Slashdot Mirror


First Chrome OS Notebooks Due This Month

adeelarshad82 writes "According to recent reports, a Google-branded Chrome OS notebook will be launched by Inventec later this month. Acer and HP will be launching theirs a month later, in December. This report is also backed by a source close to Google stating that the company is still on track to launch its Chrome OS by the end of the year, as well as its Chrome app store."

246 comments

  1. I for one welcome our new marketing overloads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ....sorry

    1. Re:I for one welcome our new marketing overloads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's Marketing OverDroids, you insensitive clod!

  2. Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google Images:Inventec Laptops

    I like what I see from them, about halfway down the page.

    1. Re:Hmm by zach_the_lizard · · Score: 1

      I find your ideas intriguing and would like to subscribe to your newsletter

      --
      SSC
    2. Re:Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google Images:Inventec Laptops

      I like what I see from them, about halfway down the page.

      Halfway down the page---at what resolution?

    3. Re:Hmm by AltairDusk · · Score: 1
  3. Now with 100% LESS privacy! by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 0, Troll

    It's like the George Foreman grill; except it cuts the internet anonymity.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    1. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      There is NO target market is for google's Chrome brand stuff, because they are totally self-serving.

      Products which futher google's privacy invasion, without adding any value.
      Whilst I can't stand anything apple, they have produced a unique sales proposition of "Place your dick and balls in this mysterious hole, and we'll make computing completely easy and fashionable for you".

      Microsoft - Mr and Mrs default
      Apple - Mr Hipster
      Opensource - Geeks

      Google won't snag any of those markets, especially geeks because they tend to put a value on privacy.

    2. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by bhcompy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Google won't snag any of those markets, especially geeks because they tend to put a value on privacy.

      You would think so, but then again, there are a huge number of people that think that pro-privacy things like NoScript are stupid on this website. Google-analytics isn't blocked by AdBlock or FlashBlock, but whatever. Those that set it in hosts are excluded from this sentiment, but I don't think that is too big of a percentage.

    3. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by biryokumaru · · Score: 1, Funny

      .. there are a huge number of people that think that pro-privacy things like NoScript are stupid ...

      It's true, though. If you have nothing to hide, privacy is a total non-issue.

      --
      When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
    4. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by icebraining · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The market is all those people who only use Gmail and Facebook anyway and whose tech savvy relatives are tired of fixing their malware ridden Windows installations.

    5. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by grantek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's true, though. If you have nothing to hide, privacy is a total non-issue.

      The problem is everyone has something to hide: passwords, bank details, religious views in certain contexts, genitalia, their company's trade secrets etc.

    6. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1, Troll

      Funny how any negative comments about Google get you trolled off the the page...

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    7. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The first two aren't an issue if you're actually smart, the latter three aren't an issue if you're even smarter and refuse to get into stupid discussions online.

    8. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by fractoid · · Score: 1

      *sigh* A goatse link after all this time... just like the old days, I'm all nostalgic.

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    9. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      I want to point out, before that post gets modded to oblivion, that the link really was on topic. Goatse man REALLY has nothing to hide.

    10. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bah! I'll be impressed when I see another ASCII greased Yoda doll...

      P.S. - Obammy sucks. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGYK8qyVaRU

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3IYXWf8u2c

    11. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But you can be damned sure that Barney Frank would love to hide some sausage inside Goatse Man!

    12. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by Kenja · · Score: 0, Troll

      Well, its more or less the definition of a troll post. No content. Just a derogatory remark. It doesn't mater if he's right or not, its how the post was written.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    13. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by dudpixel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      you might be surprised to learn that keeping these things private online is much the same as keeping them private offline.

      the problem is that people seem to be more free with their private details online than offline, maybe due to some flawed feeling of anonymity?

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    14. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by dudpixel · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I believe the people you refer to are those who "have a life". Sure, people who dont know how to use computers well may be more likely to get viruses etc, but is it really their fault - considering it was computer geeks who originally wrote the buggy software...and other computer geeks writing the malware...??

      If you think shutting ourselves up in a cave is the way forward for humankind in the modern tech era, then good for you.

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    15. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by mcrbids · · Score: 1

      And THIS is why we won't be using Chrome OS for any of our company's private data. No, we aren't in Google's RADAR (yet) but we are a rapidly growing company, growing close to 100% this year, and with all indications of accelerating growth in the future. At what point does this privacy suddenly matter?

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    16. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by Ravon+Rodriguez · · Score: 1

      It is what it is; geeks (for better or worse) may be responsible for creating the technology, but in an era dominated by computers even people who "have a life" need to have an basic awareness of computer security practices. The problem is that people are lazy, afraid of change, or just plain stubborn. Every new technology has a breaking in period, but computers have been in the home for over thirty years. It's time people get with the program.

      --
      Jesus loves me, he loves me a bunch, because he always puts Jiffy in my lunch.
    17. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, u must be a republican or a class A moron! Look, I do nothing wrong in my house at night, but I don't want people to be able to watch me while I sleep, eat dinner, take a shit, or bang my girlfriend. Not to mention a ton of other things everyone does all the time that fall totally within the rule of law. Crap on that "u have nothing to hide if u did nothing wrong" quote u or someone u listen to without question got from a talk show host. that's a simplistic idea that really only applies to junior high kids settling a dispute over a fight or some other trivial matter. people should not allow other people to monitor each other 24/7. Period. Privacy is central to comfort in many settings in life to many of us and is about respecting boundaries. Moreover, if I should be assumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, why in the world would I allow someone to constantly monitor my actions when that normally requires a warrant (which is normally only issued where one can provide evidence of actions violating the law) by the standards of current law? I have nothing illegal happening in my knickers right now but I should I tolerate someone placing a camera there to ensure I'm not smuggling drugs? Hell no! Gtf outta here u narrow minded, brainwashed fool.

    18. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by polle404 · · Score: 1

      but I like to flaunt my genitalia online?

      I have to agree, even though I see it the other way around.
      The problem is not that everyone has something to hide, the problem is that there are entirely too many asshats that think that they are entitled to access to your secrets.

      --

      ~men are from earth. women are from earth. deal with it.~
    19. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Well, its more or less the definition of a troll post. No content. Just a derogatory remark. It doesn't mater if he's right or not, its how the post was written.

      If he believes it, it's flamebait. If he doesn't believe it, it's a troll. Both are negative mods so the penalty for misapplication is pretty low. Go forth and moderate with an understanding of the language, grasshopper.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    20. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by icebraining · · Score: 1

      Yes, now go drive in reverse on the highway and when you hit someone tell them it's the car manufacturers' fault. A very advanced piece of technology like a computer requires some learning. If the person refuses to learn, I refuse to fix their computers for free.

      Getting malware has (usually) nothing to do with buggy software. The software is performing what it was designed to do: run the programs the user tells it to run. It's not the program's fault the user is ignorant. (Yes, I'm excluding drive-by malware where the user only opens a website to get it to install. From my experience, these are extremely rare).

    21. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      The first thing I do when I update AdBlock / NoScript etc is check that G-analytics and other default-whitlisted sites are still removed, as I did when I first read about them being whitelisted.

      Knowing is half the battle.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    22. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by BlackBloq · · Score: 1

      I'm tired of those people as well. I can't help but understand computers as I use them. I'm annoyed if I don't understand how to fix something I broke but more annoyed at other people who refuse to care to look into their reality and see how the shit they use works. That's why I got them to use Macs... Harder to accidentally click fuck your computer to death; it's like there is a dummy condom on Mac's. I believe the people you refer to are those who "have no brains". I have a life, it's got nothing to do with that. If I lived in China for 10 years or more, I sure as shit would pick up speaking Chinese ! Those assholes who don't learn the native language and walk around like fucktwits are the ones with no life.

    23. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      I think there should just be a blanket ban on slashdot of bit.ly and similar URL-shorteners. (To keep on topic, this should apply to goo.gl addresses too). What is the fucking point of them on an online forum?

      Their only use is print publications.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    24. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      I'm annoyed if I don't understand how to fix something I broke but more annoyed at other people who refuse to care to look into their reality and see how the shit they use works.

      Yes, I say that no-one should be allowed to drive unless they can strip a car down to its component parts and re-assemble it to better-than-factoy specification.

      Also, only carpenters should be allowed to use wooden desks and tables, and if you're not both an architect and construction worker, you shouldn't be allowed to live in a house.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    25. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Well, its more or less the definition of a troll post. No content. Just a derogatory remark. It doesn't mater if he's right or not, its how the post was written.

      If he believes it, it's flamebait. If he doesn't believe it, it's a troll. Both are negative mods so the penalty for misapplication is pretty low. Go forth and moderate with an understanding of the language, grasshopper.

      So what you're saying is that in any Google-based topic, any criticism of Google is automatically either flamebait or a troll even if it's correct?. Funny how that doesn't work if it's a Microsoft-based topic, isn't it?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    26. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by BlackBloq · · Score: 1

      Your analogy's are like rebuilding the kernel or hex editing. I'm talking about when you are stuck because your car broke down or tire blew. And you don't even know how to use a jack or what a spark plug is. You apparently can't even grasp a simple analogy so, there is no wonder you defend the stupid. My native language understanding analogy was about functional use not about writing poetry or arguing philosophy! You can't drive unless you understand what a tire is at the least! These moronic computer illiterate are lazy; Like a driver who doesn't want to know what a tire is or how to fill it, never mind road signs. If it wasn't for licensing there would be morons out there like that! So STFU with your useless inaccurate, cross analogies because they only highlight your stupidity.

    27. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      I do agree with you, however, reality being what it is, its just unlikely to happen.

      expecting it to happen is therefore foolish.

      that's my opinion anyway. we must work with what we have...

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    28. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      hey look, I'm a software engineer and yes I fix my family and friends computers for free (because i'm nice and I care about them). but I understand both sides of the issue.

      My point was that we can moan about clueless users when the other side to the story is that it is the IT "professionals" that are responsible for the problem in one way or another, either by flawed software or by writing viruses.

      A certain level of education would help, but we cannot expect the public to gain an interest in computers like we have.

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    29. Re:Now with 100% LESS privacy! by DaVince21 · · Score: 1

      So someone who isn't any of these doesn't use any OS whatsoever?

      --
      I am not devoid of humor.
  4. Inventec by itsenrique · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, this Taiwan-based company gets their product to market first, before acer and hp. I wonder why?

    1. Re:Inventec by Locutus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      some companies are afraid of Microsoft or have been enticed to steer away from non-Microsoft software. Remember, the year the G1 was released there was that big annual mobile phone conference in Feb or March and nobody would or could say anything about Android. All they would talk about was Windows Mobile 6.5 which was due the next year. Independent press people and bloggers got some to spill the beans about releasing an Android product that year but they could not talk about it at the show.

      So companies with any kind of relationship with Microsoft basically have the MS MiB's camped outside their corporate headquarters making sure nobody 'forgets' about Windows.

      I'm thankful that some companies have the gutts to build and sell products regardless of what Microsoft wants or does not want.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    2. Re:Inventec by shoehornjob · · Score: 1

      And how much money did you say they paid Google for first rights??? Oh yeah that's why they got first crack at it. I haven't seen it but were I in the market I'd wait for Asus to put out their product before I even thought of forking over my hard earned moola.

      --
      "We are just a war away from Amerikastan. When god vs god the undoing of man." Dave Mustaine
    3. Re:Inventec by xiaomai · · Score: 1

      Not sure what the country has to do with it, but Acer is also Taiwanese.

    4. Re:Inventec by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      Acer is a Taiwan-based company (always has been, welcome to the late 80's pc clone wars)

      http://www.archive.org/details/CC434_asian_clones

      Multitech (now Acer) ...

    5. Re:Inventec by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, this Taiwan-based company gets their product to market first, before acer and hp. I wonder why?

      Acer is a Taiwanese company. My HP laptop is made by Compal Electronics, another Taiwanese company. BTW, Compal sources laptops for HP, Toshiba, Dell, Acer, Fujitsu, and more.

    6. Re:Inventec by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      So, this Taiwan-based company gets their product to market first, before acer and hp. I wonder why?

      Like the rumored Google-branded product (made by the Taiwan-based Inventec), the rumored Acer and HP products that are supposed to follow it are also made by a Taiwan-based company (Quanta).

