OS is not impressive to them.
> Seven seconds is too long,' Hobbs said.
For instant on it is. FOr a quick boot it's ok.
> There is no such thing as "cold boot" for today's mobile PCs such as netbooks and smartbooks. You should be able to use your netbook like you use your smartphone -- a
> press of a button and you are "on."' M
My smartphone (HTC Touch Diamond) is nothing like that. From pressing the reset button (near where the stylus lives) to doing anything is around a minute. 7 seconds would be a massive improvement.
Does Google's OS include the BIOS in those 7 seconds?
My problem with the Google OS is I don't really want an OS with no hard drive and everything living on the net somewhere out of my control. I want to copy my photos onto my hard drive(s), convert them (from RAW) etc etc. I can't be doing all that over the net with 11 meg images, over a possibly slow, and definately hostile internet connection.
IMO the key selling points for chrome are:
1) Zero user maintenance
2) Security (the thing is even resistant against user-space malware), even Linux distros are years away from sand-boxing desktop apps
3) Simple UI
IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
What people don't get about Google's software is that they are not selling it. That's not where their revenue comes from. They can spend a lot of time getting the software right, refocusing it, tweaking it, getting comments. Microsoft by contrast has to come out with the big "impressive" release every few years to keep the company afloat. That's their business model. It's not Google's.
Look at Android. 18 months ago the cell phone execs were all saying that Google didn't understand how hard it is to create cellular phone software. The G1 got a lot of yawns. That reception would have been a disaster for Apple, but for Google it didn't matter, they just kept working on it. Today, Android is a serious competitor.
Whatever Chrome does or doesn't do can be changed. And maybe it will flop. That won't be a huge deal for Google as long as they get their advertising on the next generation of devices.
Me: I'll take ChromeOS for $100, Alex.
Alex: For $100, "specific segment of hardware that Google is aiming for".
Me: Who are people too cheap to spend $200 on a netbook?.
Alex: Right!
Me: I'll take ChromeOS for $200, please.
Alex: The answer is "it obsoleted ChromeOS a year before ChromeOS was supposed to be delivered"
Me: What is Droid?
Alex: Right again!
Me: I'll take ChromeOS for $400, please.
Alex: The answer is "Business".
Me: Who won't be using ChromeOS?
Alex: Right again!
Me: ChromeOS for $800, please.
Alex: They both don't let you run your apps your way.
Me: How is a ChromeOS-based computer like a Tivo?
Alex: Right again!
Me: ChromeOS for $1600, please.
Alex: The answer is, "100 times as much."
Me: How much more profit will Apple make off each computer it sells compared to vendors of ChromeOS-based computers.
Alex: Right again!
ChromeOS bonus question, "We welcome our cloud-based data overlords", "In Soviet Russia, Chrome browses YOU" and "You can have my data when you pry it from my cold dead hands."
Me: What were the three most popular ChromeOS privacy FAIL slogans?
Alex: Right! How much did you wager?
Me: All of it, Alex. There was no risk - everyone knows ChromeOS is Google's most famous flop to date.
What if someone successfully develops something like a cloud service with Wine+NX and lets you run any and all Windows apps out in the cloud? If they get an acceptable framerate out of it that should put most "but my application X dont work" to shame. The only problem i can see is doing that through the browser and get fast enough framerates for games.
Im also wondering how much work it would be for Google to later on slap dalvik/android devkit onto the platform for local applications. Probably not that much i suspect.
While Google Chrome OS starts out on the small netbooks etc i dont think they will stay there if they succeed in getting a piece of the market.
The development that has lead up to this has been going on since long before Microsoft even discovered the internet. The whole browser war was about keeping applications tied to the local computers. Bill Gates and many other in MS said so themselves in discoveries during Gomes and MS vs. DOJ. The same goes for the Java poisoning. And now, trying to slip .net and silverlight out as X platform and then sneaking in platform dependant stuff.
The natural development is going right in Googles direction with Microsoft working against it for everything they can. Its like a pent up dam, once a trickle starts its not long until the dam breaks and our computing as we know it is radically changed in a fairly short timespan.
I think we have pretty interesting times ahead with much foulplay from a desperate Microsoft. They will stop at nothing to stomp Google to bits, absolutely nothing.
HTTP/1.1 400
Droid gives you more features and more convenience - plus you don't have to take 7 seconds to boot.
I'll admit I don't have a Droid - I have the G1 - but a 7 second boot would be far superior to what I experience.
