Google's Pricey Pixel Gets USB-C and a Lower Price

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google's Pricey Pixel Gets USB-C and a Lower Price

Posted by timothy on Thursday March 12, 2015 @05:06AM from the dang-I-say-dang dept.

The Register reports that Google's high-end Chromebook Pixel has gotten a few spec bumps, and a lower price. It's still a touchscreen with a resolution of 2,560 × 1,700, but now that screen is backed by 8GB RAM (rather than 4) as a base configuration, and the system is equipped with a Broadwell Core i5 chip, rather than the Ivy Bridge in the first rev. The price has dropped, too; it may still be the most expensive Chromebook, but now it's "only" $999 on the low end, which is $300 less than the first Pixels cost. ($1300, though, gets an i7, 64 gigs of SSD instead of 32, and 8GB of RAM. Perhaps most interesting is that it adds USB type C, and (topping Apple's latest entry) it's got two of them.

139 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

But it's still a Chromebook... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 05:19 · Score: 0, Insightful

...which rather negates the spec upgrades. Shame, I wouldn't buy it at half the price.
1. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 05:24 · Score: 0
  
  I don't know. Maybe it works fine as a Linux Machine. Think of it - it is a nice piece of hardware without Microsoft tax on it. That is relevant also when you can get a Windows copy through MSDN. Why pay for that extra Win license?
2. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-12 05:27 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  <sarcasm> Yes, but don't forget, it's running everything through a web browser, so it NEEDS the beefier specs. </sarcasm>
  Besides, their next version will be $17,000 and have a fake gold-ceramic housing. Give them credit, though - it'll still be more useful than an Apple watch.
  
  --
  "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
3. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by mellon · 2015-03-12 05:44 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Actually that means it runs Linux natively, which is kind of a big draw from my perspective. I'm considering getting one, but will not be running ChromeOS on it if I do.
4. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 06:03 · Score: 0
  
  Seriously. Why do geeks even care about this devices. Put ALL your data in someone else's cloud? (Heck lets ignore its a bloody ad networks cloud)
5. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by squiggleslash · 2015-03-12 06:08 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Right now on my work PC, Excel.exe, which I'm using to reformat the giant big-ass Excel sheets I keep being given by another department into a form I can easily load into our DB, is taking up 14M. Firefox is coming in at 567M (and, to be honest, that's the smallest I've seen it in a while, but OTOH I did restart it recently and it only has a few tabs open.)
  So... actually... it makes sense that a device that requires you use the Google office apps rather than native apps, would require you use considerably more memory and power.
  Yes, it's ridiculous, but think of it like this: how optimal do you think a Google spreadsheet, implemented over JavaScript, the DOM, and XML, in turn implemented over various abstraction layers that eventually get down to C++ and some kinda linkage to the native widgets of the underlying OS, is, compared to a Microsoft/GNOME Spreadsheet implemented directly in C++, with a little abstraction but not a lot between that C++ and the underlying OS?
  TL;DR: A device that forces you to run desktop apps inside a web browser will always need more power than a device that allows optimized apps to run.
  Which is probably why we shouldn't be heading in this direction.
  ...which we all know we're going to anyway, because we're tech, and tech always heads in the stupid direction. Wanna buy a watch to go with your 9.7" voiceless iPhone?
  
  --
  You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
6. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Greyfox · 2015-03-12 06:25 · Score: 2
  
  From what I've seen, web apps and virtualization programs like Citrix deliver 1990s-level-performance on today's processors. All I can think is that at some point someone asked their computer for something, got an instantaneous response back and was terrified. I can imagine that person saying "My God! If my computer responds instantly, how will I take a 20 minute smoke break every 2 hours?" While there's nothing more nostalgia-inducing than watching your UI update with all the speed of a 2400 baud modem, I have to think that companies that don't adopt these solutions will have a huge productivity advantage.
  
  --
  I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
7. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by ShanghaiBill · 2015-03-12 06:37 · Score: 2
  
  I don't know. Maybe it works fine as a Linux Machine.
  Most Chromebooks have very little local storage. This "high end" Chromebook has 64GB, but 16GB is more typical. They are intended to be used as thin clients, and there many good uses for those. For non-tech office workers, Chomebooks often work well because they are using web docs anyway, and doing "everything in the browser" means it is all on a synchronized and backed-up server. Chromebooks also work well as shared computers for schools. They are cheap (starting under $200), easy to set up (the apps are on the web, not the local drive), interchangeable (you don't have to get the one where you saved your work last time), and somewhat harder to sabotage.
8. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 06:54 · Score: 0
  
  Think of it - it is a nice piece of hardware without Microsoft tax on it.
  
  And yet all the hardware with this supposed "tax" is cheaper than the hardware without it. I'll take the "tax" any day of the week.
9. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by willy_me · 2015-03-12 06:57 · Score: 1
  
  You really do not pay extra for the Windows license. Twenty to thirty bucks amounts to 1-2% of the final purchase price. It is very cheap. From the manufacturer's perspective, this gives them reduced distribution, support, and inventory costs witch would otherwise be added to the product price. Not surprising if the Windows computer is actually cheaper.
  The real reason for getting this laptop is because it's a nice laptop with components that are well supported in Linux. And it is highly likely that Google will continue to support, or require the component designers continue to support, Linux into the foreseeable future.
10. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Daniel+Hoffmann · 2015-03-12 07:32 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Chrome comes with NaCl plugins for google docs, sheets and other things to make them faster. Yes, google docs and sheets use (I believe mostly) native code when run inside chrome (you can disable the plugins that do that). The javascript is for the other browsers.
11. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 07:37 · Score: 0
  
  Having used Crouton on my Chromebook, the biggest issue I have with it is that the keyboard layout is different.
12. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by tlhIngan · 2015-03-12 08:02 · Score: 1
  
  Actually that means it runs Linux natively, which is kind of a big draw from my perspective. I'm considering getting one, but will not be running ChromeOS on it if I do.
  Only if by big draw you like kludges. Sure it may be the Linux way but still.
  Yeah, you CAN run Linux on it. You can also run Windows (it has SeaBIOS in it). But to do either means you have hit Ctrl-D within 30 seconds of power up (or reboot) every time to boot into your "alternate" (non-ChromeOS) OS otherwise it times out and goes into a recovery mode where it waits for you to insert a recovery USB stick. Sure not a hassle in that you can turn it off and turn it on again, then wait for it to get to the point where it finds an unsigned OS so you can hit Ctrl-D, but still not elegant.
  So yes, you can, but it's not a Linux laptop by far.
13. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by nut · 2015-03-12 08:43 · Score: 1
  
  I bought a Lenovo X131e Chromebook second hand for exactly that purpose. Went online for the instructions to boot it into developer mode so I could change the OS ... Nothing worked. I emailed Lenovo directly with the serial number for advice, got no reply. As far as I can tell it is a device that does not allow any change to the BIOS.
  I now have a device that runs ChromeOS and nothing else. So it's going to get sold on to the next victim. Make sure if you do buy one for this purpose that you really are able to change the OS.
  
