Slashdot Mirror
Google's Chrome OS To Launch In Fall
Kidfork writes "On Wednesday Google's vice president of product management said that this fall Google will launch Chrome OS to compete with Microsoft Windows. More than 70 million users already use the Chrome Browser, and Google expects at least 1 million users of the OS by day one of release."
Gonna give this one a try on the ol Dell Mini 9. I wonder though...how will gamers respond?
Living With a Nerd
I prefer to keep my data where it belongs, on my machine and encrypted on backup servers.
We can only guess what information it will suck up and report back to Google.
For those who want to avoid the Slashgear page.
Shiny!
Wasn't it already said that it's illegal to integrate your browser into your operating system? If IE had to be removed from Windows then why can Google build their OS with Chrome as the basis for the operating system? This was a giant monopoly suit...
Can we say double standard?
It's going to compete with Linux.
In other news: 2011. Year of the Chrome Desktop (tm).
My other sig is clever.
ChromeOS is not general competition "with Microsoft Windows". Windows has always been about delivering services on your desktop using the native CPU power and full set of UI capabilities, ensuring availability, low latency, full features and (relative) privacy.
Google Apps deliver a quite limited subset of general office suite features available only under certain environments. They are completely inadequate where privacy is of concern.
ChromeOS is another option for Netbooks - i.e. it might be suitable as another alternative in the already harmfully and unnecessarily flooded market of Netbook operating systems. But no firm should entertain using ChromeOS to prepare content.
> Google will launch Chrome OS to compete with Microsoft Windows.
Sorry, where does it say that they are aiming to compete with Windows, because it doesn't mention windows in TFA. They've never claimed to try and do that - they're targetting a completely different market. Chome OS is just a browser than boot up with no host operating system. Windows IS an entire operating system.
Wasn't microsoft sued for integrating their browser into their operating system and LOST? This sounds like a double standard to me.......
I've played around with ChromeOS on a virtual machine and it sucks. It's an OS for accessing Google apps and the web. Nothing else. Great if that's all You need, but I need a bit more.
TCAP-Abort
From a security point of view Chrome OS is very interesting. I also like the efforts spent on keeping the user out of managing and nursing the OS and make it tend its own business, letting the user work on the computer instead of playing it-expert.
If its going to be even remotely as good as Android i think we can have a winner here.
HTTP/1.1 400
if they want my windows, they're going to have to pry it out of my warm, living, delicately moisturized hands
how many pairs of boxer shorts should you own?
What I want is the ability to save my browser session back to google somehow "in the cloud" or whatever so that I can close my browser on one computer, start up a generic copy of chrome somewhere else, login, and get my entire session restored. If that happened the whole system would just become much more useful, particularly if you are in a landscape littered with what are effectively thin terminals. Imagine that kind of functionality with a mobile device like the iPad or something (ignoring all of the limitations that exist today). Close out on my desktop, transfer to my portable device, go to meetings and w/e without missing a beat or having to take the time to open things on one device that I was already interacting with on another.
I've played around with Maseratis, and they suck. It's a vehicle for accessing the roads. Nothing else. Great if that's all You need, but I need a bit more, like hauling lumber and pulling other vehicles out of ditches.
Google's Chrome OS to Launch In Fail ?
Will it run my games?
Y/N
Will it run them reliably, effecivly and as table as Windows 7?
Y/N
will it have support, patching, ease of use and compatibility with 3d party aspects? (printers for example)
Y/N
if N to any... thanks, i'll stick to windows.
i use my desktop for Gaming, Browsing, and my job (web development) if it hamper me from doing any of the 3 effecivly, or less effecivly then windows 7.... i'll stick to windows. which i also have support with. most people will in fact. (ps: i use chrome as my main personal browser... love it)
First Google begins by tracking everything you search for. Then, with their browser, they want to track everywhere you go on the internet. Now, with their operating system, they want to track everything you do, period.
Proverbs 21:19
I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with that distro...
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
I for one will welcome our shiny new overlords.
