Windows was designed that so each user ran with full administrator priveledges. Pretty much every process on the computer had full access to everything.
Explain to me how that is designing for security.
Chrome and IE8 do have per-process models. IE8 only gets any level of sandboxing on Vista and 7, because it depends on UAC, which is still not much better.
Since compatibility with old apps gets broken, you have to elevate most things back up to administrator level, and users get trained to just hit confirm on everything.
Even then, the sandboxed IE8 mode isn't sandboxed very well.
Chrome only gives a browser process as much access to read from certain folders as it needs, and no more.
Chrome netbooks aren't claiming to be a typical PC. They are very clear in their marketing. It is a web appliance basically.
And frankly, if you're running Vista Home Premium, or 7 on a netbook, and trying to install Photoshop, you're in for a world of disappointment. If you're buying a netbook for anything other than basic word processing, playing media, and connecting to the internet, you're doing it wrong.
There is a bunch of debate and FUS over netbook returns. Some retailers have said returns were the same percentage wise for Linux and Windows boxes. Others said Linux had a much higher return rate. I'm not sure which is the truth, but the matter certainly isn't clear.
Windows 7 Starter Edition won't let you run more than 3 windows at a time, and will be considerably slower than Chrome. Both have restrictions. Except Grandma will fill one with viruses and spyware, where as the other will be secure. I know which one I want to give Grandma.
Most users do live in their web browser these days. I'm not one of them. I likely wouldn't run Chrome personally. However, I will recommend it to people who do live out of their web browser.
Except Windows Vista and 7 have changed enough that Grandma doesn't know it anymore. I put my mother (grandma in her own right) in front of KDE and OpenOffice. She was able to figure out KDE just fine. And she thought OpenOffice was MS Office, even though I told her it was different.
Chrome is different enough that no one will confuse it with Windows, but if you can figure out a web browser, you can figure out Chrome.
The demos of Chrome do show shortcuts for pulling up Yahoo Mail and Hotmail as well. So I'm sure they're working to make sure other web apps work as well. Though non-HTML 5 apps won't support drag and drop, and such.
Given that I promote Linux all day long, I don't see how I'm a Windows fanboi.
The Phoronix Test Suite checks disk IO, cpu utilization, battery usage, gzip, LZMA, mplayer, ffmpeg, and some FPS games.
All those things can be tested on Windows.
You're dealing with different video drivers on Windows, as well as wondering if you can 100% trust disk IO, CPU, battery usage, numbers as being comparable given that you'll be getting those numbers from another source.
However, the test suite does use programs that will run on Windows.
Honestly, I'm not sure why I wasted the 30 seconds to respond to an AC Troll, but I just want people to realize that Phoronix isn't ducking Windows, and I'm guessing we'll see a Windows test suite in time.
Microsoft went nuts doing their best to stop Best Buy and other retailers from selling Linux in retail. They won't stop retailers from selling a Chrome netbook.
That alone proves that Microsoft will panic.
With Chrome gain 10% market share in a year? Maybe not. But Firefox grew slowly over several years, and I suspect Chrome could follow a similar growth chart. Most end-users don't install an OS on their own period. They get an OS when they buy a PC.
Given that retailers will sell this, it will be fast, secure, cheap, easy to use, and the merits can be demonstrated in the store in seconds, it stands a good chance to take off. All the users have to do is buy the fast laptop with the brand name they know (Google) that is cheap.
So basically no offline (relatively speaking) functionality and can boot in 3 seconds. Yay?
All the web apps are using Gears, which caches everything for offline use. So all the apps will be usable offline. Your data is stored in the cloud, but also cached to the SSD. So it isn't fair to say it doesn't function offline.
Yes, it looks like Chrome.
I can't imagine I'll pass up KDE for this myself, but it passes the Grandma test. They know how to use a web browser already. You plug in a camera, a little overlay shows the camera. You literally drag and drop a photo from the camera to a Google Talk overlay, and it sends to the picture to that person.
Passing the Grandma test is important. Put Grandma (even if she knows XP) in front of 7 and Chrome. See which one she prefers.
Not really. I would barely call this Linux.
Moblin has a new UI, and people aren't saying Moblin doesn't count as Linux. Embedded Linux still counts as Linux. Headless servers still count as Linux.
Why is this not Linux, simply because there is a different UI?
This is more than a thin client, since a thin client can't be used offline. And apparently it is a bit of a misnomer to say you can't install other apps, since they installed the Phoronix test suite.
Answering my own question here, but Chrome is using Ext3, which is not optimized for SSDs particularly. In fact, Ext4 has been getting some SSD patches.
I really don't understand this move since Chrome is supposed to be as fast as possible. I also have to stop saying Chromium, because that is just the browser. The whole OS project is just called Chrome.
Chromium can boot in 3 seconds. That is more than a 10% difference.
It boasts a new UI. It is going to be supported by more vendors as an OEM install than Linux ever had. It will bring Linux to the masses. It is designed to be secure. It will make Microsoft shit their pants.