  --
  Never trust a man in a blue trench coat, Never drive a car when you're dead
14. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by squiggleslash · 2015-03-12 08:44 · Score: 1
  
  Seems... awkward. That option isn't available for other (for example, third party) applications presumably, and in any case, doesn't that leave Google maintaining two entirely different code bases for the same product, that aren't even written in the same language or using similar design concepts?
  
  --
  You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
15. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-12 08:54 · Score: 2
  
  You really do not pay extra for the Windows license. Twenty to thirty bucks amounts to 1-2% of the final purchase price.
  
  According to your figures, the minimum people are spending on a computer is $1,000 ($20 == 2%) and up to $3,000 ($30 == 1%).
  If you're spending that much, you're more likely buying an Apple laptop, in which case you're not paying for a Windows license.
  
  --
  "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
16. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by macs4all · 2015-03-12 09:07 · Score: 1
  
  <sarcasm> Yes, but don't forget, it's running everything through a web browser, so it NEEDS the beefier specs. </sarcasm>
  Besides, their next version will be $17,000 and have a fake gold-ceramic housing. Give them credit, though - it'll still be more useful than an Apple watch.
  Barbara, I'm surprised at you.
  
  The high-end Apple Watch is $10k (which is definitely not that high in the watch-as-a-fashion-statement-world) and actually has a solid 18k Gold-Ceramic "alloy" housing.
  
  I must admit though; I probably wouldn't buy that model even if I was loaded...
  
  And I don't know if you watched the Keynote the other day; but they really do make some compelling use-cases for it (and I don't mean stupid-shit like sending your heartbeat or flower-scribbles).
17. Re: But it's still a Chromebook... by notjim · 2015-03-12 09:21 · Score: 1
  
  That's not true, you switch between chromos and Linux without rebooting; on a cheap chrome box it works great; chromos for browsing and playing movies, two key presses and you have Linux for programming or whatever.
18. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 09:42 · Score: 0
  
  But there's the Google tax:
  Google will suck-up all your private data -- as well as whatever data you communicate with others even if they haven't subscribed to the Google Way of doing thins -- and store it forever on their servers, and making it available to any government.
19. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 09:51 · Score: 0
  
  So? I have a 16GB SSD Chromebook (Acer C720) -- it's awesome. You do have to be careful and try out the Chromebook you have in mind before you buy... some of the keyboards or design or trackpad can be atrocious... but as for size, I put Debian on it through Crouton, and although there are limits to what it can do, with an external HD for storing actual stuff, are you really cranking through that much data at any one time? I work in HPC, deal with massive datasets, and just do all that with my work desktop. While it is amusing when Chrome runs out of memory for too many tabs, the thing is responsive, does all I need, and I can throw it off a bridge four times over before it costs me as much as spilling a coffee on a MacBook Air (literally the reason why I got this thing in the first place). Also, you can upgrade the SSDs in these so easily, it's like a dream.
20. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-12 09:57 · Score: 1
  
  Why not just run apps natively then, instead of in the crappy browser environment? Oh, right, Google lock-in. Silly me.
  
  --
  "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
21. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by exomondo · 2015-03-12 10:20 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know. Maybe it works fine as a Linux Machine.
  I'm sure it would work just fine as a Linux machine, that's probably what most people will buy it for. ChromeOS being a Linux distribution means it should at least have good hardware support for other Linux distributions.
  
  Think of it - it is a nice piece of hardware without Microsoft tax on it.
  I'd say that's probably negligible, I mean this is hardly any cheaper than any comparable Windows laptop and it's pretty silly to think they wouldn't be amortizing some of the operating system development costs in the price of this system. On a Mac you're paying an OSX "tax" and on this you'd be paying a ChromeOS "tax".
22. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by exomondo · 2015-03-12 10:30 · Score: 1
  
  The high-end Apple Watch is $10k (which is definitely not that high in the watch-as-a-fashion-statement-world) and actually has a solid 18k Gold-Ceramic "alloy" housing.
  It's definitely high when the company it comes from is the maker of common computers and smartphones though, particularly when the device itself is identical to the $349 version just in a different colored (let's be honest you're not noticing that it is actually a different material in any circumstance, which is exactly why no other version comes in a gold color unlike many of Apple's other products) case.
23. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Art3x · 2015-03-12 10:34 · Score: 1
  
  it makes sense that a device that requires you use the Google office apps rather than native apps, would require you use considerably more memory and power.
  Yes, it's ridiculous, but think of it like this: how optimal do you think a Google spreadsheet, implemented over JavaScript, the DOM, and XML, in turn implemented over various abstraction layers that eventually get down to C++ and some kinda linkage to the native widgets of the underlying OS, is, compared to a Microsoft/GNOME Spreadsheet implemented directly in C++, with a little abstraction but not a lot between that C++ and the underlying OS?
  TL;DR: A device that forces you to run desktop apps inside a web browser will always need more power than a device that allows optimized apps to run.
  Are you forgetting the other Chromebooks, all implanted with low-end processors? The Pixel is noteworthy because it's overkill. James Kendrick writes, "My old Acer C720 Chromebook had budget hardware when released, and still runs Chrome OS well." (Okay, his "old" Chromebook came out just a year ago. But still, it has a Celeron. Others have ARM processors.) The consensus is that Chromebooks are snappy no matter the hardware.
24. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Art3x · 2015-03-12 10:36 · Score: 1
  
