Slashdot Mirror
Google Releases Chrome OS Tablet Concept Demo
MojoKid writes "With all of the iPad buzz stirring up the tech world over the past couple of weeks, Chrome OS has almost been forgotten. Though Google has yet to officially release the netbook-centric operating system to the public, the company continues to keep details flowing about their forthcoming lightweight operating system. In their own response to all the recent tablet fanfare, Google decided to release some teaser shots and a demo video of the Chrome OS running on a concept tablet device. The Chromium team suggests that a screen of 5" to 10" is optimal for enjoying Chrome OS and of course tablets, netbooks and MIDs all fit that size class rather well. Couple a streamlined Google-based OS with NVIDIA's Tegra 2 processor in a design like this and the iPad could have serious competition."
I haven't seen any actual buzz, as in people genuinely talking about it.
I have see, press releases, astro-turfing, slashvertisements, and spam.
In response to Apple's iPad announcement, Google proved that it could draw a tablet and post it on the web.
My point being that maybe there is something more interesting than tablets. We already know that we'll see a fresh batch of articles on tablets / iPad in about 60 days.
These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
How soon people forget ... "Embrace, extend, extinguish."
The article says 5"-10" screen size is ideal for Chrome OS, then they go and show a video with what looks like what, a 30" screen? The reality distortion field has spread, and it stretches rulers now too!
the iPad could have serious competition
Once Apple has figured out to whom this is being marketing.
The whole Apple-Yahoo-MS-Google circle jerk posturing is delirious. If next week Steve Jobs called a press conference and sliced his dick off with a silver scalpel in a room full of stunned reporters, I have no doubt that -- not to be outdone -- Sergey Brin would cut off his with a chainsaw on nation-wide TV seven days later.
And no one in the tech punditry -- all happy just to have jobs and something to write about besides the latest PC graphics card -- would question *WHY* these idiots are emasculating themselves, they'd just write tedious "thought" pieces contrasting the metaphors of Job's elegant, shiny castration versus Brin's use of loud horsepower.
Web apps just don't cut it Google. Apple found that out with the iPhone, Palm has learned that with the Pre. People want to have stuff that runs even when there is no internet even if it is just a game.
We also want to carry some media with us so if we are stuck on a plane with no WiFi or anyplace with no WiFi or 3G we can watch or listen to something.
Stop working on the Chrome OS and improve Android or just go right to a tablet Linux.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
How could something no one wants to buy have competition?
This has been especially helpful for the developers of apps that contain trojans, not to mention the drive-by-download virus writers.
So do you instead prefer fully-locked-down, all apps from our App Store PC's? Do you prefer a fully-locked-down environment and living in a police nation to save you from those who abuse the freedom?
It's funny that people always complain about DRM, locked-down consoles and proprietary standards and want more open and free, but when it's about Apple then it doesn't matter anymore. btw, you can blame Apple for HTML5 video never going to happen - they're pushing hard towards H.264, which is never going to be reality for Firefox because it can't be distributed in the source code.
What exactly are you smoking?
Why do you think it's so out of the question? Apple is already doing it on every other device they have, and it's good market for them.
Why do you care enough to respond to a post that you disagree with?
There are plenty of people you are going to disagree with and they aren't going away.
"linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
I haven't missed that point. My point is, maybe it's not good that Apple is all of hardware company, software company and a marketplace, having vested interest in locking down their devices, locking down their software, and strictly controlling all of it via their App Store (which generates them even more money)
MS develops the OS and lets other companies to develop the hardware, and then lets other developers to freely develop application and games for it. In my point of view, that is more open, free and better environment.
There is no way the iPhone app model will be used in OS X - just what evidence do you have that it will? Apple released a slew of new OSS features in Snow Leopard, with GCD and OpenCL being chief among them, and have encouraged developers to use them. Why do that if they are going to limit OS X?
The iPhone and iPad are designed around a different software model, to be more like appliances - it doesn't mean OS X will go this way, not even "likely" - I would put a [citation needed] response on that one, it is so absurd.
As to taking "many months" to get your app on the store... again, [citation needed].
How long does it take to get an app into the iTunes App Store? While we’ve seen some estimates of up to 20 days to have your app approved, we’ve had apps accepted in as few as five.
from my first google hit: http://mashable.com/2009/06/10/build-iphone-app/
If you do not like Apple's model, you are free to *not buy into it* and instead buy an Android device, or some other competing product. It's not like Apple are the only player here. There are many ways to skin a cat, and Apple's "one gatekeeper" approach works extremely well for them, and no one is forcing you to take part (unless you want an iPhone, but want to do something else with it, but then... why buy the iPhone in the first place - buy a Nexus One or something).
Let me just repeat - Apple's model for OS X is totally, completely separate from the iPhone. They are not going to put iPhone OS on Macs and control the software you use on it. All evidence so far suggests they are in fact, opening up OS X a little more than before, starting at an OSS level for some of their new core technologies rather than opening them up later (or keeping them closed source), they support the installation of pretty much anything you can port over, and they don't make it difficult - the dev tools are free, and they provide an X window system if you don't want to (or can't due to various reasons) rewrite the UI to be native. They have a thriving third party commercial software industry going, much like Windows does, and there is no reason to change that.
By your logic, the Xbox OS is pretty locked up, so that must mean that "the next version of windows" is "likely" to be all closed up as well, with MS having to approve all software you install on it, and only being able to buy apps for Windows via Xbox Live, right? Seems very likely.