    7. Re:Inventec by anUnhandledException · · Score: 1

      They likely paid nothing.

      The bigger players are intimidated by Microsoft & Intel. Developing a non-Microsoft, non-Intel product isn't going to go over well.

      Inventec obviously doesn't care whose feathers it ruffles.

    8. Re:Inventec by Americano · · Score: 1

      Probably had nothing better to do, so they figured they'd launch a product almost guaranteed to be a stinking money sink?

      That's my guess.

    9. Re:Inventec by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      I thought Quanta made pandas.

      The more you know...

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
  5. I don't think this will compete directly with iPad by rsborg · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is going to go straight for Microsoft's jugular.

    Apple has pretty well innoculated themselves with a strong tablet (touch) and ultralight notebook (full OS) offerings.

    If this comes with net access it will pretty much eat up the remaining netbook fervor.

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  6. Do Not Want by Daetrin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I've got a Nexus One and i'm quite happy with it, but i have no interest in a Chrome OS device in any format, notebook, netbook, tablet or anything else. The cloud can be convenient i'm sure, but i'm not enamored of an entire OS designed around the idea. I do not want to be dependent on internet access to run my apps and access my data.

    --
    This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    1. Re:Do Not Want by MrHanky · · Score: 0

      Who cares?

    2. Re:Do Not Want by Locutus · · Score: 1

      like your Android running Nexus One, ChromeOS does not mean ALL apps and ALL data are on remote computers somewhere. Some Android apps are only useful with network connections to the data( google maps, email ) but others are more like "utilities" which have enough local data to run without a network. And those apps are run from your Android just like many ChromeOS apps will be. For example, there is a ChromeOS AppStore and when you load those they run on your device and are not just web pages to a remote system. Some are but this is not a requirement as I understand it.

      I sure would like to see more Android apps allow for local caching of data so they would still work when 3G or WiFi were down in certain areas.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    3. Re:Do Not Want by shougyin · · Score: 1

      I'm sure this would be a very beneficial OS for those that constantly feel the need to be online (some business types, stocks, and people that can't get off of facebook) but for the majority of the world, including myself, I simply don't see the need. I'm still very cautious as to systems built around the internet anyways (back when IE was first built into the OS and had many problems) but I’m sure things have changed greatly and maybe Google will get this right. I'd be interested to play around with it and see what it can really do, but I see no need to purchase one.

    4. Re:Do Not Want by geekoid · · Score: 1

      With how well Valves uses the cloud, and how convienant google is, I am looking forward to this device.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:Do Not Want by shougyin · · Score: 1

      I will say that Valve has implemented their use of the cloud very well (I for one use it) but in the beginning when it first came out, many users were very agitated that they HAD to be on the net regularly to use it. I still don't enjoy that fact either. Some of my business trips last for over 6 months, and I'm not always able to have internet. So Steam fails me at that point, when my offline time has run out and I have to connect in order to use it again. I wonder if the Chrome OS will be the same way?

    6. Re:Do Not Want by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      "So Steam fails me at that point, when my offline time has run out and I have to connect in order to use it again."

      Doesn't Steam have an offline mode? Does it need to "phone home" every once in a while, or something?

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    7. Re:Do Not Want by zach_the_lizard · · Score: 1

      It has on offline mode, but you have to log in at least once to be able to use it. I seem to recall one issue with it a few years ago when some sort of storm knocked some of their authentication servers, causing you to be unable to log in for a few days. I bought a game around that time. Because of the issues, I couldn't play it for few days after I bought it.

      --
      SSC
    8. Re:Do Not Want by shougyin · · Score: 1

      Yes, once you purchase or install anything through Steam, obviously downloading it, it has to authenticate it through their servers. After this is done, you are able to play it in an offline mode for a time...which I believe is around a month, but after that it has to connect again to play.

      I've had 2 games that came in disks for Steam, while on business, but they wouldn't even install till I was online and connected.

      If you can stay connected, the cloud in this aspect isn't such a bad thing, but as soon as there are server issues or connection issues for a long time, you might as well play tic-tac-toe in paint!

    9. Re:Do Not Want by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      exactly. people WILL use it and they may find it improves their lives by helping them connect with others online and without needing to worry about mundain IT things like backups, configuration etc.

      The world isn't full of IT people...and we should stop thinking these devices are being made for "us".

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    10. Re:Do Not Want by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1
      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    11. Re:Do Not Want by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      I guess you have no faith in the big push of html5 offline mode then?

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    12. Re:Do Not Want by shougyin · · Score: 1

      I don't believe in faith that much, but I look at facts and results. For me, when it comes to technology, faith is a waste of time. I'd much rather see what things can do, before believing in promises given. That's why I said I'd like to see personally what it can do, before I truly decide to knock it down.

    13. Re:Do Not Want by xtracto · · Score: 1

      Agreed.

      All the "benefits" of "the cloud" can be achieved using DropBox. With the addition of having your apps in your computer.

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    14. Re:Do Not Want by Americano · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, this concept will only really appeal to geeks, even if it's not being marketed and made "for us."

    15. Re:Do Not Want by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How does some guy saying he doesn't want something get modded "Insightful"?

    16. Re:Do Not Want by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for letting us know.

    17. Re:Do Not Want by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      do you really think so?

      How many people use GMail? GMail (and all other google services) represent cloud computing and how attractive it can be.

      The ability to access ALL your email no matter where you are is pretty empowering. No need to do backups (although its still a good idea). Accessible with the same interface and settings no matter which PC you log in on, and no matter where you go.

      I think non-geeks will be very interested in this.

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    18. Re:Do Not Want by Americano · · Score: 1

      And why does anybody need a new device with a new operating system to access gmail in a browser again?

      This is a solution looking for a problem, and those kinds of devices almost always appeal only to geeks.

    19. Re:Do Not Want by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I sure cared a whole lot less about your comment, and I'm sure the next person will care even less about mine. Why comment at all if this is all you're going to say?

    20. Re:Do Not Want by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      people wont see it that way, because it wont be marketed that way.

      What they'll be "receiving" is a computer where all of their important stuff, and all of their applications are all backed up.

      If you own an android phone you can already have your entire settings/apps/whatever backed up to google's servers. If you need to reset the phone for any reason you can restore it back to the way it was very easily.

      This is what Chrome OS will likely bring, not just a duplication of what we already have in the browser.

      just because you wouldn't use it, doesn't mean its useless. Hell, I have no use for an iPad, but that hasn't stopped its success...

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
  7. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by sznupi · · Score: 0

    Might be not a bad thing, considering MS sort of derailed the original netbook idea in the first place.

    Especially if installing a bit fuller environment, for those who want it, won't require fighting.

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  8. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by sideslash · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't think they're going to compete with Microsoft. But what they are doing is trying to invent a new class of computing device, which I think is going to fail. Maybe in another ten years having a constant internet connection will be a given, but right now... I'm just imagining people trying to type a document while riding on the subway: "Whoops, lost my internet. Oh, it's back again... let me re-open my session..."

  9. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm not sure Chrome OS will be a big success, but I think Google would have taken such connectivity issues into consideration.

    I'm not sure why they have both Android and Chrome OS -- they seem to intersect and overlap awkwardly.

  10. Cost is Key by zuperduperman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm really hoping that this thing is super cheap. That's the only way I can really justify something that has so little capability. Some of my primary use cases - handling photos, video, etc. are just not well suited for non-native applications right now. So this would really truly be a limited device. However if the price was right - and I'm talking max $150, preferably $99 - I could really go for it. As in, I'd have them all over the house, just for convenience. But if this thing costs $300 or more then it's in iPad territory and there's just zero reason to buy it over an iPad.

    1. Re:Cost is Key by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if this thing costs $300 or more then it's in iPad territory and there's just zero reason to buy it over an iPad.

      A $300 device would be literally half the price of a mid-range iPad. I think one or two people might think that was a reason. The rest of us will be looking at things like, you know, actually having a keyboard, and not making its users look like pretentious douchebags.

    2. Re:Cost is Key by cbhacking · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Many of us, including those of us who post to Slashdot, find a hardware keyboard to be useful when browsing the web. I really dislike trying to use an iPad for anyything much beyond a vastly overpriced digital picture viewer.

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
    3. Re:Cost is Key by zuperduperman · · Score: 1

      Absolutely, I'm in the same camp. But I'd bet that for the vast majority of people who want keyboards it's hard to beat a netbook unless this thing is competitive in some other major way (maybe battery life?).

    4. Re:Cost is Key by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      I was ultra-skeptical of the iPad until I used one. Even then, the only thing I like it for is passive reading--news and books, but I'm a lit major so I read a lot. The problem I have with it is that iBooks was (from what I could find in the ten minutes I had with it) severely limited. Enough to gaurantee I wouldn't use it.

    5. Re:Cost is Key by cbhacking · · Score: 1

      As I understand it, Chrome OS is intended to be used on netbooks. Thus, for purposes of web browsing, it seems much more useful to me than an iPad.

      The question in my mind is not how Chrome OS will compete with iPads, but how it will compete with traditional netbooks. Longer battery life? Lower hardware requirements? Cheaper licensing costs? Better UI for the form factor? Both Windows and (traditional) Linux have downsides on netbooks, but they're fantastically popular all the same.

      Ok, the other question is why pointing out that an iPad is not very useful to somebody who wants to do more than simply consume content due to its lack of a keyboard is considered flamebait, but whatever.

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
    6. Re:Cost is Key by zuperduperman · · Score: 1

      Mostly agree with everything you say. The comparison with iPad really just comes from consumer mindshare ... they're in the market for a "small computer" and the lure of the iPad is strong regardless of what other pros and cons there are. That's what they are thinking about and will inevitably compare to.

      One thing you didn't mention which perhaps could be key is "instant on". Despite the best efforts of Win7 my laptop still takes many seconds to light up after a resume - that's far too much if you're using it as a totally casual device ("let me google that ... ") etc.

      We'll see. I just hope Google realises that they *have* to differentiate it. They seem to have missed the mark with Google TV in my opinion, so it's not clear that they really have a good bearing on what the market will bear.

      (And I have no idea why people modded you flamebait).

    7. Re:Cost is Key by cbhacking · · Score: 1

      Interesting that your laptop is taking so long to wake up from sleep. Is it a clean install, an OEM image, or an upgrade? For me, Win7 resumes from sleep before my monitor is fully open (on my laptop) and about one second after I move the mouse (on my desktop).

      It might just be a BIOS problem, I suppose... but as I understand it, instant resume from sleep was one of the major goals for Win7, and for me it works quite well.

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
    8. Re:Cost is Key by zuperduperman · · Score: 1

      Hmm, maybe I should look into why Win7 is so slow to resume for me. It takes 10 - 15 seconds usually. The irony is that it only takes about that long to boot from scratch to get to the login screen. I have an Intel SSD which I had hoped would make this really fast but it sits there forever with a blank (completely black) screen before doing anything.

  11. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by zuperduperman · · Score: 1

    "Whoops, lost my internet. Oh, it's back again... let me re-open my session..."

    Don't forget, Google has been investing heavily in HTML5 with features like offline storage and other capabilities for apps to run offline. I doubt this tablet is going to be unusable the minute the cloud goes away.

  12. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by cacba · · Score: 1

    If this comes with net access it will pretty much eat up the remaining netbook fervor.

    Do you know what Chrome OS is? Its a browser for an operating system, without net access it may as well be a brick.

    How did this get promoted?

  13. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by cacba · · Score: 5, Informative

    Gears or HTML5 allow for offline use of apps that will sync with the cloud once reconnected. Gears has been used in google docs for years.

    To me the advantage of Chrome OS is an easy, cheap, secure computer. It would be great for my parents who seem to get a incredible amount of viruses just from browsing the web. Granted it wont replace their current PC.

  14. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I'm not sure Chrome OS will be a big success, but I think Google would have taken such connectivity issues into consideration.

    I'm not sure why they have both Android and Chrome OS -- they seem to intersect and overlap awkwardly.