  Why not just run apps natively then, instead of in the crappy browser environment? Oh, right, Google lock-in.
  Do apps written in JavaScript lock you into Google?
25. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-12 11:14 · Score: 1
  
  A nice watch is a great fashion accessory - these are fugly ugly. You can strap them around your ankle and say you're being tracked while out on parole and it would be less embarrassing ...
  The first app for it is the BMW one that will let you roll up your windows with your watch. Or find your car. Call me underwhelmed.
  About the only really useful app for any watch will be to find my phone (or my keys) :-)
  
  --
  "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
26. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by unixisc · 2015-03-12 11:19 · Score: 1
  
  I have a normal Dell Inspiron 17, which was $800. 8GB of RAM, 1TB of hard disk (not SSD), a wide keyboard w/ a numeric keypad panel. I overwrote Windows 8.1 w/ PC-BSD, and except for the WiFi issue, no complaints. This whole thing sure beats a Chromebook.
  I also bought a new $99 Winbook - 2GB RAM, 32GB integrated flash (translation: NAND flash, same as in SSD). For things that must have Windows, such as my label maker, or GoToMeeting I use that. But my daily activities - browsing, email, even my game FreeCiv - this PC-BSD laptop does it very well. I couldn't be happier!
27. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by mellon · 2015-03-12 11:29 · Score: 1
  
  Good advice. This is why I tend to buy the official Google labeled thing and not the third-party version. Works for Android too. I am indeed trolling the chromium os site to see if info on the new pixel will pop up. So far nothing.
28. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by macs4all · 2015-03-12 11:43 · Score: 1
  
  The high-end Apple Watch is $10k (which is definitely not that high in the watch-as-a-fashion-statement-world) and actually has a solid 18k Gold-Ceramic "alloy" housing.
  It's definitely high when the company it comes from is the maker of common computers and smartphones though, particularly when the device itself is identical to the $349 version just in a different colored (let's be honest you're not noticing that it is actually a different material in any circumstance, which is exactly why no other version comes in a gold color unlike many of Apple's other products) case.
  What in THE hell are you talking about???
  
  The three versions of the watch probably have the same guts; but they definitely have different case materials: Aluminum, Stainless Steel and Gold. Of course Apple would want to distinguish the actual Gold case from the others; to do otherwise would be utterly ridiculous, and would actually devalue both the lower-end AND the premium SKUs in the eye of the (potential) customer.
  
  This is Marketing 101. Can someone with some actual Marketing experience please explain this simple concept to the Parent?
  
  Personally, I hate gold-anodized or gold-plated products. To me, they just look like they are made for those who would like others to THINK they can afford actual Gold (like the high-end Apple Watch), but in actuality, they can't.
  
  Oh, and how many mechanical watches that cost as much, or even more, than the $10k Apple Watch do you think have some generic parts in their high-priced cases? I would be willing to bet that it is a lot more common than you would think.
29. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 11:54 · Score: 0
  
  You can still install a "normal" linux distribution. It's just a shame that they don't make the source code for the firmware available in an easy to rebuild package, so one deosn't have to run it in the fickle developer mode, and always press a key when it boots.
30. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Chalnoth · 2015-03-12 11:56 · Score: 2
  
  Nope. You have a fair amount of control as to how much data Google stores, and can tell Google to delete all of your data if you like. See here. I do think Google could stand to do a bit of work improving the interface, and making it more clear that they allow this sort of thing. But they do have pretty good privacy controls.
  Even on a Chromebook, you can avoid Google collecting essentially anything connected to you if you simply browse in an incognito window and don't log into Google within that window.
31. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by exomondo · 2015-03-12 12:01 · Score: 1
  
  What in THE hell are you talking about???
  Why did you ask that question if you were going to go on a big rant about something you profess to not understand rather than waiting for an answer anyway?
  To clarify: Other high-priced watches have some differentiating factor, they aren't just a cheap watch with the same case mass-produced from a different material. This is putting a Timex in the same shaped case but mass-producing it out of a more expensive material.
  ...also please don't take personal offence to the comparison of Apple and Timex, I know some Apple fans (not saying you're one of them) would do that and then pretend they don't understand the point on that basis.
32. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Bing+Tsher+E · 2015-03-12 12:11 · Score: 1
  
  Google apps written in JavaScript lock you into Google.
33. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Bing+Tsher+E · 2015-03-12 12:15 · Score: 1
  
  Personally, I hate gold-anodized or gold-plated products. To me, they just look like they are made for those who would like others to THINK they can afford actual Gold (like the high-end Apple Watch), but in actuality, they can't.
  Truly rich people are happy wearing 24 carat gold jewlery that has been copper plated. It matters just as much to them as anything else.
  The $10k iWatch is only made out of gold so that it can be priced at $10k.
  Has anybody figured out the scrap value? Those places that buy scrap gold need to set their rates for about a year from now when Version 1 is a turd and the new version is specifically designed to have a different case footprint.
34. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Bing+Tsher+E · 2015-03-12 12:17 · Score: 1
  
  Apple, a Buick-class company, got BMW to answer the phone?
35. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Bing+Tsher+E · 2015-03-12 12:22 · Score: 2
  
  Saying ChromeOS is a 'Linux distribution' is like saying that my iPod Touch runs a version of NextStep.
36. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-12 13:16 · Score: 1
  
  Apple, a Buick-class company, got BMW to answer the phone?
  Maybe they heard the rumors of Apple wanting to get in the car business and thought Apple might be interested in buying them. After all, with BMW with a market cap of less than $80 billion, Apple can use part of the $137 billion they have stored off-shore to make an all-cash offer and permanently avoid US taxes on it.
  
