Why Google Needs To Launch the Chromebook Pixel
DavidGilbert99 writes "A leaked video of the purported Google Chromebook Pixel laptop has stirred quite a lot of interest but whether or not the laptop in the video is real, Google needs to launch it in order to kickstart the Chrome OS platform." A high-res screen would be welcome, but Google seems to be doing alright with Chromebook sales right now. Warning: IB Times has ads with autoplaying videos and sound; you have been warned.
The article doesn't make a particularly good case for why ChromeOS would suddenly become attractive on a high-resolution touchscreen. Especially given that it's built around Google's not-touch-optimised web apps.
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
Every now and then I see one of these ChromeOS stories, and it reminds me that ChromeOS exists. I'm not being catty there, I mean that I really do literally forget about it. That's probably not a good sign for Google. It not only hasn't made a big splash, it's barely made ANY splash at all.
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
Why do videos like this generate so much interest? It's just another laptop. Looks like every laptop that came before it. Throw in a touchscreen, whatever. It's still just a big hinged rectangle. Nothing new here.
Best buy advertises and sells Chromebooks. My mom has one and loves it compared to her slow netbook.
It is a laptop that doesn't come with an os from Apple or Microsoft.
Yes, I know there are others, but every time I see a new non-AppleSoft machine being sold it makes me glad.
Other than that- yeah, nothing that seems all that compelling to me.
Google doesn't need new hardware for Chrome OS. They just need more marketing, because they're already doing well.
Imagine for a moment that you're a small business, such as a plumbing company. You don't have a full-time IT staff. You have maybe 10-30 computers.
You're probably buying your PCs retail. Then you have to buy a Windows server, and pay someone to set it up. You buy CALs for users and computers. A second back-up server is probably out of your budget. Off-site data back-ups are probably out of the question.
Who administers your network to keep it safe and secure? How to do you prevent malware and viruses? Administer your email?
You pay a bunch upfront, and then never know when you need to bring in an IT company to fix things. Your IT budget is completely unknown.
Or, you get Chromebooks. Google used to offer packages to lease them for $25/$30 a month. Not sure if they still do, but you can get them for $250 if not. You don't have to have your own server, unless you need Citrix for proprietary Windows apps. Your data is in the cloud. You don't have to run a mail server. Anyone can sit at any PC and instantly have their work. You don't pay an IT staff. You can budget easily for IT costs.
http://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/business/devices/
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
not really
who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
Sure, the high res screen would be nice. If I could ask for a single upgrade for my Samsung Chromebook, that would be it.. But the last few Chromebooks released have been disappointing to me, and I'm skeptical that this would be any better.
I'd say Samsung got it right with the Exynos CPU, and ChromeOS runs very, very well on ARM. Between my home and business we've replaced 3 laptops with Chromebooks, but it seems like the Samsung model is the only one that I would even consider. If you want a cheap feeling, heavy, loud, low battery life laptop, there's plenty of those to choose from. If you want something that runs cool, runs for long time, doesn't annoy you with fans, and doesn't burn your lap, then the Samsung is your only pick.
Google, if you want to release a "powerhouse" chromebook, try the Exynos quad core, and throw in some more memory. Exynos supports 40 bit memory addressing, so the 4G barrier doesn't really exist in a practical sense (32 bit address space exposed to each processes, chrome is multi-process).
Squash
I want that screen in a shiny, non-Apple laptop and load it with Linux.
I installed a Chrome OS VM just yesterday to see what all the fuss was about.
It seems nice enough to surf and use web apps. I haven't really tried offline yet, but if they say it works, it probably does.
Were it does come apart is in any old-school scenario: I could find no way to access my network shares, to play non-local media content (except running a web server and presenting the content as Flash or HTML5), no DLNA client nor server.
I don't really see how Chrome OS is superior to Android. Is there anything Chrome OS does that Android doesn't ? 'coz there's sure plenty that Android does but Chrome OS doesn't !
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
One of them is some sort of television feed. This plays right along with the ad videos! I feel like Ozymandias in Watchmen with my wall of a hundreds of video screens on that page.