    I'm sure they did take broken network connections into account, Chrome OS would be pretty useless without some sort of local persistence-layer/cache that is synced with their cloud services whenever there is a connection. I still agree with you that Chrome OS won't be a big success. It will appeal to a certain segment of the market but if I had to place bets I'd put a lot more money on Android as a Netbook/Tablet OS than I would on Chrome OS.

    --
    Only to idiots, are orders laws.
    -- Henning von Tresckow
  15. I find this awesome... by victorhooi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Hi,

    As somebody who just lost a bunch of data due to faulty backup disks, I for one welcome this.

    I've yet to lose data stored on Google's cloud *touch wood*...lol.

    Having data in the cloud, as well as cached/accessible locally seems like the best option. And to those talking about going underground on a train, I'm fairly sure Google's accounted for that - either through Gears, HTML5 Local Storage, or another local caching mechanism. I have a Google Nexus One, when I'm underground, I can still access all my email (that's been synced), my contacts, my calendar etc.

    And having all my contacts synced online, along with all my Google Talk logs, is *awesome*. I'm a bit anal-retentive when it comes to storing things, so knowing that it's all stored, and available, and won't get lost due to filesystem corruption or something equally idiotic is good news to me. And look, worst come to worst, I lose my phone (hopefully not...lol) I'll get another, login to my Google Account, and voila, everything is synced again.

    And people seem to over-value their privacy, at least to corporations. Seriously, most of you are pathetically mundane. I for one am not so insecure that I can't admit I am too. I mean, jeez, trawling through my personal emails you get...err...a bunch of emails between me and mates talking about work, me arranging lunch with my parents, and me buying stuff on eBay. Big whoop de doo. I'm happy to admit I'm a fairly boring individual, and I'm sure statistically I just fade into the background. If I was the Pope, or Jason Bourne, or I was trying to overthrow the Australian government, I suppose I might think differently. But as it is, I'm just another random guy. I doubt anybody at Google really cares, except to display targeted advertising.

    The government spying on me, yeah, I have issues on that. Serious issues. A teacher at uni. Absolutely. A colleague, sure. People I know IRL, yeah. Heck, if this was Sony even, I'd have issues, seeing as they're a bunch of immoral corporates, who have no qualms about installing malware on consumer's PCs (I bought into MiniDisc ok...lol, I have a right to be bitter). But some analytical algorithm, trying to figure out which ads I'll click on? Pftt, who cares.

    Google has tried to hide what they do - they display targeted ads. It's not like they've every tried to cover that fact up, nor have they been really been caught out on a privacy breach. (I'm going to discount the technical incompetent idiots who don't understand what unencrypted wireless communication is, or who can't be bothered to read what they're clicking on before they click it, a la Buzz).

    They also freely list all the data they store on you:

    https://www.google.com/dashboard

    And they also don't try to lock you in to their system - they provide open exports from most of their systems.

    http://www.dataliberation.org/

    I find that really awesome, and a refreshing change from every other corporation that tries to lock you in, hand over foot. It also speaks volumes about their confience - they're confident enough in the technical superiority of their solutison, that they dont' ened to resort to lock-in to try to desperately cling onto their customers.

    Cheers,
    Victor

    1. Re:I find this awesome... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Victor, how long have you been working in Google's PR department?

    2. Re:I find this awesome... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was trying to overthrow the Australian government, I suppose I might think differently.

    3. Re:I find this awesome... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody is boring to a marketing/advertising company. If they could inject you with drugs to make you buy shit then they would do it.

    4. Re:I find this awesome... by wrook · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Even if Google is completely beneficial today, even if you are completely mundane today, what makes you think it will stay that way forever? Once the data is in the cloud, there's no taking it back. Are you sure there is nothing in your email that could harm you? Have you ever sent your cellphone number to someone? What if Google decides that revenues aren't high enough and it's time to sell telephone numbers to direct marketers? Have you ever had an argument with someone in your email and said something that you wish you hadn't? What if someone gets hold of those emails and tries to paint a picture of you as someone you aren't? Maybe you get divorced in the future and Google decides its alright to let lawyers see your email for some reason.

      You say that you wouldn't trust Sony, but Google openly says what they want to do with your data. You do realize that a company is not a person right? A company is inherently not trustworthy because it doesn't have a character. A company is made up of many, many people, some trustworthy and some not. Today the head of Google may be trustworthy. What makes you think that in 10 years the same guys will be running the show? Or maybe they will get so big that some moron in a small part of the company will be able to get away with shit that the guys at the top don't realize. Or maybe they will decide that they want to change the focus of the company and sell off parts (including your data) to another company that isn't so trustworthy.

      Don't get me wrong. I use "cloud services". I even have a gmail account. But I don't put my head in the sand and say, "I'm safe because it is Google". In fact, there are several emails I now wish had not gone through gmail... Forever is a long, long time and pretending that the status quo will last as long as the data is very naive.

    5. Re:I find this awesome... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Time to stalk this person: http://www.google.com/search?q=victorhooi

    6. Re:I find this awesome... by mercuryguy · · Score: 1

      looks like a post from a google lawyer, lol

    7. Re:I find this awesome... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's odd. I seem to lose data in gmail on a daily basis. It's most obvious if you compare a chat window to the log. Something like 1 in 50 messages sent aren't recorded. It works the other way too - roughly the same poriton of messages show up in the log but not the client.

    8. Re:I find this awesome... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Maybe you get divorced in the future and Google decides its alright to let lawyers see your email for some reason.

      That reason would be a subpoena. Subpoenas for email in divorce cases have been going on for at least a decade now. It ain't a theoretical risk at all.

      Forever is a long, long time and pretending that the status quo will last as long as the data is very naive.

      Your privacy is like Pandora's Box - once you let your personal information out, you'll never be able to stuff it back in again if you ever change your mind.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    9. Re:I find this awesome... by preflex · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Google has tried to hide what they do - they display targeted ads. It's not like they've every tried to cover that fact up,

      Uhh what?

      nor have they been really been caught out on a privacy breach. (I'm going to discount the technical incompetent idiots [...] who can't be bothered to read what they're clicking on before they click it, a la Buzz).

      Wasn't the whole buzz settlement about having automatically opted people into buzz who hadn't clicked on anything of the sort, and then sharing all of their google contacts with all of their other google contacts?

      They also freely list all the data they store on you: https//www.google.com/dashboard

      On the google dashboard, there is a link for "About privacy and security in Google Voice."
      Page not available.
      Does this mean privacy and security in Google Voice is not available either?

    10. Re:I find this awesome... by xtracto · · Score: 1

      As somebody who just lost a bunch of data due to faulty backup disks, I for one welcome this.

      So, the solution of losing backup of data created with some applications is to change the applications you use and in addition trust all your data to a third party?

      In that case I would go for something similar to DropBox and use it as an "offline" backup.

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    11. Re:I find this awesome... by jimicus · · Score: 1

      "Data in the cloud" is a fancy way of saying "Data on somebody else's storage infrastructure, not mine".

      You expect that the company storing the data has a rather fancier storage infrastructure than you can possibly afford, but you can't be certain. You may have visions of the latest, greatest SAN technology complete with multi-site replication and failover capabilities - but for all you know your supplier has a vision of a single Dell server with an external storage array of 16 1TB SATA drives. And for goodness' sake, can someone get down there and re-route that cable? It's the third time this week someone's tripped over it and it's come unplugged. We're just lucky that we haven't got enough customers that anybody really noticed.

      This is before you even consider the possibility of human error. We've seen plenty of evidence over the last couple of years of companies who think RAID = backup.

    12. Re:I find this awesome... by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      The government spying on me, yeah, I have issues on that. Serious issues. A teacher at uni. Absolutely. A colleague, sure. People I know IRL, yeah. Heck, if this was Sony even, I'd have issues, seeing as they're a bunch of immoral corporates, who have no qualms about installing malware on consumer's PCs (I bought into MiniDisc ok...lol, I have a right to be bitter). But some analytical algorithm, trying to figure out which ads I'll click on? Pftt, who cares.

      So Google's a nice warm fuzzy corporation, whereas Sony is an immoral corporation.

      First clue: they're both corporations. Second clue: at least Sony just want to sell you product, not market your whole life.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    13. Re:I find this awesome... by mywhitewolf · · Score: 1

      i don't particularly like advertisers going through my personal information / emails, if i click on a link in a Google search? sure, feel free to try and work out what things I'd buy, but the moment i have to type in a password to access something personal of mine, or something you wouldn't be able to access without entering a password, I'd consider that personal and there is an expectation of privacy.

    14. Re:I find this awesome... by victorhooi · · Score: 1

      Hi,

      You seem to have completely missed my point...*sigh*.

      Please, feel free to "stalk" me, as you say. My point is this - I'm a boring, mundane person, just another data-point. There's another 6 billion souls where I came from. I'm not Larry Ellison, I'm not Eric Schmidt, I'm not David Cameron.

      At the end of the day, if your life is even more pathetically sad than that, that you've got nothing better than to type some random strangers name into Google...well...you have my pity.

      Seriously, go out, get a life, get some sunshine, play some sports. My gosh, you guys aren't doing wonders for geek credibility...haha.

      Cheers,
      Victor

    15. Re:I find this awesome... by victorhooi · · Score: 1

      heya,

      Read my post again.

      It's not just the fact that their storage infrastructure is more advanced that mine. It's the other services the offer, like sync and web-access. For instance, as I mentioned, via Google Contacts, my contacts are backed up online - and hence accessible from any internet-enabled box. Also, if I lose my phone, I can instantly resync, and know everything will be update.

      Likewise for chat logs, it's stored online, so I can search or browse it via an online interface, on any internet-enabled computer. This wouldn't be available before, unless I wanted to store my logs locally in a DB, then hack up a webapp to make that available via the web.

      I actually do use Dropbox, and I quite like it. However for collaboration, I've actually found the Google Docs interface (the new version - the old one was pretty terrible) better for dealing with simultaneous edits. Dropbox tends to dump a whole bunch of conflicted copies in the folder - you don't lose anything, but you have to manually merge which is just...annoying. And that's only for text files, for binary files like Word documents, it just doesn't work. The tradeoff here is of course the more limited online interface of Google Docs, but that's getting better and for most common features (at least for me) it's nearly at parity.

      Cheers,
      Victor

    16. Re:I find this awesome... by victorhooi · · Score: 1

      heya,

      Err, I don't know about Google being warm and fuzzy, but thus far, I seem to like what they do. That, and quite a few of my mates from uni went across to work for them (I sold out and went to "evil" banks...lol). From what I hear, nice place to work. Maybe that'll change in the future *shrugs*, but at the end of the day, Google's doesn't do dodgy anti-competitive stuff, they don't sue their customers, and they provide a lock of value back to the open-source community. A *lot*.

      Sony...gosh, don't get me started.

      Sony is a soul-less evil megacorporation in every sense of the world. They sue their customers. They install malware on their systems. They force you to use their own stupidly coded, buggy software, and try to lock you in. The DRM on MiniDisc was a pain in the a*se - the irony is, from a technical perspective, Sony makes awesome technology. Then they weigh it down with so much DRM, vendor control and lock-in, and badly coded junk software made by some second-rate coder, that it turns into a steaming pile of c*ap.

      One word - OpenMG...*shudders*.

      Then we look at their other products, like MemoryStick. Gee, I wonder why that died? Because Sony decided to be greedy corporate buggers, and try to squeeze out more money by overcharing, and also prevent licensees. Open-standards? Nah, not the Sony way.

      Or say BetaCam?

      Then look at the dodgy run-around they gave PS3 owners with the whole Linux on PS3 thing.

      Sorry, Sony lost my respect a long time ago. And believe me, I was a big fan before (I bought a MiniDisk deck, and portable MD players ok...lol. Multiple TVs, VCRs, all our DVD players etc.)

      Cheers,
      Victor

  16. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have pretty much constant internet access, even in the subway. It fails so rarely I sometimes forget to check my connection before blaming the OS (often MS, but I do already have chrome on a SSD for web sessions.

  17. HTML5 local storage neé Google Gears by rsborg · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...will keep your google document alive offline today.

    If battery life approaches or exceeds iPad and current netbook class while providing instant-on and a keyboard, it will sell.

    I don't WANT windows and all it's security issues and bulk for lightweight browsing, and I'd like a keyboard sometimes (which the iPad doesn't have).