  --
  "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
37. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 14:01 · Score: 0
  
  So would Google apps written in object oriented COBOL :-)
38. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by exomondo · 2015-03-12 14:27 · Score: 0
  
  Well it fits the definition of a Linux definition perfectly, I'm not particularly concerned if you want to say your iPod Touch runs a version of NextStep or care whether or not that's at all accurate.
39. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 20:36 · Score: 0
  
  The problem is the same for Windows tablets running on Atom. Because "Tablet" and "Convertible" are seperate markets in which Microsoft does not have a monopoly they do not need to abide by their consent decree and thus ship the bootloader locked.
  Do not buy an Atom based Windows Tablet.
40. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Daniel+Hoffmann · 2015-03-13 00:48 · Score: 1
  
  It is not the whole application that is written in NaCl and google has the man power to maintain two code bases, plus the backend code is, of course, shared. It might also use the google closure compile to have a single code base that compiles down to both targets (NaCl and javascript).
41. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Daniel+Hoffmann · 2015-03-13 00:50 · Score: 1
  
  Well they do support browsers that don't have NaCl, those browsers are free to implement NaCl as well if they so chose. This is not evil by itself but I can't say there aren't some unfortunate implications.
42. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-13 01:42 · Score: 1
  
  Funny thing is, 2 of my nephews have chromebooks for university, and they're not only cheap, but nobody's going to steal them. It's like someone stealing an old flip-phone when there are so many better phones around ripe for the picking.
  
  --
  "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
43. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by squiggleslash · 2015-03-13 02:38 · Score: 1
  
  If it only replaces part of the application, it seems to be unlikely that the reduction is enough to counter the fact the same app now has to run under several levels of abstraction, each considerably less efficient even excluding lower levels of abstraction - ie an application written in Javascript, even if somehow compiled to machine code - is always going to be memory intensive* compared to a well written C++ application than the layer below it.
  It sounds to be that NaCl is more of a hack to try to reduce the disadvantages of the environment, not a fix for the problem altogether.
  
  * I've done a lot of thought on this, because I actually like JavaScript, it's a nice, clean, free form OO language, and most of its ostensible public critics tend actually to be criticizing the DOM and other stuff that's not actually JS but a product of the fact it's usually used within a web browser, rather than the language itself. Certain features, such as the way JS handles closures and 'eval' type scopes, make it very, very, difficult to implement at a low level that doesn't ultimately involve large amounts of metadata being held in memory, and large amounts of otherwise ready for garbage collection information that a compiler has no way of knowing will not be used in future. It's a beautiful prototype, but it'd be nice to see someone who knows what they're doing actually knock together a "Web Scripting Language 1.0" that is almost as free form and just as flexible but with less overhead.
  
  --
  You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
44. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Shirley+Marquez · 2015-03-13 07:29 · Score: 1
  
  I bought an Atom based Windows tablet. To run Windows. I wanted a cheap portable Windows device to run some ham radio applications as part of my portable station, and it fills the bill nicely. But I didn't go in with any plans to use it for Linux, nor have I tried it so far.
  You are correct, though, if one wants to use it to run any OS other than Windows. Investigate the particular device first.
45. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-13 20:16 · Score: 0
  
  Why would Chrome OS not be a linux distribution? It is hardly critical to GP's point whether you think it constitutes a linux distribution anyway though.
46. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by squiggleslash · 2015-03-15 07:08 · Score: 1
  
  No, I'm not. The difference between Firefox and Excel was what I was highlighting. Both a 600M and 16M (I can't be arsed to scroll up and look at the exact figures) will fit quite happy on a 1G laptop and run mostly OK on a 10 year old CPU.
  The issue comes in applications. Is James Kendrick really using his Chromebook in the same way as a person with similar hardware would use a Windows or GNU/Linux system? Are you expecting him to be able to edit 3D graphics, or play even a 10 year old FPS, even assuming a port to JavaScript of the latter can be found?
  ChromeBooks are seen, for the most part, as heavily stripped down, and as less capable than a ten year old Thinkpad, not because the hardware is incapable of running the same stuff (faster, even) but because the added layers of abstraction are both inherently inefficient, and because the choices of abstraction technology, JS, HTML5, etc, are far from ideal in the efficiency department.
  Yes, they're usable, but with a gigabyte of memory and a relatively modern CPU, even if not a top of the line one, you should be able to edit using Google Docs. But, well, Google Docs is... let's just say it's not even comparable to Office 95. Remember that? That ran happily on Pentium 1s, with 32Mb of memory. That's how decrepit the enforced usage of web technologies makes a modern laptop.
  
  --
  You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
47. Re:But it's still a Chromebook... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-18 10:35 · Score: 0
  
  Why? Most people know Python pretty well, it's fairly mainstream these days.
64GB by TechyImmigrant · 2015-03-12 05:25 · Score: 3, Interesting

I'm a bit disappointed with the 64GB storage.
I would get one of these for as a Linux laptop, but I want 1TB, like my Macbook.
If the wise denizens of /. can tell me I just need to plug thing X into slot Y to get that, I'll send in my order.

--
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
1. Re:64GB by allquixotic · 2015-03-12 05:36 · Score: 2
  
  Slot? This is a consumer device. It's not user serviceable. The SSD is probably either soldered in, or behind so much glue that you'll never be able to put the thing back together again properly once you install the replacement.
2. Re:64GB by ceoyoyo · 2015-03-12 05:39 · Score: 1
  
  Unless you really want the touchscreen, I don't really see why you'd buy one of these over another Macbook.
3. Re:64GB by mellon · 2015-03-12 05:48 · Score: 2
  
  More ports. Runs Linux. I agree about the touchscreen, though. Don't really quite understand that for a laptop.
4. Re:64GB by TechyImmigrant · 2015-03-12 05:51 · Score: 1
  
  Unless you really want the touchscreen, I don't really see why you'd buy one of these over another Macbook.
  I do Mac type things on my Macbook. I'm not interested in ChromeOS. But a native Linux laptop would be handy, especially for long flights where I get most of my best programming done. I hate the touch screen on laptops. I have a Lenovo with that and I had to disable the touch screen so it didn't mess up whenever anyone pointed at the screen.
  
  --
  I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
5. Re:64GB by blindbat · 2015-03-12 06:01 · Score: 2
  
  Move music off the drive onto usb storage. I got a small usb drive with just a tiny nub that sticks out for my daughter's chromebook and it works great. That leaves a lot of room on the drive. Remember that the OS doesn't take up 20-30 gigs of space on a chromebook.
6. Re:64GB by Microlith · 2015-03-12 06:05 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  It's a surface mount, single-package SSD.
7. Re:64GB by Ichijo · 2015-03-12 06:09 · Score: 2
  
  If the wise denizens of /. can tell me I just need to plug thing X into slot Y to get [1TB, like my Macbook], I'll send in my order.
  