Adblock and Flashblock are your best friends.
Android was the product of an "Oh $#!+" moment when Google realized the world was migrating to mobile access of the internet, and they had no presence in that space. They did not want to be beholden to Apple for access to their mobile user-base. Google's effort in the mobile space is to generate a user-base more or less locked into Google's family of services. They're much more able to get their fingers into a platform that they control, and are thus better able to monetize the user-base's interaction with their services. Google will eventually and inevitably merge Android and ChromeOS into a single product line. Similarly, Apple will ultimately merge OS X and iOS. Just like Micro$0ft has basically already done with Windows 8.
I'm sure I'm not the person they want to sell to but last time looked it offered nothing for doing development. Excluding that they live in a magical world where you always have a net connection. Even in a well connected city that's not always the case. I'll stick with OS X or Linux which does everything chrome os does and more.
This device looks great, with the sweet screen, that means there is a need for a decent CPU + GPU combination, also hopefully it means that this device will support more, and hopefully higher speed memory. Up to 8 gigs of Ram, a great touch-enabled screen, a moderately powerful CPU + GPU, an SSD, backlit keyboard, and very stylish look and size, sign me up! If Google can squeeze some good battery life out of this machine, between 4-6 hours, this product will be a slam dunk. Everyone arguing about ChromeOS, who cares? If you don't like ChromeOS, load something else. If you are not a technical person and do not like ChromeOS, look for something else. Google is hardly struggling, but this flagship device looks great. Personally, I love Android, it's a great mobile operating system, and if blending ChromeOS with Android brings more functionality I am all for it. I am a Fedora fan on laptops, and would likely dual boot Fedora on this machine, but if I could get all my developer tools to run in ChromeOS, I could see myself just running ChromeOS.
I don't want cheesy-poof grease on my screen.
I'm not impressed with Chromebook sales considering fairly similar PC laptop models at that price point also sell like hotcakes. I bought an Acer Aspire One 725-0687 from Walmart for under $200 USD and it works fine in Debian unstable. That sounds like a better price than say 199 British pounds. http://www.walmart.com/ip/Acer-Red-11.6-AO725-0687-Laptop-PC-with-AMD-Dual-Core-C-70-Accelerated-Processor-and-Windows-8-Operating-System/21853455 I did have to swap out the hard drive for an SSD but I would have had to have done that with an Acer Chromebook as well. And unlike an Acer Chromebook, I would not have had to have been forced to use Ubuntu 12.04 or whatever has been hacked to work on the Chromebook, but instead I can use any Linux distribution I want once I set the bios to legacy bios. Apparently Walmart can sell whatever number of $200 11.6 inch laptops they want, just like Google can sell however many sub $250 USD Chromebooks they want. The question of course is whether the respective companies feel like keeping these products in stock, which is not always the case for either.
Hasn't anybody else noticed that this video is just showing a MacBook with a stupid image fullscreen? I very highly doubt there is something like that in the works...
I'm pretty sure it is a MacBook Pro. Some idiot conspiracy theorists probably put this video together and now everybody is believing it.
Did anyone else notice the lack of a registered trademark symbol on "Google" at the end of the video?
why are you paying extra for an ultrabook, where the emphasis is on portability?
It looks like a laptop.
Any laptop looks like any other, except from Thinkpads which are functional rather than shiny.
Google needs to launch it in order to kickstart the Chrome OS platform.
I've got a feeling Google already has a pretty good idea of what they need to do.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
(I know, I'm feeding this obTroll, but hey, it's 3am here, and I'm waiting for a render to complete!) Chromebook is a laptop, not a tablet. And why do you need "external media" to boot (indeed, you seem to think "booting" is something all devices do in the same way.) I'm getting the impression you really don't understand the differences between a laptop and a tablet. Fwiw, my Nexus 10 is a tablet, but it is not "locked down." Unlocking it and reflashing it with cyanogen's excellent mod took all of five minutes. I spent US $5 to get an adapter that lets me have "access" to external media. Finding a convenient way to store that dongle, though, has proven to be almost more trouble than it was worth. Almost. Damn you, Google, for annoying me like that.