    At the right price, this will make a value proposition that takes the base of netbooks

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    1. Re:HTML5 local storage neé Google Gears by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Lets say $200 for a basic notebook, 8hr battery, onboard flash memory (8-16gb), 2GB memory, wifi A/G. Give it space for a 2.5" HDD, mini PCIe, 2 USB.

      Make a million units, laugh like maniacs.

      This will be all about getting Google Everything into peoples hands. I love my wifes Dell Mini, but all it ever does is run Google Chrome and it runs like crap because she usually has dozens of tabs open.

      Slap Chrome OS on, and she loves it. Fast on, Chrome works fine, fairly snappy. Sure some things don't work, but it does enough. For everything else there is my watercooled beast of a desktop.

  18. GREY! by transfatfree · · Score: 1

    A Large Grey Area has just appeared in the land between Notebooks and Netbooks. Neither side have commented yet, and both seem hesitant to lay claim to this grey area.

    A company, Google, has claimed responsibility for creating this large grey area. In a press conference earlier today, the company made some comments about "not being evil" and "don't worry".

    The first migrants to this area are already en route, and are slated to arrive before the year is out.

    1. Re:GREY! by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      "Slated" to arrive? Punny.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    2. Re:GREY! by Americano · · Score: 1

      And when they arrive, they'll find a clean, neat, nicely designed city populated with apple users, who will all say, "jeez, what took you guys so long to get here?"

  19. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by dgatwood · · Score: 1

    I don't think this will compete with much of anything; there's no real market for Chrome OS, and I doubt there ever will be. As I understand it, the target audience is people who:

    • Type too much to use a tablet.
    • Only use web apps.

    For the most part, anybody who types enough to need a laptop with a built-in keyboard is also somebody who uses apps like Office and isn't going to be satisfied with a web substitute. Anybody who doesn't type enough to need a built-in keyboard would probably find a tablet (either iPad or Android-based) easier to use (not to mention more capable due to native app availability), and since you can use a keyboard with most of those devices for when you need to type frequently, it's hard to imagine why anyone would choose a web-only device like these.

    I'd expect this to be even less popular than Linux-based netbooks, which is to say, remarkably unpopular. I really can't imagine why anyone would be interested in this, frankly. It's basically the computer equivalent of Palm's WebOS, and we know how well that has worked out....

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  20. Battery and cost by gmuslera · · Score: 1

    With pretty long battery duration (15+ hs?) and very low cost (not a lot of local storage required, no software licences, etc... maybe less than US$100?) it could have an edge. Ok, maybe more than an edge, a 3g, as probably cellphone companies could bundle them for close to free with data contracts.

  21. Better... by 2.7182 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I for one welcome a 4th operating system on the market. Sure took long enough. (I know I know, some people are going to say "what about VMS? I still use it", etc.)

    1. Re:Better... by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 1

      I gave up VAX/VMS for Solaris you insensitive clod.

      --
      Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
  22. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by dgatwood · · Score: 2, Informative

    I doubt this tablet is going to be unusable the minute the cloud goes away.

    No, without any native app support, it's going to be unusable long before the cloud goes away. :-D

    And it's not a tablet. It's a notebook.

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  23. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by hitmark · · Score: 4, Informative

    Google (google gears) and Mozilla (prism?) experimented with such a offline layer some time ago for normal browsers, and such a offline cache is part of the HTML5 spec. They have also included a file manager and media player, iirc.

    --
    comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
  24. Hey, clueless newbies, this isn't 1999 by yelvington · · Score: 5, Informative

    Every time there's a Slashdot post about ChromeOS there's immediately a rush of posts complaining that it won't work offline.

    Slashdot is supposed to be news for nerds, not recent history for nerds ... but SOME OF YOU GUYS ARE NOT PAYING ATTENTION. Listen up.
    This is not 1999. You can come out of your bunker now.

    Google introduced offline Web functionality in in 2007. Google Docs supported Google Gears, which made it possible to use the Google word processor on an airplane with no network connection at all. I've done it. It worked fine. When I reconnected, everything synchronized with the cloud.

    This concept has been reworked and is a part of the HTML5 standard. See http://www.w3.org/TR/offline-webapps/

    In 2010-2011, you can write highly functional applications using HTML5 and Javascript, make them installable on your web browser, and have them work offline. Please stop assuming the Web is as it was when you were in junior high.

    1. Re:Hey, clueless newbies, this isn't 1999 by shoehornjob · · Score: 1

      Somebody give that man some mod points. ROTFLMAO- It's not 1999 anymore . You can comeout of your bunkers now. Classic.

      --
      "We are just a war away from Amerikastan. When god vs god the undoing of man." Dave Mustaine
    2. Re:Hey, clueless newbies, this isn't 1999 by Random+BedHead+Ed · · Score: 1

      In 2010-2011, you can write highly functional applications using HTML5 and Javascript, make them installable on your web browser, and have them work offline. Please stop assuming the Web is as it was when you were in junior high.

      There was no Web when I was in junior high, you insensitive clod. :)

      I'm glad you summarized all this because I've also seen and used plenty of these offline apps and they can be quite sophisticated. It will be interesting to see if the Web can become an app platform, beyond webmail and the other common cloud services we have today. Frankly, I look forward to it. Most of my life computing has been a balkanized activity, users running in one of several parallel ruts depending which hardware/software platform they happen to use. At times there has been convergence, at other times divergence. The Web has always held the promise of making the old platforms irrelevant, and in a very good way.

    3. Re:Hey, clueless newbies, this isn't 1999 by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Please stop assuming the Web is as it was when you were in junior high.

      I know memory goes as one gets older; but I was in junior high during the mid-1970s and I DON'T REMEMBER NO WEB!

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    4. Re:Hey, clueless newbies, this isn't 1999 by Genda · · Score: 1

      It was made of silk and had arachnids in it... you need to get your memory checked!

    5. Re:Hey, clueless newbies, this isn't 1999 by FrankieBaby1986 · · Score: 1

      Heh, makes me wonder if the Web is the new WHORE (java). Yano, Write (Hopefully) Once, Run Everywhere

      --
      ERROR: SIG NOT FOUND (A)bort, (R)etry, (F)ail?:
    6. Re:Hey, clueless newbies, this isn't 1999 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it webscale?

    7. Re:Hey, clueless newbies, this isn't 1999 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *applauds*

    8. Re:Hey, clueless newbies, this isn't 1999 by vux984 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In 2010-2011, you can write highly functional applications using HTML5 and Javascript, make them installable on your web browser, and have them work offline.

      I'd say Windows 98 is more highly functional than html5 and javascript.

      This is not 1999.

      Quite right, you said it yourself... its almost 2011. Why are you trying to promote a technology that's on not even on par in terms of functionality and user experience with what was available in 1999.

      I'm well aware that chromeos will work offline. But if docment editing is the criteria I'd rather use Office 98 on Windows 98 than ChromeOS offline... or even online for that matter.

      But fortunately Office98 on Win 98 isn't even the alternative I'm faced with; the actual alternative is Microsoft Office on {Snow Leopard or Windows 7} or LibreOffice on {Windows 7, Snow Leopoard, or Ubuntu.}.

      Please stop assuming the Web is as it was when you were in junior high.

      Not a problem. In junior high I used a TRS-80. The internet existed, but there was no http yet. You really have to stop pretending the Web is a modern operating system. Its come a long way in the last 15 to 20 years, but its not there yet.

    9. Re:Hey, clueless newbies, this isn't 1999 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but my biggest issue is that you can't assume everybody will have connectivity all the time. The cloud is great and all, but what happens if your connection goes down? or if you're on an airplane?

    10. Re:Hey, clueless newbies, this isn't 1999 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oddly enough, you couldn't create a new document off-line. I thought that was rather strange.

    11. Re:Hey, clueless newbies, this isn't 1999 by thegarbz · · Score: 0

      You really have to stop pretending the Web is a modern operating system. Its come a long way in the last 15 to 20 years, but its not there yet.

      I'm sorry this doesn't work out for you, but lets take a look at a small group of typical users shall we?:

      - I for one come home and check out slashdot, and the news, and a handful of other sites, I'll write some emails, play some very basic games, sort out photos.
      -My sister spends most of her time of facebook, some of her time studying (mostly reading PDFs of lecture notes from the uni website), and the remainder of her computer time writing emails and assignments.
      -My father does all of the above including tax mostly done in a variety of excel sheets.
      -My mother cries for help when the computer's finished logging in because finding her way around windows is too complicated.

      For you it may not be a full blown highly configurable OS which lets you do whatever the heck you want, but for many of the rest of us it may as well be. Giving it some real thought I can't come up with a single application the average home user would need that couldn't be run from the cloud right there in a web browser, with additional bonus points. Good for you that you'd rather use Windows 98 and Office 98. More power to you. I'd rather user Chrome OS and Google Docs, they are for the average joe functionally identical, except for the benefits that google docs brings of being able to access your documents from anywhere.

      But realistically you can't expect a hardcore geek who would rather use a 12 year old system, or a modern combination that requires 2minutes to boot up and 1.5GB of RAM minimum to understand the beauty of the Web as the OS is in its simplicity. You hang on to your computers, I for one look forward to buying one of these document typing / web surfing appliances.

    12. Re:Hey, clueless newbies, this isn't 1999 by unity100 · · Score: 1

      so you liked it very much eh ...

    13. Re:Hey, clueless newbies, this isn't 1999 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, Gears left a lot to be desired (or Google's support of it did anyway). It was pretty cool for the time though.

    14. Re:Hey, clueless newbies, this isn't 1999 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the beauty of the Web as the OS is in its simplicity.

      Notepad is simple. Any kind of word processor-cum-WYSIWYG page layout app is not simple. If people want to waste time adjusting fonts and colors, then that's their problem. Adding font, color, layout controls to a word processor or spreadsheet ruins their simplicity.

    15. Re:Hey, clueless newbies, this isn't 1999 by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Thanks for bringing back terrible memories of book reports and Charlotte's Web... Punk.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    16. Re:Hey, clueless newbies, this isn't 1999 by vux984 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Giving it some real thought I can't come up with a single application the average home user would need that couldn't be run from the cloud right there in a web browser

      The average home user would like to sync their ipod to their music libary. I'm willing to bet at least one of you, your father, your mother, or your sister even do this.

      You also mentioned you like to "sort out photos"; that's another good example. Even My 8 year old daughters camera does video and has a 4GB card. She likes to sync her camera, and organize her photos and videos too. It takes a few minutes to sync... syncing to 'the cloud' would take hours.

      I'd rather user Chrome OS and Google Docs, they are for the average joe functionally identical, except for the benefits that google docs brings of being able to access your documents from anywhere.

      We were saving documents to network accessible storage in 1998 too. We didn't need google or chrome for that.

      I'm not saying web-accessible stuff is bad. I like having webmail as back up access to my email. That's awesome. I sure as hell don't want to give up my local desktop client though.

      You hang on to your computers, I for one look forward to buying one of these document typing / web surfing appliances.

      I see the merit in little computing appliances as much as the next person. A webbrowser for sitting on the couch instead of a full laptop makes a lot of sense... but if I am serious about writing a real document (my thesis for example) I find even a laptop restrictive. I want a comfortable keyboard, lots of screen real-estate, and so on.

    17. Re:Hey, clueless newbies, this isn't 1999 by mywhitewolf · · Score: 1

      windows 98 / ms office isn't designed from the ground up to be a cloud system. you could probably shoehorn it in to work, but in the end your making the foot fit the shoe.

      next your going to tell me that there isn't any market for android / iOS because windows mobile was able to do it previously? and the iPad will fail because windows 95 with adobe acrobat & media player would work just fine?

      lucky apple discovered that User experience is what sells products (and to a certain extend brand recognition), which allowed them to change the game with smart phones. Google worked out that cheap products that are mostly supported by advertising (you know, like free to air tv and radio have been doing for years) is a very successful model if done right.

      most advances are coming from user experience & functionality, we have had most of the "current" technology for years, touch screens aren't new, phones aren't new, lightweight operating systems aren't new, pda's aren't new. its all about putting it all together in a way to fill market niches for a fair price and a focus on user experience.

