Forum Moderators: goodroi
In a post on its company blog, Google said the operating system would initially be aimed at netbooks, the compact, low-cost computers that have turned the PC world on its head. It said the open-source software, called Chrome OS, would be available in the second half of next year.
The announcement on Google's blog [googleblog.blogspot.com] says,
Google Chrome OS is an open source, lightweight operating system that will initially be targeted at netbooks. Later this year we will open-source its code... and we'll soon be working with the open source community...Speed, simplicity and security are the key aspects of Google Chrome OS. We're designing the OS to be fast and lightweight, to start up and get you onto the web in a few seconds. ... and completely redesigning the underlying security architecture of the OS so that users don't have to deal with viruses, malware and security updates. It should just work.
Wow, what does Google NOT do?
Here is another report of the story: [foxnews.com...]
[edited by: tedster at 5:44 am (utc) on July 8, 2009]
[edited by: Interent_Yogi at 5:53 am (utc) on July 8, 2009]
So a battle of the juggernauts is underway. Watch this space.
Seriously, some serious competition for Microsoft can only be good.
MSFT's current flagship OS (Vista) get's no love whatsoever from potential buyers, and it's hard for individuals to upgrade back to XP.
The next installment of windows is still many months away at best -Windows 7 is for the end of October this year-.
netbooks being first to be targeted: of course: these machines are actually underpowered to run any current or future windows versions, offering them a light OS (linux kernel I read) with an easier -for non IT home users- windowing system than X11 and user friendliness makes a lot of sense.
A threat to all web based activity into the future is coming from windows based machines: IE6 has been holding back things like CSS for many years, and it's only recently that we see the number of visitors actually significantly start to drop that use this -from a CSS perspective- poor excuse for a browser.
If netbooks continue to become increasingly popular, odds are they'll run XP and IE6 as a consequence, and that's bad for all of us (and probably more for Google than most of the rest of us).
Even if you look at the latest installment of IE: IE8, it's still got (new) issues with CSS popping up every day, and don't get us started over the lack of pre-CSS3 being implemented in IE8, somethings that's going to hold back the improvement of the web for yet another decade?
From me: go GOOG!
Competition is a great thing.
Technichaly this could change everything.
Mack.
I have had a netbook for a little over a month. I have used it about 2-3 hours a day. I love it, but I can't imagine I would use it much if it were just a browser. A netbook without a fully supported OS is like the difference between a good internet smart phone and a cheap flip phone like a razor.
Where it gets really interesting is in the this subsidy that the phone companies are now doing with netbooks. Sprint introduced a $1 netbook [gizmodo.com] yesterday.
Its hard for Bing to Replace Google, It will be hard for Chrome to replace Windows.
For example lets take the example of Chrome browser - has it replaced IE or FireFox?
How much will it cost to bid on the term "File" or "Open" from a menu item in the OS?
Will file explorer results be ordered by how much you've paid into your OS AdWords account. Will other users be able bump your files onto the second page.
Will your OS's Quality Score and therefore placement in the queue for patches and updates, be determined by the amount of times you opened a file measured against the time spent in front of that file.
Finally, when I've saved a personal file will I be told that the only way I can open it again is to agree to a modified terms and conditions that doesn't highlight the things that have changed, and boots me out of the OS.
Sorry but it was just too good to resist such reasoning.
[webmasterworld.com...]
If all future apps run in a browser (or something like it), the only things left for an OS are OS-related programs like drivers for the printer, etc., and maybe some games and heavy-duty photo and video processing programs.
Just make sure it comes with Remote Desktop so I can remote into a Windows box when I need a legacy app.
In an exclusive interview, CNET News' Ina Fried talks with Helen Wang, the researcher behind Microsoft's Gazelle effort, which aims to make the browser more like an operating system.
[news.cnet.com...]
I wonder if they will bundle chrome browser ! hehe
we'll see what the EU has to say about that! haah Chrome OS ships without chrome....
The first comment on here sums the situation up - webmasters do not trust Google with their data, if this perception moves to the mainstream then any google operating system is dead in the water...
Mainstream folks love Google. They trust G more than any other brand as their choice search tool. Beyond that, folks love free. If Google can produce an OS that comes with free software to do everything folks want to do now (Ubuntu already does this), then they will win again with consumers who already trust their brand.
Yes, the minority webmasters (me included) will stick with Ubuntu or other flavors just to keep our paranoia in check... ;-)
Yes, the minority webmasters (me included) will stick with Ubuntu or other flavors just to keep our paranoia in check... ;-)
well im guessing google isn't doing a ground up OS and is just using linux as a base with all the google stuff on top of it.
so why not just run ubuntu with all of googles stuff installed on it?
Wait for the privacy revolution :)
so why not just run ubuntu with all of googles stuff installed on it?
Sounds like a reasonable starting point. It sounds like they want to take it a step further with some advanced features not common with base OS installs today... like...
People want to get to their email instantly, without wasting time waiting for their computers to boot and browsers to start up. They want their computers to always run as fast as when they first bought them. They want their data to be accessible to them wherever they are and not have to worry about losing their computer or forgetting to back up files. Even more importantly, they don't want to spend hours configuring their computers to work with every new piece of hardware, or have to worry about constant software updates.
Android imho is a failure.
Chrome is fast, the interface sucks and not including the G-Toolbar was a stupid move.
Chrome OS - Conjecture are the moment, but based off the above examples its probably going be fast and efficient with minimal support out of the box. I see it being the OS of choice for hardware ninjas/geeks and not the average consumer.