  Sure, plug one of these into one of these into one of the USB-C slots on the Chromebook.
  
  --
  Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
8. Re:64GB by Rob+Y. · 2015-03-12 06:11 · Score: 2
  
  As Chrome gains the ability to run Android apps, a touchscreen will be a must. Not because touch is great on a laptop, but because Android apps would be awful with a trackpad. (actually, everything's awful with a trackpad, but I assume you can plug a mouse into this thing)
  
  --
  Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
9. Re:64GB by ceoyoyo · 2015-03-12 06:17 · Score: 2
  
  MacBooks run Linux very well. Possibly better than these things. Do you still have to do some hacking to run Linux instead of Chrome?
10. Re:64GB by ceoyoyo · 2015-03-12 06:25 · Score: 1
  
  What do you mean by a "native Linux laptop?" Linux runs just fine on Mac or Windows notebooks. This notebook happens to come with ChromeOS instead of OS X or Windows. I couldn't find details on the current one, but the old Pixel didn't have a standard BIOS so you had to hack that to get a regular Linux install to work. Then you're left with a notebook with an undersized hard drive because Google expected you to store everything in the cloud.
11. Re:64GB by TechyImmigrant · 2015-03-12 06:32 · Score: 1
  
  What do you mean by a "native Linux laptop?" Linux runs just fine on Mac or Windows notebooks. This notebook happens to come with ChromeOS instead of OS X or Windows. I couldn't find details on the current one, but the old Pixel didn't have a standard BIOS so you had to hack that to get a regular Linux install to work. Then you're left with a notebook with an undersized hard drive because Google expected you to store everything in the cloud.
  I know I can run Linux on my Macbook, but I use XCode and have big data sets that use most of the disk.
  I could get another Macbook, but then I don't get to play with new things.
  The undersized disk thing was my original point.
  
  --
  I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
12. Re:64GB by AmiMoJo · 2015-03-12 06:35 · Score: 1
  
  Where did you get that information?
  I'd never buy a laptop with soldered in SSD... What if you need to recover data from it and the machine is otherwise dead? What if I want to upgrade it? Most ultrabook super thin laptops have mSATA drives.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
13. Re:64GB by Blaskowicz · 2015-03-12 07:18 · Score: 1
  
  And writing music to USB thumb drive is painfully slow. Most ones will give you a few MB/s of write speed, and it is compounded by the fact you write some hundreds of file so there's slowdown at each "boundary" compared to the favorable case of writing a few big files.
  A 128GB SD card might do well, if that's your main music collection you're fitting here. At least, it stays unchanged most of the time. You still have to not mind the slowness and at that cost you could have had a 256GB SSD in the laptop.
14. Re:64GB by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 08:00 · Score: 0
  
  I have no trouble running Linux on my Macbook (2010 mbp). ymmv
15. Re:64GB by BronsCon · 2015-03-12 08:06 · Score: 1
  
  Why? There are 2 USB 3.0 ports, as well. The adapter is an added expense and point of failure.
  
  --
  APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
16. Re:64GB by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 08:06 · Score: 0
  
  I can watch a fucking HD video off a USB2 drive with 4GB space. The speed is a literal non-issue.
17. Re:64GB by macs4all · 2015-03-12 09:21 · Score: 1
  
  More ports. Runs Linux. I agree about the touchscreen, though. Don't really quite understand that for a laptop.
  Not more ports than a MBA (which is a similar price, and has more storage and a faster CPU, and doesn't have Google datamining your every word). And it runs Linux, too.
18. Re:64GB by AmiMoJo · 2015-03-12 10:29 · Score: 1
  
  Linux is officially supported. The screen is non-wide-screen. It's 5:4. Should be the ultimate laptop if the threads on Slashdot complaining about 16:9 monitors and the lack of vertical space are to be believed.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
19. Re:64GB by exomondo · 2015-03-12 10:57 · Score: 1
  
  If you use XCode then why would you want Linux?
20. Re:64GB by TechyImmigrant · 2015-03-12 11:20 · Score: 1
  
  If you use XCode then why would you want Linux?
  I use XCode on the Mac.
  I use Python and assembler and C and a few other things on Linux.
  I use Windows because my employer shoves it onto my work laptop, but only to VNC or SSH into machines on which I do real work (System Verilog).
  I don't write big GUI apps. I do care about making sure the underlying hardware does what it is supposed to do. If it's not esoteric hardware details, it's not really my thing, unless it's a POS for a yarn store, which is punishment for something bad I did in an earlier life.
  For a single machine, the Mac is the best compromise, since I can pull up a bash shell and do unixy things, but my job has me doing things on all classes of machine from the smallest microcontroller to the beastliest Xeon.
  
  --
  I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
21. Re:64GB by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 11:44 · Score: 0
  
  Only 2 USB ports? Pfft. I'm waiting for a laptop with 4 because that would clearly be twice as good.
22. Re:64GB by Chalnoth · 2015-03-12 12:22 · Score: 1
  
  It's nice to have sometimes. For some things it's a lot easier than using the mouse pad (in particular it's faster to click on a specific thing). Usually I don't use it because I forget about it (as I spend most of my time with a desktop). But it definitely is a cool thing to have.
23. Re:64GB by Bing+Tsher+E · 2015-03-12 12:29 · Score: 1
  
  my job has me doing things on all classes of machine from the smallest microcontroller
  Really? I like the PIC10F200, too. It's a little bit cramped that it only has 16 bytes of data memory, but the 256 bytes of program memory is enough for tight assembly language.
  And the cost of under a dime helps, too.
24. Re:64GB by TechyImmigrant · 2015-03-12 15:01 · Score: 1
  
  Yes. All the way down to tiny cpus in tiny sensors.
  