  25. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by cbhacking · · Score: 1

    Apple doesn't directly compete in this market - they have no computing devices this cheap except for the iPod Touch - but that doesn't mean they're immune. The market for the iPad could be eroded by this, for example. I still have trouble understanding the market for the MacBook Air (I've seen a lot more iPads than MBAirs, despite the difference in how long each has been out) so I'm not sure whether they'll be any impact there.

    MS definitely has reason to be concerned, of course, though they've been very successful at getting Windows on netbooks. The first netbooks almost exclusively ran Linux, these days you have to hunt specifically for a Linux one. Chrome OS may manage to oust Windows (mostly Win7 these days) in that market, but I wouldn't count on it.

    --
    There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
  26. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 1

    That's why you have HTML5 Offline Apps.

  27. finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    the real story here is that there are going to FINALLY be ARM netbooks for sale!

    now if only they could get the sense to make a full laptop with them.

    1. Re:finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I remember the summer of 2009 when everyone was expecting the wave of ARM cpu netbooks... it never happened. My friend was designing power management ICs for them too. I suspect that the major desktop and notebook OEMs are afraid of Intel's reprisal if they were to market an ARM netbook (same goes for ARM tablets). I wonder what makes Apple so special that they are not afraid of Intel?

    2. Re:finally! by markatto · · Score: 1

      Now if only TFA had actually said anything specific about the hardware... Here's hoping for Cortex-A9, perhaps OMAP4? ChromeOS isn't very interesting to me, but I would almost certainly buy one to use with a real distro.

    3. Re:finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt it...Google went all Intel with Google TV. Perhaps it is the same chip in the Chrome OS SpeedBooks (yes, Google applied for trademark for SpeedBook IIRC).

    4. Re:finally! by thatkid_2002 · · Score: 1

      (Decent) ARM based netbooks have already arrived this year. The Toshiba AC100 is great (I own one) and the EfikaMX from Gensei USA also looks very good. I was able to walk into a normal mainstream store in Brisbane (Australia) and pick up a Toshiba AC100.

      The AC100 comes with Android by default but Linux has been hacked onto it.

      There is also the Always Innovating smartbook, which runs a full Linux.

    5. Re:finally! by jimicus · · Score: 1

      How long before they're running Windows Mobile 7?

    6. Re:finally! by rdnetto · · Score: 1

      This one was available over a year ago, and a new model has just been released: http://www.alwaysinnovating.com/home/index.htm

      --
      Most human behaviour can be explained in terms of identity.
  28. Read the first line of the article & summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "A Google-branded Chrome OS notebook will be launched by Inventec, with Acer and Hewlett-Packard following suit thereafter, according to a report."

    It's Google branded, meaning Google probably chose that manufacturer for launch devices. With the run in the mid-tens of thousands, it seems to be a kick start for the platform, not a major brand.

    Maybe if someone SRWare Irons out the Google spyware, I might consider one.

    Sadly, this is almost certainly doomed to failure like every smartbook preceding it.

  29. WHOOOO You get to type on an airplane! by judeancodersfront · · Score: 1


    What a feature!

    That really compares to being able to also watch movies and play games offline.

    Chrome OS is going to bomb, I don't care if it runs Linux. If anything it will give Linux a bad name by having low sales.

    1. Re:WHOOOO You get to type on an airplane! by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 1

      That really compares to being able to also watch movies and play games offline.

      Do you really believe you're not going to be able to watch movies & play games offline?

      --
      There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
    2. Re:WHOOOO You get to type on an airplane! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The /. retard train doesn't fail to disappoint, so here you go: a rich 3d game (Lego Star Wars) running natively inside Chrome. For everything else, there's WebGL.

    3. Re:WHOOOO You get to type on an airplane! by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      Ohh yea, mister smarty pants, how are you going to use an entirely web based OS without an internet connection? just cache things locally and run them or something? Then what? Resync them next time you connect? How pathetic.

      dumb ass...

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    4. Re:WHOOOO You get to type on an airplane! by judeancodersfront · · Score: 1

      Yes I believe that based on what Google has said so far.

    5. Re:WHOOOO You get to type on an airplane! by judeancodersfront · · Score: 1

      That's an online game for kids. It's using the unity engine.

      How ever could I doubt this system.

    6. Re:WHOOOO You get to type on an airplane! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.chromium.org/nativeclient
      http://code.google.com/p/nativeclient/
      http://code.google.com/p/nativeclient-sdk/

      Welcome to this early preview of the Native Client SDK. With the SDK and a Windows, Mac OS X, or Linux computer, you'll be able to build web apps that seamlessly use native C/C++ code to perform high-performance computation, render 2D/3D graphics, play audio, and respond to mouse and keyboard events — all without requiring users to install a plugin. Until Native Client is on by default in Google Chrome, you can run web apps that use Native Client by launching Google Chrome version 6 or later with the --enable-nacl flag.

      Chrome apps, Chrome OS, Chrome Web Store, and Native Client all appear to be converging on similar release timeframes.

    7. Re:WHOOOO You get to type on an airplane! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keep trolling you idiot. Google: Chrome OS media player.

      They've already demonstrated packaged games for Chrome. In fact, if you search, there are many prereleased packaged games. The only thing Google hasn't solidly confirmed is whether packaged apps will work on Chrome OS... if not, then hosted games/apps will need to use HTML5 for offline access.

    8. Re:WHOOOO You get to type on an airplane! by martin-boundary · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Isn't that ActiveX redux?

    9. Re:WHOOOO You get to type on an airplane! by judeancodersfront · · Score: 0, Troll

      Petty name calling, what a classy place.
      Being able to play avi files off a usb drive doesn't mean anything to the public. They don't even know what an avi file is.
      No media store or DVD drive means no movies to them.
      Chrome OS is going to fail and name calling won't change that. If you think it has a chance then you should never work on a consumer OS.

    10. Re:WHOOOO You get to type on an airplane! by judeancodersfront · · Score: 1

      Chrome OS will be off the shelves before it gets a decent library. They should have tapped into Android or existing Linux games.

    11. Re:WHOOOO You get to type on an airplane! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not unless you consider the Android platform similarly insecure for allowing native libraries. The problem with ActiveX was that the installed components had full user or system permissions. Android limits what capabilities native libraries have (JNI required for most I/O tasks). The operating system limits the Native Client library permissions.

      See here: NaCl - Trusted vs Untrusted.

      In the presence of a sandbox environment, trusted code runs outside of the sandbox and can perform privileged operations while untrusted code is prohibited from doing so by the enclosing sandbox, which isolates potentially misbehaving or malicious software from the rest of the system.

      Now as an outsider I don't really know which 'sandbox' the Native Client documentation is referring to. It's probably Chromium's sandbox support.

      On Windows that means the self-contained library won't be able to do anything to the user account besides access the temporary cache. On Linux that probably means AppArmor/seccomp limiting (not like anyone uses SELinux).

    12. Re:WHOOOO You get to type on an airplane! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Android apps are supposedly coming to Google TV, so it's likely they will appear on Chromium or Chrome OS at some point. Google's Web Store has been stockpiling apps for a while now, so it won't be an entirely featureless release. But it probably will be a year or two until developers see ChromeOS as a desirable platform to target.

    13. Re:WHOOOO You get to type on an airplane! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In other words you mean netbooks are a failure? (OK, granted they kinda are.) Because your DVD drive complaint isn't about Chrome OS, it's about netbooks. If you want a DVD/Bluray drive, buy a laptop. Simple.

      Actually funny that, Bluray basically killed the 'common PC' media center, as the drives are so fucking expensive, and no laptops come with one. Used to be that any machine you purchased could play DVDs upfront. Not so with Bluray.

    14. Re:WHOOOO You get to type on an airplane! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI, Google goes into Native Client details in this video (it even references ActiveX).

  30. Begining of the end for Windows by foxylad · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We have a large local organisation that has been a rock-solid windows shop for ever. I've occasionally had dealings with their IT manager, and never got any interest in moving to linux. So I just about fell over when he told me he was planning to switch as many workstations as possible to ChromeOS and Google Docs as soon as it comes out.

    This is just one sample of course. But if a conservative Windows-centric organisation is planning to switch so immediately, it doesn't bode well for MS's revenue backbone - all those corporate workstations running windows and office. A switch to ChromeOS would be disruptive, but not much more so than the Windows 7 upgrade that must be on 75% of IT managers' todo lists next year.

    Don't get me wrong, MS will be around for years and years, but I think their Silverlight/HTML5 announcement shows they've recognised their supremacy is over and they can't assume everyone runs Windows any more. Interesting times ahead.

    --
    Do as you would be done to.
    1. Re:Begining of the end for Windows by Yunzil · · Score: 1

      This is just one sample of course. But if a conservative Windows-centric organisation is planning to switch so immediately, it doesn't bode well for MS's revenue backbone

      Or... it doesn't bode well for your organization.

    2. Re:Begining of the end for Windows by foxylad · · Score: 1

      The way it bodes for the organisation depends on Google's execution. But my point is that everyone assumes MS's corporate customers are going to stick with Windows come hell or high water, and this might not be so.

      It isn't my organisation, by the way - I'd have wanted to do a LOT of user testing (and unless it was unusually polished wait for version 2) before making a decision of this magnitude.

      --
      Do as you would be done to.
    3. Re:Begining of the end for Windows by Raenex · · Score: 1

      It isn't my organisation, by the way - I'd have wanted to do a LOT of user testing (and unless it was unusually polished wait for version 2) before making a decision of this magnitude.

      Right, which means the guy making this decision is a clown, and not to be used as an example of what the real IT world will be doing.

  31. so... by atari2600a · · Score: 0

    Anyone here have the MSRP on the Inventec Chrome?

  32. The way I see this is by melted · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The way I see this is this is a business play. For a consumer like me, a castrated variant of a laptop I already own is not particularly exciting to me. As a small business, if I use Google Apps, this would be a huge money saver. You basically don't have to do much (if any) IT if you have this. Your data is always backed up. Your laptops never have any upgrade or virus issues - they upgrade themselves and system partition is read-only. You have endless amount of space for docs and email, and pretty decent collaboration features which will only get better over time. So for a business that can cope with the current limitations of Google Apps, there's quite a bit of value in ChromeOS.

  33. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by pckl300 · · Score: 1

    This is going to go straight for Microsoft's jugular.

    Apple has pretty well innoculated themselves with a strong tablet (touch) and ultralight notebook (full OS) offerings.

    If this comes with net access it will pretty much eat up the remaining netbook fervor.

    You say that like those are the only kinds of devices people want.

    --
    In the beginning, there was null.
  34. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by shird · · Score: 1

    There are a lot of people that just use their computer for facebook and generally using the web, especially people looking in this price range. The kind of people that need to write documents on the subway would not be using this. I see it as more the 'laptop for the kids/casual use' which is probably 90% of what laptops are used for in the home. I myself have an expensive laptop which I just use for browsing the web and a desktop PC for doing work. In hindsight I would have been far better off getting the cheapest smallest netbook that could run a web browser.

    --
    I.O.U One Sig.
  35. HTML5 won't be a "standard" until 2022! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait, is this "HTML5 standard" that you speak of the same one that's expected to actually become a W3C Recommendation no earlier than 2022 ?

    1. Re:HTML5 won't be a "standard" until 2022! by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

      Probably. But who cares?

      If Google can get it working now, it doesn't matter if the standards change over the next 12 years. Your data will be on a Google server, and the WebOS applications can be updated to support the standards over the next 12 years seamlessly (compared to other OSs, anyway).

      Heck, Microsoft Office document formats just became a standard earlier this year, and they've been used for over a decade now without too much of a problem.

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    2. Re:HTML5 won't be a "standard" until 2022! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're wrong. Microsoft Office XML Document Formats are a standard, and Microsoft has been pushing them since forever.

      However, there are still lots of users and businesses that use Office 2003 and the Office Binary Formats are not a standard. They are still proprietary.

      There is a plug-in for Office 2003 to provide compatibility with Opening/Saving Office 07/10 Formats, but it does not set that format as the default for saving.