Yes, MS is a software company... and yet, they don't lock down any of the software options within their operating systems.
Yet, when you run their operating systems (including mobile variants of windows), in any form, MS does not prevent you from using a competitor's software within that OS. Apple, however does restrict you.
If Apple is a "hardware" company, then why do they restrict competing applications.
Because they are not a hardware company, they are either a package company - wanting to sell you on the whole deal, hardware and software, or they are a PR company, more concerned with convincing you to buy something, than with the actual nature product. It depends on your view of the company as to which category fits them best...
Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
You've completely missed the point that Apple is a hardware company, whereas MS is a software company. Of course MS doesn't try to lock you out of "their devices" since the devices aren't MS's in the first place. You can "install anything you want" on OS X, and there are plenty of other phones that are locked down--heck, my Motorola phones were MORE locked down than any iPhone, since there was no way to install software except OTA.
How's the weather up there in Redmond, anyway?
If Apple is a hardware company what do they have to gain from banning Opera, Firefox, Chrome and political apps that Steve doesn't like from the iPhone and iPad? It's all about control and that nice 30% forcible cut of every non free app.
We're talking about the iPad too, which is being hailed as a tablet computer, not phone. The point is that MS could've locked developers out of MS-DOS and Windows by banning competing applications and those that 'duplicate functionality' or leeched off them by forcibly taking 30% of cost of AutoCAD etc.
It's funny you call him a paid shill while being ready to whore for free.
This space for rent.
What nerds don't get is that most people don't care about "user's freedom." They're happy to buy a controlled but stable device that lets them browse the web.
AppleTV failed because it wasn't open; it can only play content from the iTunes store, or painstakingly transcoded files. People would rather use devices that are convenient, which implies a certain amount of give and take with the user's needs (see XBox 360 and the PS3). People will want to listen to Pandora while using other applications, and if the iPhone/iPad OS4 still has a single-tasking mentality, it will be fundamentally broken, just like AppleTV is. Ditto with receiving instant messages while playing a game or browsing the web; OS3 can only do that on the 3G network. The iPhone was enough of a revolution for people to see past these faults (heck, I own one); but when the competition starts in earnest Apple will need to adjust.
People aren't as stupid as you seem to believe.
The wheel is turning, but the hamster is dead.
That's real cute, but what irks me, as an iPhone user, is that this fancy shmancy app submission process does nothing to ensure quality. Every goddamned week I see hundreds of those "daily babe" apps, all seemingly made by the same 3rd-world developer slapping new pics on his 99 cent app. You're trying to convince me someone actually reviews these submissions ? If I want suggestive imagery on my iphone, I can get them off the web like everyone else, no need for a freaking ad-riddled app.
The app store review process is all about Apple's selfish interests. It offers a false air of legitimacy to any apps hosted therein, and by that sole trait I consider it a fraud.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
I've been thinking about this tablet format, and I think it's got a few limitations.
For a start, you've got to hold it up or prop it against something while you use it. So, how's this for an idea... give it a hinged lid that can be used to protect the screen and as a stand when it's open. Better yet - if you've got the hinged bit at the front, why not put a physical keyboard in there to save screen space and for easier typing.
Wonder if anyone's come up with any products like that?
Sigs are so 1990s. No way would I be seen dead with one.
Wow... exaggerate much? App store to police state? .
That's not that big of an exaggeration. See here: http://www.juggleware.com/blog/2008/09/steve-jobs-writes-back/
FreedomTime was a app that displayed a countdown till the next president was elected. It was banned by Apple for being too political.
The developers email:
Dear Steve,
A quick note to let you know what kinds of apps are being rejected for the App Store.
This app is not defamatory, harmful or speaking untruth. It is lighthearted and humorous. Does it imply critique? Of course it does, but not without crossing any lines of decency or the boundaries agreement.
For a quick screen shot:
http://www.juggleware.com/iphone/freedomtime/
Sincerely,
Alec Vance
juggleware llc
His Steveness' reply:
Even though my personal political leanings are democratic, I think this app will be offensive to roughly half our customers. What’s the point?
Steve
That's only of many examples, which include political caricatures etc. etc.
So while you play with your shiny phone, freedom is being trampled.. and even the tech savvy Apple Slashdotters are not even aware of it..or maybe they're busy brushing them under the carpet while making and modding up posts that rationalize Apple. Just think of the mom and pop types that get an iPhone because everyone else has it, no one will care, while developer freedom is lost. This is Microsoft's wet dream.. and Apple is realizing it.
This space for rent.
Apple's [user experience] model for OS X is totally, completely separate from the iPhone
Agreed, 110%, however what a lot of people don't realize, at least those that aren't iPhone or Mac OS X developers, is that the iPhone OS and core Mac OS X share over 80% of their source code [Apple WWDC'09]. You also use the same tools and many of the frameworks to develop apps (in Objective-C, C and/or C++) for either platform. It is plausible to have the same code base and then change a build target to create a Mac OS X or iPhone version of a product.
Did anyone else notice in the demo video that the hands on the person were freakishly small? I think Google is trying to tell us something:
ChromeOS is not for manhands.
That's right folks. Forget your hopes and dreams of manhandling the ChromeOS, this OS isn't for you. It's designed and built for those with small hands. Midgets, small children, and perhaps rodents will be able to use it. But not manhands.
Draw your own conclusions. I think that googlers are looking for people who have small hands, like women. Then the googlers will have a source of information on available women with which they can actually take on a date. It's quite an ingenious plan.