Google Netbook Specs Leaked

Foochee noted that specs have leaked for an alleged new Google NetBook. Coupling this with the HTC Google Phone, it really appears that Google is going to be pushing into new spaces in the next few years.

Comments

Re:Cool.

[maeka]

No kidding, TANSTAAFL.

Now if all of these are true, it's like getting a Ferrari for the price of a Mini Cooper.

Pick (at least) one:
A - All of these [rumors] aren't true.
B - You're going to be forced to watch ads.
C - It's going to be bundled with a monthly wireless bill.

Re:Odd

[jhoegl]

Porn

Very interesting.

[wvmarle]

This can be interesting, why:

• This would become a non-Intel platform, which means Windows doesn't run on it. I'd really like to see how well it sells when Windows is simply not an option. If it takes off, MS is going to be hit hard, if only because alternative OSes become a serious alternative all of a sudden. Instead of being a niche product.
• Price of under $300, but still subsidised: where is the money coming from? Normally e.g. a mobile phone is subsidised because you are going to pay money to the mobile phone provider (calls, data, etc). I have never paid Google anything, other than for ads that I asked them to place. But not for any of their regular services. So either ad-supported, or only sold together with mobile data plans or so? The first is easy to get around: just install another OS or so.
• Opening up the processor market: if this netbook takes off, we could start seeing really lots of non-Intel compatible computers around, first of all of course ARM based, and maybe a revival of the PPC in the consumer market. I think that would be the best effect of this. Not just because Windows doesn't run on it but because there is so much more than Intel. And I bet there will suddenly be more room for competitors to AMD and Intel: they do not need to license any microcode or so. And porting Linux/*BSD/Chrome to those architectures, if not done yet, will be relatively easy.

IMHO one of the core reasons all consumer PCs come with Intel compatible processors is that Windows runs on them. Equip them with other processors and you can not sell your product with Windows. And that is an absolute suicidal business plan at the moment. Google may get this going, get non-Windows and non-Intel computers to the masses, opening up a lot of space for competitors.

And if it doesn't work, well we can always continue dreaming.

Re:Google notebook specs...

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

We've given up on the goal of not being bothered by commercial solicitation every bloody minute of our lives?

Re:Is it going to be free?

[mister_playboy]

I played with Chrome OS and think it sucks as well. you can't do anything without an internet connection.

Google can't send you ads if you aren't online.

Re:smartbook is nice, but where are the ARM nettop

[nxtw]

If power usage is not limited by battery life, ARM hasn't been truly competitive with Intel (or AMD or IBM) for a long time. I don't think there any ARM CPUs that are even close to having as much performance as a dual-core Atom, let alone something based on the Core or Nehalem microarchitecture.

Re:This has failed before and will fail again.

[Eil]

#1) Google will SUBSIDIZE the cost of the netbook (aka NetPC, which was hacked out of existence).

If they're targeting the sub-$300 region as TFA says, they won't have to subsidize much, as similar netbooks (albeit with more expensive chipsets) already sell for less than that. And, uh, it's Google. A company run by hackers doing interesting things with cheap hardware. They're expecting a certain number of them to be hacked or repurposed. Also, they're not selling a separately-purchased subscription or anything with it. All they want is for people to keep using the web and this netbook helps them achieve that.

#2) Unlike NetPC, they won't be using an intel processor, locking out Windows.
--- so when joey or jane try to download and install their favorite game or chat client, it will fail.
--- so when grandma can't load in her quickbooks document for the church, it will fail.

This won't be marketed as a general-purpose computer. The things that you mentioned won't work on a Linux netbook either and that hasn't stopped netbooks from being shipped with Linux preinstalled. (Dell Mini 10, HP Mini 110, Acer Aspire One, MSI Wind, etc.) Most people just want a web browser, an email client, and instant messaging. That's the market that Google's netbook targets. Whoever buys this thing expecting to put their Windows XP Pirate Edition on it instead, deserves whatever complete lack of support they get.

#3) As someone who has lurked in many a netbook forum, I can tell you the number one question will be "How do I install Windows XP on it?"

An the #1 answer will be, "You don't. You just use it like it is." Not so hard, is it? Again, it's not meant to be a general-purpose computer. It's a specific device with a specific job: getting you on the web. Asking how to install Windows on it will make about as much sense as asking how to install OS X on a Nintendo Wii.

#4) Someone will figure out how to install alternative OSes on it, maybe even write some kind of intel CPU emulator, or real-time recompiler, and then hack Windows into running on it, and then the lawsuits begin.

Uhhh, what? The only "alternative" OS that a hacker can port to ARM is Linux or maybe one of the BSDs. Emulating an x86 CPU with any reasonable speed is simply not going to be feasible. And if it were, where would the lawsuits come from? Microsoft does not care what kind of computer you install Windows upon. And I highly doubt that Google will include an Apple-esqe EULA stating which kinds of software you can and cannot install.

Also, the Chromium OS is open source, is very well documented, and Google encourages external hacking and development.

#5) As soon as people get bored with it, into the trash heap it goes.

If you get bored with it, you either didn't need one in the first place, or you're just bored with the Internet in general. I don't think there's a lot that Google can do to prevent either of those.

When the masses get it they will be disappointed by it's lack of backwards compatibility, and start searching (ironically using Google) for websites to show them how to "jailbreak" the thing into running what they want.

The whole thrust of your thinly-veiled argument is that nobody will want it if it can't run Windows. What you fail to realize is that:

1. With the notable exception of hardcore PC gaming, there are really not many computing tasks that absolutely require windows any more. Despite Microsoft's best efforts, Internet content these days is very much OS-independent. We're to the point where most people can do e