  36. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by Daengbo · · Score: 1

    Schmidt said it himself about six months ago: ChromeOS is targeted as a thin client for businesses on Google Apps, and he compared it to the SunRays. Heck, my employer could go ChromeOS -- everything is a web app already, and we use Google Apps for the students (and Lotus iNotes for the teachers ... WTF?). I doubt very many people would whine if we switched.

  37. Un-Words by e-d0uble · · Score: 1

    I for one am so bloody sick and tired of the un-word "app". Can't morons just say APPLICATION STORE? Thank you, and have a nice day.

    1. Re:Un-Words by cyclomedia · · Score: 1

      I bet you also hate it when people use "Text" as a verb instead of saying "Compose a short electronic note and send it to a friend via the Short Message Service". or "Email" instead of "Electronic Mail". Chased any kids of your lawn lately?

      --
      If you don't risk failure you don't risk success.
    2. Re:Un-Words by e-d0uble · · Score: 1

      No, I didn't chase them. I bulleted them instead, so that they'd understand.

  38. Re:Notebook, not netbook by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

    Mine craft.

    --
    Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  39. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

    I think it will compete with Microsoft in the market of people ready to move off of XP but not ready to shell out for a Windows-7 capable laptop to replace it. That's sure to be a small market, but with the right price point it's a big enough one to be interesting.

  40. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not all Chrome apps will be web apps: see local 'packaged' apps. Plus 'hosted' web apps could work offline using HTML5, although the two aren't the same.

    Chrome app support has been in Chrome for months now. But you have to toggle it manually.

  41. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by zhong-guo-1 · · Score: 1

    Get off my lawn!

  42. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by JonySuede · · Score: 1

    you seems to forget that Google is a proponent of the offline browser capability, look at Google gear for what they have in mind.

    --
    Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
  43. It's time the geek stopped reaching for excuses by westlake · · Score: 0, Troll

    some companies are afraid of Microsoft or have been enticed to steer away from non-Microsoft software

    Walmart.com has in stock an astonishing 248 Windows laptops for the Christmas shopping season.

    Something like 150 priced between $250 and $800.

    98 Windows desktops, 109 Windows printers, 72 Windows webcams, about 700 flavors of the Windows mouse, keyboard and joystick, and over 1,000 Windows software packages, roughly divided between productivity apps and PC games.

    Walmart is the world's largest retailer. Not easily frightened.

    But notoriously efficient and ruthless in weeding out product that does not sell in numbers which matter.

    _____

    You will find the 10" Entourage Systems 10.1" eDGe DualBook e-book reader here - at a stiff $500. E Ink on the left page. Color LCD on the right. Android OS.

    The problem here is - as it always seems to be with OEM Linux - is that the add copy assumes that you are an experienced e-book reader. That you understand the technology. That you understand the supported file formats. That you where and how to find and purchase a book.

    Apple doesn't make these mistakes. Amazon doesn't make these mistakes.

    1. Re:It's time the geek stopped reaching for excuses by symbolset · · Score: 0, Troll

      And of course Walmart is also selling the ipad and iPod, two of the top three gifts in Santa's email inbox this holiday season. For the other of the top three they offer hundreds of iPhone accessories.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    2. Re:It's time the geek stopped reaching for excuses by AltairDusk · · Score: 1

      You do realize the majority of those "Windows" printers, webcams, mice, keyboards, and joysticks will also work with another OS?

    3. Re:It's time the geek stopped reaching for excuses by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Why is this modded as a troll?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    4. Re:It's time the geek stopped reaching for excuses by hazydave · · Score: 1

      No surprises... the average Windows laptop sold last year for about $550 in the USA.... probably close to $500 once the numbers are tallied for 2010. And that doesn't include Netbooks, which were tracked as a separate class. That says something about the functional price of things like ChromeOS and non-Windows Tablet systems. Ok, sure, Apple has a fairly large zombie following who will shell out far more for a glorified iPod, but I would be surprised if the price on these things didn't settle in at or below that of a typical Netbook.

      --
      -Dave Haynie
    5. Re:It's time the geek stopped reaching for excuses by Locutus · · Score: 1

      Then I sure wish we would stop hearing of Microsoft blocking products with exclusionary arrangements. When the netbooks were just getting going, we started hearing of Microsoft supplying sales people to various retail stores and then how those stores would no longer carry Linux based netbooks or PCs. What about the head of the Taiwanese manufacturing association stating that their manufacturers are afraid of Microsoft on PCs but not so much on things not like a PC?
      And don't forget, companies as large as Intel and HP have been threatened by Microsoft and gave in to there wishes of NOT supporting competing technologies.

      These are not excuses, they are a reality and I sure wish the non-geek community would open their eyes to how the market has been tuned by the monopoly in the room for the past 20 years. IMO

      I've also heard directly from a product manager who was told to shut down a Linux based project because of how Microsoft would react to putting that product on the market.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  44. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    It already has native 'app' (was that a typo?) support. Apps can be locally installed (ran in browser), and take advantage of native code libraries. Hell, by all accounts it will even support some form of remote desktop (aka 'chromoting').

    Did you really think Google was going to launch their flagship product without thinking about it for five whole minutes? How the fuck did you think non-WebGL games would work?

  45. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by dudpixel · · Score: 1

    This is going to go straight for Microsoft's jugular.

    Apple has pretty well innoculated themselves with a strong tablet (touch) and ultralight notebook (full OS) offerings.

    If this comes with net access it will pretty much eat up the remaining netbook fervor.

    hmmm lets see...Google? yeah I reckon it'll come with net access.

    --
    This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
  46. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by ArsonSmith · · Score: 2, Funny

    How did this get promoted?

    Probably as a test for html5 offline mode.

    --
    Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
  47. I think your "special" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your either an astro turfing paid shill, or an idiot.

    Im not sure which.

  48. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 1

    I don't think this will compete with much of anything; there's no real market for Chrome OS, and I doubt there ever will be.

    Well, thin clients will be able to use this for access to internet or network based apps, lots of people would like a simple 'internet appliance' that can send/receive e-mail (via a web app like Gmail, Yahoo Mail, Hotmail, etc), access the internet and maybe even send/receive SMS, and then there are many opportunities to use this as a front end for advanced interactive devices in cars, kiosks, vending machines that personalize items, etc.

    Will it replace PC's? No, and yes. It is not really designed to replace a PC's functionality, so 'no'. But it's going to replace PC's that are currently used for the above tasks because the PC is overkill and these will just fit the bill (figuratively and financially).

    Is there a market for these devices? There sure is. I may not be the target but I'd happily use these to replace workstations in a client's warehouse that's only being used to access a web based app running on their in-house server ... or use them for temporary workstations in a call center during seasonal peaks ... or use one as a dedicated 'terminal' to access a client's phone system.

  49. I talked about this on Nexus 1 release by symbolset · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From January, The comment is here.

    Google is selling this phone because it advances the technology and their phone partners wouldn't sell it. Expect them to sell an Android + Snapdragon slate for the same reasons.... I doubt Google even wants to sell phones - I think they just want to get the new good technologies adopted so that people can get used to Internet everywhere quicker. This serves their bottom line because when most people use the Internet they use Google services, which Google sells ads on. You can't very well sell Internet ads to be viewed by people who aren't close to a browser. [me]

    It links to this interesting article where the CEO of Asus was backing away from the Android smartbook they had recently pulled in mid-computex.

    "Currently, I still don't see a clear market for smartbooks," said Jerry Shen, CEO of Asustek Computer, during an investors' conference in Taipei.

    So he pulls the Linux Snapdragon smartbook and shows up a few days later at an investors conference - just before the W7 launch - flanked by reps from Microsoft and Intel - probably glancing cautiously from one to the other hoping nothing bad happens to his precious W7 netbooks (little does he know...). And he gives a carefully prepared speech about how Intel and Microsoft are going to crush their enemies, see them driven before them, hear the lamentation of their women...

    And now world & dog sees Microsoft as a fading power, Apple mobile platforms - and mobile platforms in general - as the next generation of user interface, and suddenly now he sees a future in it again. Intel is driving as hard as they can to be the thing that gives people what they want. Microsoft? Let's just say the KIN didn't work out and WP7 has a steeper hill to climb than it might have. What a difference a year makes.

    I love my Samsung Epic Android phone, but obviously I know I would not have any such thing if both Apple and Google had not dared to bring us change, each in their own way.

    That article was about Google's Nexus 1 phones. Remember that Google shopped its candybar phone to every phone vendor and they wouldn't take it, so Google made it, sold a grip of them, and ushered in all this sweet tech we enjoy today. If they had not done so when they did, we'd not have seen the first good big-screen Android platforms until after WP7 launched, if ever. And now those phones are selling 20M units a quarter in the US alone, giving 44% market share, driving every phone vendor that builds it into profitability or record profitability, giving US non-AT&T networks a phone to sell that isn't absolutely pathetic, and putting money in the pockets of a vast economy of app developers and advertising buyers (and of course, Google).

    The message is pretty clear. If Google gives you a reference platform, Run With It! Refusing is not going to keep them from bringing new tech to market. They don't want the manufacturing and retail money because they want to leave that business to their partners. It's a messy customer service business with low leverage. It's not their strong point. But if their partners won't give us progress, they aren't averse to bringing it directly and reaping a few billion in hardware revenue along the way. Microsoft and Intel used to be able to prevent progress, to prevent "cannabilization" of their established markets. But now those days are done. Vendors used to be able to hold off the releases with "tomorrow, tommorow" and "any day now". Any more? No. That's not going to fly. We'll have progress now whether the established hardware vendors are ready to give it or not. There will be no stalling any more.

    /this is me agreeing with you.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
    1. Re:I talked about this on Nexus 1 release by AltairDusk · · Score: 1

      That article was about Google's Nexus 1 phones. Remember that Google shopped its candybar phone to every phone vendor and they wouldn't take it, so Google made it, sold a grip of them, and ushered in all this sweet tech we enjoy today. If they had not done so when they did, we'd not have seen the first good big-screen Android platforms until after WP7 launched, if ever. And now those phones are selling 20M units a quarter in the US alone, giving 44% market share, driving every phone vendor that builds it into profitability or record profitability, giving US non-AT&T networks a phone to sell that isn't absolutely pathetic, and putting money in the pockets of a vast economy of app developers and advertising buyers (and of course, Google).

      It's about time they do it again. Even the new "big" Android phone launches would be a minor upgrade from my N1 when you look at the whole hardware package. Add in the support and early upgrades the N1 enjoys and it's hard for me to make an argument for upgrading my phone right now even if I wanted to. I expected we would be hearing about phones under development with dual core Snapdragons by now.

      Hopefully Google can do the same thing in the netbook/smartbook market. Some may disagree but I think that market has been stagnating as of late.

    2. Re:I talked about this on Nexus 1 release by hazydave · · Score: 1

      Doesn't make any sense, sorry. The Nexus One was no "large screen" Android phone... it had the usual 3.7" screen, same as the Motorola Droid that preceded it to market and really got the Android market going. I think the HTC and Droid X introductions were just the inevitable effect of getting companies who produce multiple models for multiple market segments finally involved in the high-end smart phone business.

      The real promise of the Nexus One was dead on arrival. Google promised a phone that would work on any carrier, but delivered one that did 3G for T-Mobile, but not AT&T. They promised realistic pricing, but delivered it with the artificially high pricing of all stand-alone cellphones... always necessary to get deals with carriers -- which they did, anyway, with T-Mo. A realistically priced high end smart phone would sell for less than $100 more than a similarly priced high-end PMP/PDA. Add $35 parts to an iPod Touch and you have an iPhone.

      --
      -Dave Haynie
  50. You are not paranoid enough... by yet-another-lobbyist · · Score: 1

    OK. So you are not afraid of Google spying on you, but you would be afraid of government agencies spying on you? Have you thought about that the government agencies may ask Google to hand them over your data set once they get interested in you? I just checked the dashboard. I agree that's not what you are afraid of. What you are afraid of is the data that can be generated by doing a sophisticated search on the complete data base. For instance the one that is a time profile of you telling what you did every minute you were using a computer or you had your android phone switched on. This one will tell which web site you surfed (=google-searched) from which IP address at what time and where you were (GPS in your phone) every minute. I am sure the search could be carried out using many different interesting parameters.