  --
  I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
25. Re:64GB by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 18:46 · Score: 0
  
  I could live with this, but what really kills it is the keyboard layout.
26. Re:64GB by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-13 05:07 · Score: 0
  
  The whole point of Chromebooks is that they run Chrome OS. Which doesn't store much data locally on the system, it syncs everything with Google services (Drive, gmail, etc..). So really they could have kept the 32GB storage and dropped the price even more.
27. Re:64GB by Shirley+Marquez · 2015-03-13 07:37 · Score: 1
  
  They did keep the 32GB storage in the $999 model. It's the $1299 upsell model that has 64GB, and also 16GB RAM and an i7.
  Nobody seems to be mentioning it, but the Pixel does have an SD slot. So if you really need more storage you could pop in a card. A 256GB card is under $100 now so it's not that big an expense, and storage on the card is fast enough for things like storing a few high definition movies to watch on a long plane trip.
28. Re:64GB by Shirley+Marquez · 2015-03-13 07:40 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, you can plug in a mouse. It has two standard USB 3.0 ports as well as the two Type C ports. And it supports Bluetooth.
29. Re:64GB by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-13 11:33 · Score: 0
  
  Or you could simply recover that precious data from your data backups and be thankful that your backup plan is working as intended.
30. Re:64GB by Blaskowicz · 2015-03-13 21:45 · Score: 1
  
  A friend comes over, before he leaves we copy about 7GB of data to his USB drive (empty, by the way) and that takes about half a hour. That's what I am bitching about. Copying from hard drive to hard drive on 100BaseT network was so much better (with no stall when doing concurrent copying)
For god's sake man! by Ecuador · 2015-03-12 05:26 · Score: 5, Funny

Close that parenthesis! I can't take it for much longer, it hurts, please!

--
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
1. Re: For god's sake man! by EmeraldBot · 2015-03-12 05:43 · Score: 2
  
  Close that parenthesis! I can't take it for much longer, it hurts, please!
  A Lisp user, I see :P
  
  --
  "Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
2. Re: For god's sake man! by mellon · 2015-03-12 05:49 · Score: 1
  
  We are here for you, brother or sister!
  )
3. Re: For god's sake man! by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-12 06:01 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Lisp is evil . Take that! (
  
  --
  "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
4. Re: For god's sake man! by squiggleslash · 2015-03-12 06:10 · Score: 1
  
  It's OK, I'm sure they'll fix it soon (although if they do, some bastard could reply to your comment with an unfixable example of the same thing...
  
  --
  You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
5. Re: For god's sake man! by friesofdoom · 2015-03-12 06:46 · Score: 1
  
  Are the reporters who write/edit this shit actually retarded? Do they not realize how much DISTRESS not closing a quote or bracket causes?
6. Re: For god's sake man! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 07:44 · Score: 0
  
  ...and some other crazy fellow who cannot stand that bastardness to close it up )
7. Re: For god's sake man! by TeknoHog · 2015-03-12 11:03 · Score: 1
  
  Nice :)
  
  --
  Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
Do Not Be Alarmed Brethren by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 05:27 · Score: 0

Whilst the morrow be the 13th and doth appearst on the Friday, this is of no concern at all - No Concern At All.
1. Re:Do Not Be Alarmed Brethren by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 05:43 · Score: 0
  
  It concerns me greatly as it is the anniversary of my birth.
2. Re:Do Not Be Alarmed Brethren by Thud457 · 2015-03-12 05:58 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Being superstitious is bad luck.
  
  --
  the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
3. Re:Do Not Be Alarmed Brethren by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 07:53 · Score: 0
  
  It concerns me greatly as it is the anniversary of my birth.
  Damian? Is that you?
Apple, stop, you are making this too obvious. by Norrdec · 2015-03-12 05:30 · Score: 1

I am not an user of Apple products, but I see their merits (like great customer support, works great out of the box). If the new Apple notebook had 3 USB-C ports all would be fine and dandy. But the moment they have 1 and the only way to access almost ANYTHING else (like a projector or connect your phone to), you now have to buy an adapter separately... It's really evil and a money grab in my opinion. If 100% hardware would work wireless, then by all means, have no ports on your notebook, but this time has not come yet and it will take some time before that happens.
1. Re:Apple, stop, you are making this too obvious. by ceoyoyo · 2015-03-12 05:43 · Score: 1
  
  Apple likes to push "it will take some time" into "soon." Chromecasts/Apple TVs and things like that hooked up to projectors are becoming more common.
  Personally, I'm quite happy to trade a bunch of connectors for a lighter notebook.
2. Re:Apple, stop, you are making this too obvious. by Norrdec · 2015-03-12 06:24 · Score: 1
  
  That might be true, I use a desktop as my private computer, so I see laptops and notebooks as work tools, and I can't see a time soon where all hardware is wireless in most companies. Wired is usually more secure.
3. Re:Apple, stop, you are making this too obvious. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 06:47 · Score: 0
  
  I'm sure the MacbookPro refresh will address exactly this. If you want more ports, get a hub or something else that fits what you're looking for.
4. Re:Apple, stop, you are making this too obvious. by macs4all · 2015-03-12 09:42 · Score: 1
  
  It's really evil and a money grab in my opinion.
  Money grab by who? If Apple was the only source of USB-C adapters, then you might have a point.
  
  But they're not.
  
  Next time: Think; THEN Post.
5. Re:Apple, stop, you are making this too obvious. by Norrdec · 2015-03-16 00:14 · Score: 1
  
  I did think and then post. It's a money grab because if you want to do 2 things at the same time on the new macbook - have your laptop connected to a power source and insert a pendrive or connect to a second screen - you need to buy an adapter. And this thing already costs 1300$ afair, while having nothing innovative, par the new port - which like you mentioned, they don't have a monopoly for.
Re: Relates to Systemd? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 05:33 · Score: 5, Funny

The pixel is endorsed by Slashdot folk hero Bennett, was coded by female H-1B visa workers, uses the latest technological advances in graphene, interfaces with Tesla vehicles and can end global warming. SystemD makes all of this possible.
I really like the looks and specs... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 05:45 · Score: 0

I really like the design and specs of the Chromebook Pixel. Unfortunately, it doesn't run anything I need/want. That's been a problem with Linux in general for me. Or rather, a problem with Microsoft and Adobe, not Linux. Maybe Google will convince them to release Office and Adobe CS for Chrome, give me a reason to buy one. :)
1. Re:I really like the looks and specs... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 06:59 · Score: 0
  
  I really like the design and specs of the Chromebook Pixel. Unfortunately, it doesn't run anything I need/want. That's been a problem with Linux in general for me. Or rather, a problem with Microsoft and Adobe, not Linux. Maybe Google will convince them to release Office and Adobe CS for Chrome, give me a reason to buy one. :)
  There's a web-version of Office 365 that runs in a browser, and it runs great on a Chromebook or under Linux. Heck, you can even run the web versions of Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and OneNote for free right now, today.
  Microsoft gets a lot of flak around here (not wholly underserved), but that old crutch of 'Nobody will ever use Linux because they can't use Office' is really looking wobbly these days.
2. Re:I really like the looks and specs... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 07:02 · Score: 0
  
  Oh, and Adobe is actively testing streaming Photoshop to a client via a web browser, specifically for devices like the Chromebook, so that argument holds less water as time goes on, too.
3. Re:I really like the looks and specs... by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-12 09:05 · Score: 1
  
  Hope none of you are on a limited-data plan.
  