What are people talking about with 'instant on smartphones'? The only thing 'instant-on' that I've seen is turning the screen back on. If you ever have to actually reboot the thing it takes at a least a MINUTE (haven't timed it, could be longer).
http://www.chaotickingdoms.com
Not really. People will buy a crippleware smartphone for that before they'll spend money on a crippleware computer. don't have to buy a separate keyboard, mouse or screen, portable, always-on, can run local apps instead of downloading everything off the web every time, apps work offline, more local storage, can make phone calls, videos, etc., and just way more cool.
And the only people who will look at this are people too cheap to buy even a crappy $200 netbook or a smartphone. No advertiser is going to pay for clicks from them, so forget about subsidizing these boxes with revenue from search.
Business won't want it because there's some data you just don't share, not to mention desktop clutter and more time wasted synching.
This product is at least 3 years too late (and will be 4 years too late when it finally rolls out), and aims at a market nobody can make money with.
Microsoft aren't considering:
1) ARM version of Chrome OS - means $199 smartbooks instead of $299-$499 netbooks running Windows XP or Windows 7.
2) OS is free.
3) Actually Google might be offering a share of advertising revenue to manufacturers, as with Android. This means that the OS has a negative cost. We could see $149 smartbooks. Who is interested in a Windows 7 netbook at 3x the cost then?
4) Good enough for a second/cloud computer. Especially if it supports the "home cloud" with support for DNLA (media streaming) and other common home/office services.
However there are failings - firstly I think that Google need to make the OS Android compatible. I.e., installing the Dalvik VM and Android APIs by default. Android 2 allows higher resolutions. Android 3 will surely support resolutions up to smartbook (1024x600, 1366x768) and running an app as a tab within Chrome OS, allowing a unified platform. Surely therefore Chrome OS smartbooks will include multitouch displays...
Also Chrome OS 1 will surely be rough, like Android 1 and the G1. Droid is showing what Android 2 can do, and it's far more mature. Android 3 will probably be the first all-rounded and sweetly remembered variant. Android 4 will be good too. Android 5 through 7 will be dire.
It's for your friends and relatives who drive you mad with tech support questions. Send them a $100 box, tell them to switch the cables out, and get on with your life.
even in Virtualbox. The rest is rather disappointing though. It's just a full screen web-browser and nothing else. If you want more than that you'd be better off with Ubuntu Netbook Remix or another mini Linux distro. I would have much preferred a stable Linux build of the Google Chrome browser.
Tom,
There have been some challenges in defining the differences, but Chrome OS is not an operating system. It's a distribution that includes the Linux operating system that adds its value in the user interface space. The underlying operating system is Linux. Chrome OS is a shell.
Its scope is every environment the base OS applies to, and that's going to stretch from the firmware of your wireless router to the TOP500. Its target market is grandma, but it's open source to the point where builds are now available for every Virtual environment and we're not 48 hours in yet.
In short by opposing something that's not yet defined, you're destroying your cred.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
their approval of the way Windows 7 just works
So, Microsoft is now imitating Apple's moniker. Of course, it's b.s. from both Microsoft and Apple: when you buy their systems, you get an OS and a bunch of accessory applications. You then need to install the application software you actually want to use. And then you can get ready for being pestered constantly by applications that want to update themselves, security warnings, and all that other crap that comes with desktop OSes.
Google states that Chrome OS will run only web apps and is designed primarily for Netbooks. So this means that wireless access must be available for free or at little cost everywhere. Now consider that Google is coming with it's own phone soon. So since Google owns a lot of dark fiber, perhaps they will trade network access with the cell phone companies.
When Steve Ballmer dismisses Apple it is really like a kid who pulls the cover over his head and repeats over and over "there are no monsters under the bed, there are no monsters under the bed".
And he is right. Steve Jobs is in the closet.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Ah, but you can dump your Excel for something cloud-based that will likely look nearly exactly like Excel, function nearly the same way, and read Excel files. Add that to the boot and app launch times, and you have a serious competitor for the specific segment of hardware that Google is aiming for.
The problem with Excel is that people who are not familiar with how many corporations use Excel tend to understimate what people do with it. These days it's a platform as much as a spreadsheet application. I routinely need to use Excel sheets that do complex scripting and live data lookups and inputs to other sources. I've tried some of these in the so called compatible alternatives, and they fail so miserably it isn't even funny.
And no, such use is not limited to a handful of people in the finance department, a very significant number of normal business roles in the org use them as part of running the business.