    I admit I am guessing a bit here. Correct me if you know more details. But I think this kind of fantasizing will be important to assess how dangerous or not dangerous this data eating of companies like Google is.

  51. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by tftp · · Score: 1

    Is there a market for these devices? There sure is.

    In this very house I have two notebooks that only run a Web browser. This is because they are used to access news, Web-based email and nothing else. You can do a lot today with just a browser.

  52. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by whoop · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm sorry, you must be confused. This is Slashdot. We only tolerate one of any sort of device for all uses. Therefore, if a web-browsing only netbook appears, that means that all computers henceforth will be just like this. Gone are the days of building your own PC, running an OS of your choosing. All computers will be running ChromeOS by the end of the year. So, let's pile on with a thousand and one use cases where this device isn't appropriate. Only then can we stop it and maintain the status quo in computers.

    Let's see. Astronauts. I don't see astronauts flipping around in space using ChromeOS. If the ISS were run on ChromeOS, everybody on board would be dead in three seconds. Antarcticians. Last I checked, there wasn't very fast broadband available on Antarctica. ChromeOS cannot overtake the industry until they get FIOS to the penguins down south. My great-grandma in the ICU on a ventilator can't be checking her Facebooks with this thing. They don't even want me to wear a watch in the room with her! Clearly, ChromeOS just isn't ready for primetime. Until they resolve these and many other ridiculous things I can come up, nobody should touch it. Please, for the sake of my gram-gram, don't go near ChromeOS.

  53. the uncanny cost valley. by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    I've been shopping myself and in the process have discovered something. I want an ipad. given that I won't settle for anything else unless it's just no-brainer cheap. that is, I find myslef looking at the $169 android 2.2 pads and thinking-- boy I bet these will be below $100 by January and I can wait. Then that would be worth buying. But if I'm paying more than $200 then I'm going to go all the way up to an ipad.

    Which is funny to me since I did not know that would be come so clear to me. It's either ridiculously cheap or an ipad. aything with the similar or even better specs than an ipad has no interest to me if the price is within $300 dollars. I know from experience that the apple experience is well worth $300 in non-wasted effort. THat is apple products are things you use not things you dick around with trying to make work. On the other hand $100 is just fun money and the chance to dick around and make it work would be more of a fun hobby.

    It's the in between prices that are have no appeal no matter what the specs. There is this dead zone between cheap fun and luxury.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:the uncanny cost valley. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Always nice to see a well-balanced, intelligent post from the Apple marketing department.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    2. Re:the uncanny cost valley. by goombah99 · · Score: 1

      Quite the reverse actually. I did not fully appreciate the ipads market position until I had my own personal epiphany about own purchasing habits. THe point I was trying to make was that in the abstract I could see why someting with more specs than an ipad that cost $100 less was logically more valuable. But it was when I went from thinking about it actually having to put my money down that my real preferences crystallized. If I'm paying $600 I want something I know will work perfectly for me and thus will be something I will use and not be frustrated with. I know that's true of the apple, I'm fairly sure it's not true of the Android if history is a guide. On the other hand I do enjoy tinkering sometimes. But not when the toy if $600. I'll tinker in $100 toys cause I can just toss them if they suck.

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  54. You're insane by judeancodersfront · · Score: 2, Funny

    It seems that half of Slashdot would have no problem with Google taking over the world as long as their mind control servers were running Linux.

  55. Sorry meant to say 3G access by rsborg · · Score: 1

    Obviously it will have wifi but integrated 3G would raise the game.

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  56. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by bm_luethke · · Score: 1

    As a concept I do not think it is going to fail - even in Podunct Tennessee (of which many places I am around certainly qualify, though I live in "metropolitan Tennessee" as much as it exists) you pretty much have total coverage. Yea I have relatives without electricity, without running water from municipal pipes, and all sorts of "primitive things" but they *choose* to do so in nearly every case. I can't think of any of them that could not go someplace that had those modern conveniences if they truly wanted and, frankly, the ones that rig up DC generators, an array of car batteries, and have homemade dc/ac converter to run their TV and computer (which gets a cell phone tower) understand those mystic things called "computers" better than their so referenced more advanced relatives. Indeed it is amusing to hear them talk - a rare mix of truly uneducated and truly knowledgeable.

    If internet connectivity is the make/break part of this it is there good enough - after all it isn't like this is the first or only device to rely on the "cloud". It doesn't take a PhD in Computer Science to figure out how to cope with the example you give - indeed apps do so today and it is part of the standards of any technology that relies on cloud computing.

    The bigger issues are why? Android and iOS do pretty much everything one would want on such a slim device - why go with *another* software stack like ChromOS? Yea, it "does" more but then there are netbooks which are 105% harder to lug around and do 150% the tasks. Of course I have to add I still find tablets to be in the same boat - the few people I know that love them have all the issues I do lugging a laptop around yet have none of the benefits - yet they think they are grand. I'll wait and see - however the occasional disconnect is *not* going to cause the issues you describe even on current products. Nor is coverage that spotty either.

    --
    ------- Sorry about the spelling, I suffer from two problems. Dyslexia makes it difficult to spell well, lazy makes it
  57. finally! some apps. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the summer of 2009 where were the apps? Conspiracy is easy, writing an app for another processor and operating system harder. Now if MS had a windows version for ARM and companies still didn't come out with ARM computers then the reprisal theory would hold more water.

    1. Re:finally! some apps. by satuon · · Score: 1

      An ARM version of Windows won't let you run third-party binary exe-s compiled for Intel CPUs.

  58. Buddy, never admit by SpaghettiPattern · · Score: 1

    As somebody who just lost a bunch of data due to faulty backup disks,

    Wrong, wrong, wrong!!! Never admit to have lost data. NEVER!

    Always hold your head high and pretend nothing ever unsettles you. Seem so absolutely self-assured to make people puke from envy.

    Learn from me, learn.

    You could secretly move to a corner to hide and sulk for awhile. It releases tension and you probably will feel better. But the data remains lost forever.
    (I might know a person who did exactly this.)

    --

    I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
  59. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

    I don't think this will compete with much of anything; there's no real market for Chrome OS, and I doubt there ever will be. As I understand it, the target audience is people who:

    Type too much to use a tablet.
    Only use web apps.

    Well, yes and no.

    Chrome OS, yes, only support apps that run through the Chrome browser. But one of Google's focuses with the Chrome browser, even before they announced Chrome OS, was to enable browser-hosted apps to do things that, at the time Chrome was introduced, only native apps could do. Browser based storage (now part of HTML5), pushing javascript execution speeds, Native Client, and all the other features Chrome have pushed have been about enabling the browser as a full-function application platform.

    Anybody who doesn't type enough to need a built-in keyboard would probably find a tablet (either iPad or Android-based) easier to use (not to mention more capable due to native app availability)

    Yeah, if you don't need a keyboard, a tablet is more useful than a netbook (of course, a number of vendors are putting together Chrome OS-powered tablets, too.) As far as capability, what can native apps do on iPad or Android that Chrome OS apps can't do?

    and since you can use a keyboard with most of those devices for when you need to type frequently, it's hard to imagine why anyone would choose a web-only device like these.

    A netbook is a much more convenient form factor than a tablet + a separate keyboard if you have to type frequently. As for web-only, well, perhaps that will be a limitation that impacts some users, but, again, Google has been working hard with Chrome and Chrome OS to reduce the distinction between the browser and any other application platform.

  60. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by LS · · Score: 2, Informative

    Comments like this getting modded to 5 show the general ignorance of slashdotters. First, you've never seen the device so you have no idea how it will work. Second, even if it were web service based, Google has already released apps and software components (e.g. gears) that work without connectivity. It's called synching folks

    --
    There is a fine line between being a cultivated citizen and being someone else's crop. - A. J. Patrick Liszkie
  61. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't think they're going to compete with Microsoft. But what they are doing is trying to invent a new class of computing device, which I think is going to fail. Maybe in another ten years having a constant internet connection will be a given, but right now... I'm just imagining people trying to type a document while riding on the subway: "Whoops, lost my internet. Oh, it's back again... let me re-open my session..."

    Everything in IT-business other than MS-owned is competing with MS. And MS does not want to compete, it never has had to.
    And it's so easy for monopoly to make manufacturer to understand that it is out of business if making something else but MS-products. It does not matter if the technology is other wise going to survive or not. MS just has to make sure it does not. That's what I would do as a monopoly.

  62. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have access to literally hundreds of 4~5+ year old laptops - physically OK, but the hardware is so slow it is painful to do anything with them.

    On the other hand you drop an early version of Chrome OS running on a USB stick and you have a near-instant-on portable computer that runs nicely. If all you want is the web, then this works great.

    (I have it running on an X41 which permanently sits by my pillow. Great when you wake up at 3AM and just need to look at a site or fire off an email)

  63. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by xtracto · · Score: 1

    IIRC Mozilla Prism only allows to load web pages ("applications") in a seamless window (what a bunch of CEOspeak).

    That is, it provides a browser window without any controls (only the frame and title window) that can be used to load specific web pages as "apps".

    I use it to load a specific Office.live.com excel sheet for logging my daily activities.

    --
    Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
  64. I'm holding out by Chrisq · · Score: 2, Funny

    I for one welcome a 4th operating system on the market. Sure took long enough. (I know I know, some people are going to say "what about VMS? I still use it", etc.)

    I'm holding out for the HURD notebook

    1. Re:I'm holding out by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      Has it got to be strong, got to be fast and got to be fresh from the fight?

  65. are there still fanboi morons among us by unity100 · · Score: 1

    why is parent modded flamebait ?

    1. Re:are there still fanboi morons among us by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      There's a new rule on slashdot that any anti-Apple or anti-Google post is by definition flamebait or a troll. The fanboys honestly can't believe that anyone could criticise either company in good faith.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  66. Re:Read the first line of the article & summar by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

    Nice thought, but I'm afraid unless they have changed things you CAN'T "SWare Iron" out the nasty, because it has both signed key and hardware checks "for security purposes" to insure you don't run a "hacked" OS. If you would like to read more here is the only thing I could find that wasn't just more press releases. Allow me to quote some of the relevant bits "If unsigned software is about to be launched, the OS halts and is restored to clean state." And from the looks of the diagram they have the signatures are used before anything but the firmware, so my guess is jailbreaking one will be quite difficult without bricking it.

    If anyone has more info please post it, as looking for anything chrome related just came up with mounds of press releases for me. Also where does this leave Android? I've seen more and more small devices running ARM powered by Android, and this seems to be in direct competition at least on the ARM front.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  67. Will this be good ? by unity100 · · Score: 1

    can it evolve to a competitor for ms oses on pc platform in future ? i would very much prefer to have an os that supports all open standards, doesnt lock features (like directx10-11 business), and lightweight (without all those drm shit).

  68. Chrome OS by Phoghat · · Score: 1

    Maybe I'm not understanding TFA, or maybe I'm just muzzy in the head at 4 AM, BUT if a Chrome OS notebook is being released this month (Nov.), then how can it be said that Google is releasing Chrome OS in December?

    --
    Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
  69. Replacement for a macbook in 2 years? by Erick+Lionheart · · Score: 1

    I moved away from XP about 4 years ago. I wanted a laptop that just -worked-, and the low quality buggy, virused windows machines definitely weren't it. I didn't want to tinker forever with linux, so had to wait until the business could afford a mac (http://www.gamersloot.net , get your Cataclysm key early to beat the rush ;) ). Burning crusade came out, business was good, and off I switched.

    Have loved my mac ever since, great support, and the software pretty much just... works. But. I am worried about the direction Apple is heading in. Picked up an ipod since there wasn't(isn't?) much else out there. However when phones came out, I couldn't justify the lock-in of the iphone. Bid my time and jumped on the Nexus one when it came out. Love it.
    Interface ease of use is pretty much the same as my gf's Iphone (yeah I know, i'm a reformed geek... don't wanna tinker with linux and have a gf!), yet I don't need to worry that google is going to take away functionalities from it. (And for books, sorry but nothing beats the Kindle. Still using my 1st gen and loving it =b)

    Enters Chrome OS. I'm guessing it'll be a -whole lot- cheaper than a macbook/pro and that... it'll work. Employees in the philippines will be able to use those without worrying about the ubiquitous viruses passed on by friends and anyone that plugs in a USB.