  --
  "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Testing Comments Subject by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 05:49 · Score: 0

Testing the Comments notes fields lkjlksdflk sldjfl sls jslj lsdjfkls dlfksj dklfsjdlkf sdklfjskld jflksdjfkls dflksjdklfsjdklfjsans, have no ports on your notebook, but this time has not come yet and it will take some time before that happens.
This is an outrage! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 05:51 · Score: 0

USB-C? A thousand dollars a laptop with only 65gigs of storage?!?!? Why can't Apple get a hold of themselves? Have they gone mad?

Oh, what? This is Google? Splendid, splendid, dear boy. Innovative on every front! Amazing! Insightful! The future is now!
sadly no linux on surface by nazsco · 2015-03-12 05:53 · Score: 1

if microsoft surface could run linux, all netbooks and ultraportables discussion would go to the place they should have been for a long time: the garbage.
1. Re:sadly no linux on surface by Microlith · 2015-03-12 06:27 · Score: 1
  
  if microsoft surface could run linux
  The (x86) Surface is a standard PC, you can install and run Linux on it.
  Of course, that requires giving money to Microsoft and not everyone wants their keyboard or solely the hardware on offer in the Surface.
2. Re:sadly no linux on surface by Greyfox · 2015-03-12 06:30 · Score: 1
  
  From what I hear, you can install Ubuntu on the last generation of surface pro. I haven't looked into whether the current one allows it.
  
  --
  I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
3. Re:sadly no linux on surface by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 07:03 · Score: 0
  
  Huh? My current primary laptop is a Surface Pro 1 running Ubuntu (dual booting to Windows 8 in case I ever need Windows).
ChromeOS is a great operating system by Blaskowicz · 2015-03-12 06:05 · Score: 4, Funny

... it only lacks a good web browser.
I love the chromebook but... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 06:11 · Score: 0

It's best function is a cheap laptop that you don't have to mess with, it just works for basic stuff (which is all most people do with their laptops).
I have 4 chromebooks that cost me less than $800 total (wife and many kids, I tend to only use one at a time). Paying $999 for one seems a little crazy.
But then there are a lot of people with entirely too much money, so they will probably still sell.
1. Re:I love the chromebook but... by Gliscameria · 2015-03-12 06:17 · Score: 1
  
  I don't understand what you are supposed to do with a beefy chromebook. What can you run that needs that much HP that isn't just horribly optimized?
  
  --
  X
The top end model by stox · 2015-03-12 06:12 · Score: 5, Informative

has 16GB, not 8GB, of RAM.

--
"To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
Macbook 2015 by funkymonkjay · 2015-03-12 06:17 · Score: 1

Hardware wise, this thing's a big fat loser compared to the new Macbook 2015.
Off the cuff comparison:
1. Storage is a huge loss
2. Has fan. booooo
3. CPU is a win
4. I am going to guess the touchpad is a loss - hard to beat apple on this.
5. Form factor and weight is a big loss
6. I/O ports, winner. silly being apple apple and sacrificing function over form.
7. OS - I prefer a pure linux for CLI but not so much for GUI apps. I would lean for OS X as it has better support in the GUI apps area.
I like the chromebook I bought for $150, but . . . by walterbyrd · 2015-03-12 06:25 · Score: 1

I got the Samsung 11" chromebook on sale for $150.
It's great for what it is: an inexpensive device with a decent sized screen, full KB, and fast bootup. Unlike windows, it does not get easily infected.
But I cannot see a chromebook being worth $1000.
Re: Relates to Systemd? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 06:29 · Score: 4, Funny

But is the case 3D-printed?
Can we take a step back? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 06:32 · Score: 0

Can we take a step back here and think about the reaction if Apple tried to release a MacBook with 32GB of storage for $999?
1. Re:Can we take a step back? by ArcadeMan · 2015-03-12 09:20 · Score: 1
  
  Even at 64GB people would say it's a typical overpriced Apple toy which only fashion-oriented idiots would buy.
  But Google releases the same thing with lower specifications and people stay silent.
  
  --
  Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Glossy screen by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 06:33 · Score: 0

Means no sale. Give it a good matte screen and we'll talk.
USB-C by DarthVain · 2015-03-12 06:33 · Score: 1

I don't know if USB-C is backward compatible, but I presume it is. I can't see the specifications, so I don't know if there are additional USB slots if it isn't (but presumably there would be unless they are stupid).
So buy the 64GB version and use that as your system drive. Buy an external USB HD in whatever capacity you want and just plug it in the USB slot.
Problem solved.
Anyone of any competence is going to build a system like that anyway, an SSD system drive with another traditional HD as your media drive. Having your media drive attached VIA USB (particularly presumably faster USB-C, though I am uncertain of compatible HD availability), will have no appreciable performance issues when using it to play media and the like, which is all you will be using it for if you need 1TB+ capacity. You will have an additional thing you will need to throw into your laptop bag, and plug in, should you decide to use it.
1. Re:USB-C by TechyImmigrant · 2015-03-12 06:58 · Score: 1
  
  I happen to know a lot more about USB Type-C than the average punter who hasn't authored specs for the USB SIG.
  It's good juju. But compare with an Intel NUC, where you can plug in a PCIe SSD.
  That would be a good thing to be available on the motherboard.
  