I thought you couldn't even install apps. Here they're installing the test suite, performing LZMA compressions, etc. Perhaps Chromium OS does more than we were led to believe it can do.
Each distro includes distro-specific kernel patches. They configure the kernel differently. They ship different releases of the kernel. And they compile with slightly different versions of the toolchain.
So you will see benchmark differences with the "same" kernel on different distros.
I'm shocked to read the Chromium is eschewing Ext4. What FS are they using, and it it because it is optimized for SSDs?
They're building self-sustaining floating data centers. Initially they are designed to operate 7 miles off shore. However, if there is a legal problem with a country trying to assert itself over Google, Google could simply move the barge into international waters.
Actually, when Yahoo was handing over blogger data to China, Google said they would change their policies and start anonymizing user data even sooner than they already were.
Install my own mail server and tape drive system which I must maintain whitelists and blacklists for, or let Google do the heavy-lifting?
Let me ask a better question. When Bush said he might start asking for search data on every user in the country, and then AOL, Yahoo and Microsoft preemptively was handing that data over, while Google was busy fighting court orders not to have over user data on Orkut users (who were in fact spreading kiddie porn), what has Google ever done once to suggest to me that I shouldn't trust them?
Or are you a member of the permanent tinfoil-hat brigade?
Google Gears locally caches your data for offline access to web-apps.
The OS won't boot from a HDD for security reasons. They are treating the OS more like read-only firmware than a traditional OS install. That doesn't mean the netbooks that ship with this won't have storage of any kind.
Haven't there been source code leaks that referenced an unannounced GDrive project? I hear the data center being built down the road from me (Council Bluffs, IA) is for GDrive. Google isn't saying. Isn't a direct cloud storage app the missing piece? We know it needs to be there. So why isn't it announced? I assumed it would go hand-in-hand with Chrome OS.
Slashdot Mirror
Windows was designed that so each user ran with full administrator priveledges. Pretty much every process on the computer had full access to everything.
Explain to me how that is designing for security.
Chrome and IE8 do have per-process models. IE8 only gets any level of sandboxing on Vista and 7, because it depends on UAC, which is still not much better.
Since compatibility with old apps gets broken, you have to elevate most things back up to administrator level, and users get trained to just hit confirm on everything.
Even then, the sandboxed IE8 mode isn't sandboxed very well.
Chrome only gives a browser process as much access to read from certain folders as it needs, and no more.
If you think that Windows and IE were designed to be secure, then I don't know what to tell you.
There is a world of difference between Chrome's security model, and Windows.
Chrome netbooks aren't claiming to be a typical PC. They are very clear in their marketing. It is a web appliance basically.
And frankly, if you're running Vista Home Premium, or 7 on a netbook, and trying to install Photoshop, you're in for a world of disappointment. If you're buying a netbook for anything other than basic word processing, playing media, and connecting to the internet, you're doing it wrong.
There is a bunch of debate and FUS over netbook returns. Some retailers have said returns were the same percentage wise for Linux and Windows boxes. Others said Linux had a much higher return rate. I'm not sure which is the truth, but the matter certainly isn't clear.
Windows 7 Starter Edition won't let you run more than 3 windows at a time, and will be considerably slower than Chrome. Both have restrictions. Except Grandma will fill one with viruses and spyware, where as the other will be secure. I know which one I want to give Grandma.
Most users do live in their web browser these days. I'm not one of them. I likely wouldn't run Chrome personally. However, I will recommend it to people who do live out of their web browser.
Except Windows Vista and 7 have changed enough that Grandma doesn't know it anymore. I put my mother (grandma in her own right) in front of KDE and OpenOffice. She was able to figure out KDE just fine. And she thought OpenOffice was MS Office, even though I told her it was different.
Chrome is different enough that no one will confuse it with Windows, but if you can figure out a web browser, you can figure out Chrome.
The demos of Chrome do show shortcuts for pulling up Yahoo Mail and Hotmail as well. So I'm sure they're working to make sure other web apps work as well. Though non-HTML 5 apps won't support drag and drop, and such.
I imagine the simplist solution would be an Ubuntu Live CD, and then chroot into the Chrome OS. You now have terminal access.
I saw a video demonstration that went from pushing power, to having a login screen in 3 seconds. I'm not sure what hardware was used.
Given that I promote Linux all day long, I don't see how I'm a Windows fanboi.
The Phoronix Test Suite checks disk IO, cpu utilization, battery usage, gzip, LZMA, mplayer, ffmpeg, and some FPS games.
All those things can be tested on Windows.
You're dealing with different video drivers on Windows, as well as wondering if you can 100% trust disk IO, CPU, battery usage, numbers as being comparable given that you'll be getting those numbers from another source.
However, the test suite does use programs that will run on Windows.
Honestly, I'm not sure why I wasted the 30 seconds to respond to an AC Troll, but I just want people to realize that Phoronix isn't ducking Windows, and I'm guessing we'll see a Windows test suite in time.