    The question is, (similar to Android's speedy rise?) how long before Chrome OS is popular and mature enough that all basic/popular programs are available on it? (YM, Skype, image/video tools, games etc). Couple years?

    Not in a hurry to move from my M.Pro, but heartened to see Google entering the space. I expect it's just a question of time. While it's easy to criticize, I sure have appreciated Goggle's approach to most things a whole lot more than Microsoft, or even more recently Apple.

    --
    http://www.gamersloot.net/

  70. Will it run SCUMMVM? by cyclomedia · · Score: 1

    (subj). That is all I need to know

    --
    If you don't risk failure you don't risk success.
  71. Windows netbooks have offline movie rentals by judeancodersfront · · Score: 1

    that's why people put up with itunes.

  72. Lost for words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Backup 101: check the tapes are actually backing up, dude! I would fire you on the spot for this.

    1. Re:Lost for words by victorhooi · · Score: 1

      heya,

      Lol, this was personal backups which mean a lot to *me*, but I doubt to anybody else. I have very critical stuff backed up on Dropbox, this was some periphery stuff that happened to be in $HOME, and I hadn't moved across.

      Annoying, and I'm kicking myself, but s*it happens.

      And I don't have so much hubris that I'm not afraid to admit I make a mistake. *shrugs*. Maybe you're that arrogant ? I don't know.

      Also, at the end of the day, I have neither the budget, nor the time, to make sure the harddisk on my laptop is real-time synchronised to redundant storage in multiple datacentres. Dropbox provides that to an extent (it's based on Amazon S3), and Google provide it in a different way (they get you to use their full application stack).

      My lesson is this - I hear enough about SANS and heavily replicated storage systems via work (I work for an IB, so let's just leave it at that). Outsourcing my personal storage needs to a company, that's supplying it for free for targeted advertising is, at least to me, a good value proposition.

      Cheers,
      Victor

  73. I already have an ARM netbook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sharp Netwalkers have been on sale in Japan for some time now.

  74. Which are the other 3? by mangu · · Score: 1

    I for one welcome a 4th operating system on the market

    Wait, isn't ChromeOS basically an application running on top of Android? To call an application running on a Linux distro an OS is a kind of an overstatement. Wait till the Debian bunch start calling it a GNU/ChromeOS.

  75. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by miffo.swe · · Score: 1

    Chrome OS is probably not intended to stay on smaller devices like netbooks forever. It looks as if its more lined up to compete against Windows and Apple on desktops eventually.

    They overlap somewhat between tabs and netbooks but thats not really a problem.

    --
    HTTP/1.1 400
  76. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by imakemusic · · Score: 1

    Do you know what Chrome OS is? Its a browser for an operating system, without net access it may as well be a brick.

    Do you know what a netbook is? I'll give you a clue: there's a hint in the name. Without net access you may as well buy a decent computer.

    --
    Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
  77. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by imakemusic · · Score: 1

    For a brief lesson in how to read a comment out of context and make a totally stupid reply, please see the above comment.

    --
    Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
  78. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by djdavetrouble · · Score: 1

    Please, for the sake of my gram-gram, don't go near ChromeOS.

    Shit, I just installed it in a virtual machine (Parallels has a menu item, "Download Chrome OS").
    I hope your gram gram is ok!

    --
    music lover since 1969
  79. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by anUnhandledException · · Score: 1

    You think google is that stupid? Really?

    You don't think apps will be cached locally and then the cache synced w/ cloud when connectivity returns.

  80. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by MorpheousMarty · · Score: 1

    I think the advantages of Chrome Os are for a completely different class of computer than Windows, or even iOS or Android.

    Let's use for base hardware the Apple TV. It has the same processing capabilities as the iPad and considering Apple's love of high profit margins, is probably way cheaper to make than $99. This means that you could probably release equivalent hardware with a wireless mouse and keyboard for about the same price. What that adds up to is if you have a HDMI compatible screen, you could add Chrome OS to it for less than the price of a Windows license.

    To the people who think of Chrome OS as a useless, stripped down OS:
    Sure, Chrome Os probably won't see much life on a modern desktop, but the potential this has to bring the internet, simply and securely, to almost every other screen in a home is something I won't dismiss so easily. Having spent more on some adapter cables than the hardware this OS could require, I am curious to see how the final product turns out.

  81. Google appear to be dithering by DrXym · · Score: 1

    Google has ChromeOS. Google has Android. What the hell are Google doing releasing two disparate operating systems like this? It confuses everyone and I suspect it's the result of two camps within Google fighting a turf war. It certainly doesn't seem like a coherent strategy whatsoever. For the life of me I can't understand why the touted features of ChromeOS (e.g. webapps) couldn't be integrated into Android. It's not like Android is some bloated legacy OS - it would be perfectly suited to notebooks with relatively modest changes to address the different form factor & inputs.

  82. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by cacba · · Score: 1

    Im not sure what your point is, the levels of sarcasm elude me. The OP clearly has no knowledge other than from the summary but is making market predictions. It may as well be gibberish.

    Also netbooks are currently better than my laptop from 5 years ago, which was definitely worth the money.

  83. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry! I should read a whole thread properly before replying. My comment makes no real sense and my reply to myself was about my post, not yours.

    In short, I agree with you!

  84. Notebooks can't run an OS by AP31R0N · · Score: 1

    They are made of paper.

    A laptop computer, otoH, could.

    --
    Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
  85. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by tehcyder · · Score: 1

    (I have it running on an X41 which permanently sits by my pillow. Great when you wake up at 3AM and just need to look at a site or fire off an email)

    Or alternatively, you could get a life.

    --
    To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  86. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by DrXym · · Score: 1
    Android could be the basis of an easy, cheap, secure computer too. Furthermore it's already proven, has massive industry support and is (over) due a major release shortly. Why Google would choose to muddy the waters with yet another OS which encroaches into the same functionality as Android is beyond me.

    The benefits that ChromeOS touts boil down to fast boot and web apps. I don't see either as things that couldn't be integrated with Android.

  87. Re:finally! there Already is efika by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "going to FINALLY be ARM netbooks for sale!" thee already is the Efika box and book based on the same PCB, what happened to SD these days, You should Already Know This.

    v7 Arm cortex A8/Neon 128bit SIMD Freescale i.MX51 at 800MHz
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOSluW6vHL8
    Microsoft Word on ARM Powered Laptop using Genesi and Citrix solutions

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUQzlf2hqQ8&feature=related

    between the $200 box and $300 laptop developer unit price sits a perfectly usable Arm cortex A8/Neon 128bit SIMD Freescale i.MX51 pad unit.

    it runs chromeOS, AROS , QNX RTP6 (you might know this as the new RIM OS about to come on the Playbook etc)and many other OS's including Debian etc already, ported to it's Arm CPU for a long time now,http://bbrv.blogspot.com/2010/11/next-up-debian-sprint.html

      go buy one and give it a try, its pocket change for any serious developer looking to develop Arm A8 apps etc in the future...

  88. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

    The benefits that ChromeOS touts boil down to fast boot and web apps. I don't see either as things that couldn't be integrated with Android.

    Since Google's CEO has openly stated that the long term strategy is forAndroid and ChromeOS to converge, I would expect that there it is not by accident that every feature and advantage of one is something that could be integrated in the other.

  89. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by tepples · · Score: 1

    How the fuck did you think non-WebGL games would work?

    By being rewritten line-by-line in JavaScript using WebGL.

  90. Re:Read the first line of the article & summar by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

    This "SRWare Iron is necessary to prevent evil spying" myth has been around for ages, and it seems like every time its mentioned, someone replies with a thorough rebuttal of that ridiculous claim. I would like to know, for example, why you would trust an unknown 3rd party's compiled binary-blob Chrome [ / OS] over Google's-- like your rootkits much? Why not just download and compile Chromium [OS]?

    Suffice it to say Chrome with default settings is BARELY if any more intrusive than ANY other browser with its default search engine (suggestions anyone?). Chop off the malware protection, dns prefetch, and translation features, and youre on par with IE8, firefox, and any browser with yahoo or bing or google as default search. Not to mention that about 4 clicks turns off EVERY bit of communication to google that is not explicitly requested....

    Perhaps joke is on me replying to an AC, but if it means (perhaps) another nail in the coffin of this stupid, overused, and wrong complaint, then its worth it to me.

  91. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by DrXym · · Score: 1

    The problem is that there is a distinction at all. ChromeOS probably offers a superior browsing experience but it will be horrible in most other regards. Android is a remarkably rounded device but is suffering from lack of support for a burgeoning variety of PMPs, ereaders, tablets, netbooks etc. which are trying to use it. Google's message is really confused. Arguably as confused or worse as Microsoft supporting Windows Phone 7 AND Kin. It's confusing to everybody. It's clear that Android has longer legs than ChromeOS and to an outside observer it looks like two rival camps inside Google are having a turf war. The CEO should be killing one project and moving the good stuff into the other.

  92. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

    Android is a remarkably rounded device

    Android is not a device.

    but is suffering from lack of support for a burgeoning variety of PMPs, ereaders, tablets, netbooks etc. which are trying to use it.

    Android's target market might be evident from the fact that it is owned by the Open Handset Alliance.

    Its a free-to-use OS so companies in other markets might can choose to use it even if the OHA isn't targeting the market they are in, and its an open-source OS so those companies are also free to customize it to meet the needs of their market, but generally they are peripheral to the strategy for the OS.

    Google's message is really confused.

    Android is a handset operating system. ChromeOS is essentially a notebook/desktop operating system with a buffed-up web browser as the standard graphical shell.

    Unlike some OS vendors, neither Google nor the Open Handset Alliance are particularly interested in stopping vendors from using either operating system outside of the principle target market, but each has a clear principal target market.

    Arguably as confused or worse as Microsoft supporting Windows Phone 7 AND Kin.

    I think its more like Apple supporting both iOS and OSX.

    It's confusing to everybody.

    Its not confusing to me. It doesn't seem to be confusing to hardware vendors. "You" != "everybody".

    Its clear that Android has longer legs than ChromeOS

    I don't think that's clear at all; its clear that Android is far more well established than ChromeOS is (which is not the same thing.) Which is one reason why it makes sense for Google to release ChromeOS separately: why saddle the established Android ecosystem with baggage related to a peripherally-related target market? Shared components and other positive synergies are possible without that, and the time for convergence is once you've got both well-established in their respective niches and can converge them without breaking the momentum that either has.

    to an outside observer it looks like two rival camps inside Google are having a turf war.

    I would say that says more about the outside observer's lack of vision than any problem at Google.

    The CEO should be killing one project and moving the good stuff into the other.

    I can see where that might seem to be the case to someone grounded in traditional management practices, unfamiliar with lean software development, and unable to see why you would have one faily conservative project aimed at meeting clear, well-established immediate needs and a riskier (but bigger potential payoff), longer-term project aimed at meeting more distant needs in a related or broader market that might eventually subsume the immediate one, and why you might want to keep those separate from (though informed by) each other.

  93. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by DaVince21 · · Score: 1

    Offline HTML5 technology allows (or will soon enough allow) you to visit some of the cached websites offline, most notably GMail and Google Docs. It's not quite a brick at that point.

    --
    I am not devoid of humor.
  94. well.... by mycomputerlady · · Score: 1

    That is exciting! I rather have something by google that is easy to use vs Microsoft.. that isn't as user friendly!

  95. Windows CE netbooks by tepples · · Score: 1

    Now if MS had a windows version for ARM

    Microsoft does sell a Windows brand operating system designed for ARM CPUs. I've seen a kiosk in a local mall selling Windows CE netbooks. Don't they run the same collection of apps as Windows Mobile PDAs?

  96. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by cacba · · Score: 1

    To cache the website requires a net connection, or a lot of hacking. Though it can still be used as a short range flashlight.

  97. Re:I don't think this will compete directly with i by DaVince21 · · Score: 1

    To cache the website requires a one-time connection to the website. After that, you'll always be able to reach it offline (unless you delete the cache), so sites you visit commonly are at least available offline at that point. Kind of like using an email client offline, or developing a website on localhost.

    --
    I am not devoid of humor.