"We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers." Carl Sagan
Comment removed based on user account deletion
There are some choice quotes in the article's source article over at Reuters.
Here's one of my favorites, from Sundar Pichai:
Wow, lots of revisionist history here. It turns out that Microsoft wasn't/isn't bundling web browsers with Windows since Windows 98. I mean, they must not have been, because they weren't one of the "few... operating systems for which there are already millions of applications that work" such as "Gmail" and "Facebook."
Seriously, did he think no one would notice that he was saying that Chrome OS is one of the few operating systems that can run web applications?
I don't need a B.S. in Lieology to detect the problem with that logic!
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
Shouldn't it be ;)
"Google's Chrome OS to Launch In Fail"
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Looks like I'll have to clear a partition for it. Hmm, my Windoze recovery partition should do. I use Linux (Ubuntu Lucid), with Windoze as a backup if something doesn't work in Wine or VirtualBox... which so far has been nothing.
So what is this OS targeted at? Just tablet PC's, netbooks, and embedded systems? Do they really intend to compete in the desktop market with Windows? The joke, "will it run Crysis?" really isnt a joke at all, because nobody will use it if it doesn't. Unless they have full binary compatibility with windows itself they will go nowhere. It really doesnt make any business sense to persue something like this, at least, Im not seeing it. Unless of course they are targeting it at very specific niche platforms, which is the only way I can see them being successful with this. I would love to see this on an HTPC or something. Sure, in true geek fashion I will most certainly try it out. But I cant see this being any more than a novelty.
so is Android, and Debian and other Linux and WinCE setups. Netbooks have enough local processing to do a lot of things. They're not powerful compared to modern desktops, but they're amazingly powerful boxes. A 400 MHz ARM7 is twice as fast as a Sun Ultra 1 and faster than a DEC Alpha 600 5/266, and yet we think "these are pitiful little computers we can only run a web browser on"?
I get the idea that Google likes products and ideas and doesn't have any leadership at all. That they figure that the ideas can slug it out, and let the best one win.
That works fine within an organization, but on a product level, it seems NUTS.
Certainly it is isn't for us (hardcore computer users) with tons of native applications.
I have a 3+GHz Quad core desktop, I dont' think I really need to worry about they extra latency the OS imposes on my browser.
Next I thought of my mostly computer illiterate brother who I set up a windows PC for. He is familiar with some applications for ripping/burning CDs, editing documents, drawing/photo editing, printing. So what now. He has to learn all new applications. You can stop right there. Is there even a web based ripping/burning app for CD's?
Can he even store stuff in a local file system, or is everything in the cloud? Speaking of cloud. What about bandwidth. He is on Dial up!
Seriously who is this for. I don't see any success with power users, and next to none with borderline users who have already learned some applications.
About the only users I see is setting it up for granny to check email...
Because Chrome OS is useless without Internet access.
I know some are putting Android on Tablets, but it doesn't look like it is supported by Google.
I was looking forward to more Tablet optimized Android from Google (certification, higher official resolutions, etc).
Now with Chrome, they may choose to promote Chrome for tablets instead and not bother with tablet optimizations.
android already runs androids apps.
Oops, I misread the headline...
I could have sworn the headline for this article read "Google's Chrome OS to Launch in Fail".
Being as I've lost my faith in Google, as of late, I think it is appropriate.
--Stak
Holy happy hippy crap!
I doubt a lot of people are going to move right over to this OS but it will be nice to have an alternative to windows for the everyday user I hope the experience is as good as they are promoting.
http://www.thetechnologygeek.org
Google's OS lineup isn't any less "cohesive" than that of any other vendor that has an OS targetting handheld devices and one targetting more traditional computers (netbooks/laptops/desktops.)
About the only difference is that Google has at different times suggested both Android and Chrome OS for tablets, and Google doesn't exert control of what people do with its OS's and, despite the fact that Google has never pushed Android for netbooks, some hardware vendors have chosen to ship it as a (usually, AFAIK, dual-boot with Windows) netbook OS.