Microsoft went nuts doing their best to stop Best Buy and other retailers from selling Linux in retail. They won't stop retailers from selling a Chrome netbook.
That alone proves that Microsoft will panic.
With Chrome gain 10% market share in a year? Maybe not. But Firefox grew slowly over several years, and I suspect Chrome could follow a similar growth chart. Most end-users don't install an OS on their own period. They get an OS when they buy a PC.
Given that retailers will sell this, it will be fast, secure, cheap, easy to use, and the merits can be demonstrated in the store in seconds, it stands a good chance to take off. All the users have to do is buy the fast laptop with the brand name they know (Google) that is cheap.
Would you honestly bet against that?
The fastest I've heard from Moblin is 5-10 seconds. I'm not knocking 5 seconds. That's pretty impressive. But Chrome is smoking fast.
So basically no offline (relatively speaking) functionality and can boot in 3 seconds. Yay?
All the web apps are using Gears, which caches everything for offline use. So all the apps will be usable offline. Your data is stored in the cloud, but also cached to the SSD. So it isn't fair to say it doesn't function offline.
Yes, it looks like Chrome.
I can't imagine I'll pass up KDE for this myself, but it passes the Grandma test. They know how to use a web browser already. You plug in a camera, a little overlay shows the camera. You literally drag and drop a photo from the camera to a Google Talk overlay, and it sends to the picture to that person.
Passing the Grandma test is important. Put Grandma (even if she knows XP) in front of 7 and Chrome. See which one she prefers.
Not really. I would barely call this Linux.
Moblin has a new UI, and people aren't saying Moblin doesn't count as Linux. Embedded Linux still counts as Linux. Headless servers still count as Linux.
Why is this not Linux, simply because there is a different UI?
This is more than a thin client, since a thin client can't be used offline. And apparently it is a bit of a misnomer to say you can't install other apps, since they installed the Phoronix test suite.
Answering my own question here, but Chrome is using Ext3, which is not optimized for SSDs particularly. In fact, Ext4 has been getting some SSD patches.
I really don't understand this move since Chrome is supposed to be as fast as possible. I also have to stop saying Chromium, because that is just the browser. The whole OS project is just called Chrome.
Chromium can boot in 3 seconds. That is more than a 10% difference.
It boasts a new UI. It is going to be supported by more vendors as an OEM install than Linux ever had. It will bring Linux to the masses. It is designed to be secure. It will make Microsoft shit their pants.
That's good enough for me.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NzY1MA
I thought you couldn't even install apps. Here they're installing the test suite, performing LZMA compressions, etc. Perhaps Chromium OS does more than we were led to believe it can do.
Does the Phonorix test suite even run on Windows yet? I don't think that's released yet.
Phonoroix does benchmark against the Mac all the time.
Each distro includes distro-specific kernel patches. They configure the kernel differently. They ship different releases of the kernel. And they compile with slightly different versions of the toolchain.
So you will see benchmark differences with the "same" kernel on different distros.
I'm shocked to read the Chromium is eschewing Ext4. What FS are they using, and it it because it is optimized for SSDs?
Google really has thought of everything.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=9937
They're building self-sustaining floating data centers. Initially they are designed to operate 7 miles off shore. However, if there is a legal problem with a country trying to assert itself over Google, Google could simply move the barge into international waters.
Actually, when Yahoo was handing over blogger data to China, Google said they would change their policies and start anonymizing user data even sooner than they already were.
http://searchengineland.com/google-anonymizing-search-records-to-protect-privacy-10736
Actually that was Yahoo that did that, not Google.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/media/article728898.ece
Five years ago, I'd be trying to setup a build environment for it immediately. Now I let lazy web do it for me.
Install my own mail server and tape drive system which I must maintain whitelists and blacklists for, or let Google do the heavy-lifting?
Let me ask a better question. When Bush said he might start asking for search data on every user in the country, and then AOL, Yahoo and Microsoft preemptively was handing that data over, while Google was busy fighting court orders not to have over user data on Orkut users (who were in fact spreading kiddie porn), what has Google ever done once to suggest to me that I shouldn't trust them?
Or are you a member of the permanent tinfoil-hat brigade?
Google Gears locally caches your data for offline access to web-apps.
The OS won't boot from a HDD for security reasons. They are treating the OS more like read-only firmware than a traditional OS install. That doesn't mean the netbooks that ship with this won't have storage of any kind.
Haven't there been source code leaks that referenced an unannounced GDrive project? I hear the data center being built down the road from me (Council Bluffs, IA) is for GDrive. Google isn't saying. Isn't a direct cloud storage app the missing piece? We know it needs to be there. So why isn't it announced? I assumed it would go hand-in-hand with Chrome OS.
I hearby announce the very first fork of ChromeOS.
I have replaced the entire source with:
#include
main()
{
for(;;)
{
printf ("Natalie Portman and hot grits, oh my!\n");
}
}
I will be providing a full patch shortly.