  --
  I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
2. Re:USB-C by Lunix+Nutcase · 2015-03-12 07:05 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know if USB-C is backward compatible, but I presume it is.
  USB-C is just the connector type. The ChromeBook Pixel is using USB 3.x which is backwards compatible just like all other USB revisions.
3. Re:USB-C by Lunix+Nutcase · 2015-03-12 07:10 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry that should have been connector/wiring type. But, yes, with the proper dongle it's backwards compatible with all other USB types.
4. Re:USB-C by DarthVain · 2015-03-12 08:35 · Score: 1
  
  I have a mSSD slot on mine which is nice, as is ITX builds it saves even more space...
  However most ITX cases I have seen thus far don't support removable back plates... which means if I ever have to remove or replace the thing, I will have to basically disassemble everything to get at it which kind of sucks (as on most MB the slot is on the back of the board)... :(
5. Re:USB-C by macs4all · 2015-03-12 09:37 · Score: 1
  
  I happen to know a lot more about USB Type-C than the average punter who hasn't authored specs for the USB SIG.
  It's good juju. But compare with an Intel NUC, where you can plug in a PCIe SSD.
  That would be a good thing to be available on the motherboard.
  $500? for 512 GB? Are you KIDDING me?!? If SSDs are going to cost THAT much, platters will spin for quite a while in my computers...
Re:I like the chromebook I bought for $150, but . by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2015-03-12 07:03 · Score: 1

But I cannot see a chromebook being worth $1000.
Especially with only 32 gigs of storage! It doesn't really matter whether or not you need lots of storage with a chromebook - even assuming you don't, it still costs them next to nothing to put just 32 gigs in there!

--
#DeleteChrome
Re:I like the chromebook I bought for $150, but . by nogginthenog · 2015-03-12 07:45 · Score: 1

Does it have a 2,560 x 1,700 screen? I think that's what you're paying for here.
Although... by thrill12 · 2015-03-12 08:39 · Score: 1

As a Pixel 1 owner here, you can just crack open the Chromebook, screw tight the write-protect screw for the BIOS and flash a replacement ROM that removes the whole ChromeOS boot capability and delay.
It does have drawbacks, but you can work around them. Good for tweakers.

--
Slashdot: stuff for news, nerds that matter, matter for news, stuff that nerd
1. Re:Although... by macs4all · 2015-03-12 09:13 · Score: 1
  
  As a Pixel 1 owner here, you can just crack open the Chromebook, screw tight the write-protect screw for the BIOS and flash a replacement ROM that removes the whole ChromeOS boot capability and delay. It does have drawbacks, but you can work around them. Good for tweakers.
  Excuse me; but a $1k laptop with those weak-ass specs shouldn't require "workarounds".
  
  You Linux guys are sooooo funny.
2. Re:Although... by mellon · 2015-03-12 11:36 · Score: 1
  
  Being able to flash the firmware is kind of cool, actually, particularly since it's open source, so you can hack it first.
3. Re:Although... by Shirley+Marquez · 2015-03-13 07:26 · Score: 1
  
  Calling the Pixel "weak-ass" is unfair. The specs are good for an ultraportable laptop, which is what the Pixel is. It can't match the computing power of a 17" behemoth but it also doesn't weigh 8 pounds.
4. Re:Although... by macs4all · 2015-03-13 07:44 · Score: 1
  
  Calling the Pixel "weak-ass" is unfair. The specs are good for an ultraportable laptop, which is what the Pixel is. It can't match the computing power of a 17" behemoth but it also doesn't weigh 8 pounds.
  Sorry.
  
  Maybe I'm just a bit annoyed at all the bitching about the new MacBook, which, other than one less USB-C port, seems to have as good, or in most cases, better, specs than the Pixel.
The CRB 1 had that by thrill12 · 2015-03-12 08:40 · Score: 1

So the CRB 2 probably will have that as well.

--
Slashdot: stuff for news, nerds that matter, matter for news, stuff that nerd
3:2 aspect ratio -- surprisingly good by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 08:41 · Score: 1

2560x1700 is essentially a 3:2 aspect ratio. Terrible for watching movies, fantastic for productivity. I used to code on a pair of 3:2's -- it feels a little weird at first, but you gain a lot more vertical space and it's much more sane than portrait 16:10's: it doesn't break layouts in most applications or webpages.
Re:I like the chromebook I bought for $150, but . by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-12 09:09 · Score: 1

Does it have a 2,560 x 1,700 screen? I think that's what you're paying for here.
Can your eyeballs even use 2,560 x 1,700 on a sub-13" screen?

--
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Re: Relates to Systemd? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-12 09:45 · Score: 0

And what does Hugh Pickens think about it?
Open your mind by Art3x · 2015-03-12 10:55 · Score: 1, Insightful

If my work didn't give me a laptop for free, I would be tempted to snap up a new Chromebook Pixel.
The self-anointed tech pundits are all scratching their heads. "Why such a luxurious laptop to just browse the web?"
"Just browse the web." That's the first lie. Web browsers, especially Chrome, no longer just browse the Web. It is no less than a modern GUI toolkit and practically a whole operating system. HTML 5 specifies that web browsers can run background processes, run offline, open and save local files, stream video, support instant chat, draw raster and vector artwork (<canvas> and SVG), and put up a large variety of widgets from just a little bit of code.
Chromebooks don't just browse the Web, they aren't useless offline --- or actually, Windows and Macs offline are just as useless, the way we use them today. About the only thing I'm still waiting on in a Chromebook is an offline video editor. Everything else --- word processing, spreadsheets, drawing, photoshopping --- are now available and pretty good. In fact, I think they're better, maybe just because they're newer, made by programmers who are wiser.
And who wouldn't want all the nice things in a Google Pixel: a solid build, a nice screen, a good keyboard, long battery life. The only point I agree on is that the processor is a waste, for most people. I would rather Google had gone for an ARM processor while keeping everything else the same, resulting in 24-hour battery life. I would rather get away with forgetting to charge my laptop one night than have that much speed.
Re:Relates to Systemd? by unixisc · 2015-03-12 11:09 · Score: 1

Feeding the troll, but...
Ain't Chrome OS derived from Gentoo? That too, only the first version - it's not a rolling derivative, like CentOS or Scientific Linux is of RHEL. So ChromeOS didn't have systemd, and likely won't, unless Google decides they want something like it in the OS.
Re:I like the chromebook I bought for $150, but . by walterbyrd · 2015-03-12 11:09 · Score: 1

No, but I don't see the point of such a high res screen, on a device with such limited use.