And Google has publicly stated that they expect, in the long-term, Android and Chrome OS to merge.
We are the Google. Resistance is futile.
We will add your biological and technological data to Google.
Your culture will adapt, to service Google.
Your life, as it has been
Is over.
It certainly isn't the conventional approach in traditional firms, but -- especially where the products aren't direct alternatives but merely have some overlap -- it makes some sense.
I admire Google's pioneering spirit, and I also welcome any move towards relegating Microsoft to the trashcan of history, but I find it hard to believe that any OS intended for a PC environment that fundamentally requires an always-on internet connection could successfully compete for market share against those that also provide the option of running apps locally.
I don't think the world is wired enough yet for the Chrome/Software-as-a-service concept. I also don't think people will just silently accept making regular payments for a service that replaces what they used to be able to do for free locally. With Chrome the whole privacy issue is a serious one, and I can also imagine that just the associated network latency of running an app on a remote server instead of locally on a reasonably specced PC is always bound to make the experience feel clunkier.
If Chrome manages to fulfill Google's dream of entirely killing the notion that PCs can run apps locally, then it will be a triumph of marketing over substance.
'They aren't completely separate "OS systems". They are separate brands...'
Exactly. That's what makes it so odd. Proctor and Gamble are experts at managing competing brands, but you don't look at Tide (if you're Bob consumer, anyhow) and think "Proctor and Gamble". But I have heard Droid phone ads saying that Droid runs "Google". I think this will be an unpleasant experience for Google. We'll see.
Thanks for the comments on how they might/will converge -- it's interesting and encouraging.
But on a brand level, I think "Android Chrome" or "Chrome on Android" would be a much better idea than "Chrome" and "Android".
AFAIK, Google has stated that Chrome OS will support offline use of web apps that use the appropriate HTML5 features (and will feature Google's Native Client to allow "web" apps that run native-compiled code in a secure sandbox), and that it will only need internet access to use web sites that aren't made to support use as an offline app or to use those that can be offline apps in their online mode, and for the first login for a user (which needs to access the user's Google Account.)
I'd rather have a paper trail than a vapor trail for both my votes and financial transactions, thank you.
When all you have is HTML/CSS/JS/AJAX, everything looks like a webpage.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
And the Lord did grin, and people did feast upon the lambs, and sloths, and carp, and anchovies, and orangutans, and breakfast cereals, and fruit bats, and large --" ... and Google didst savest the peoples of the internets and track their every movement.
It seems that the OS will be based on ubuntu:
http://blogs.computerworld.com/15127/ubuntus_canonical_and_google_partner_to_create_chrome
Math is beautiful... e^(pi*i)+1=0
if this is ANYthing that is parallel to google design philosophy up to date, it will be a success due to its simplicity and ease of use.
Read radical news here
Anyone else read that headline as "Google's Chrome OS to Launch and Fail" ?
I liked using chromium for development, it was basically a pretty ordinary debian-flavor (with a bit of gentoo mixed in) Linux box set up in a nice way. It's very browser oriented but that is no surprise. After trying to wedge Android into a netbook I find that Chrome OS is much more appropriate, and I expect it to do fairly well in the netbook arena compared to Android. If it can hold its own in the web tablet arena as well I think that one day Chrome OS and Android could merge together into a single solution that works for smartphones, tablets and portables. I also think ChromeOS would do very well in a settop box, but I think settop boxes are probably dead as a growth industry.
Now that the praise is out of the way, ChromeOS has a long ways to go. It is still difficult to add new packages to a distribution, having the barriers of Debian's package system combined with the work required to get gentoo ebuilds to cross compile correctly. And the system just isn't appropriate out of the box for an embedded consumer device, because of how platofrms, software updates, configuration and security are handled. I'm not a fan of Android, but frankly Android is much further along in those areas. Android has most of what you need to make a device based on it. ChromeOS is almost a generic Linux box, fine for a desktop or laptop, but I don't really see desktops as a growth industry.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire