I assume Google has resources monies to put together a GUI suitably close to Windows XP.
Google is pretty good at designing interfaces, though. I'd prefer they re-evaluate what parts of a GUI are important and release with a new interface that can get us away from the startbutton/taskbar paradigm that's dominated since Windows 95. With an option for "legacy UI" for users who just want it to work like Windows.
So it's essentially Linux + Chrome? That sounds interesting, but I'm not getting all the hype. I mean, I can already install Linux on a netbook and put Chrome on it if I wanted to...
More like Linux + Google GUI + Chrome. I understand they won't be using Gnome/KDE. In fact, I would be surprised if they used X11 at all.
So it's a bit like Mac OS X/iPhone OS, which is BSD + Apple GUI + Safari.
Google Chrome OS will run on both x86 as well as ARM chips and we are working with multiple OEMs to bring a number of netbooks to market next year. The software architecture is simple — Google Chrome running within a new windowing system on top of a Linux kernel.
I want to know more about their windowing system. Specifically, they announced that Chrome OS will be "open sourced." You all think that'll include the windowing system?
Compare to the Apple case, where Darwin (their BSD version) is open source, but the GUI is closed.
enc0re on
0
Options
HachfaceNot the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking ofDammit, Shepard!Registered Userregular
edited July 2009
If it's *nix-based and open source, shouldn't it be able to support things like GIMP and OpenOffice (more robust then GoogleDocs, not as fully featured as Word) with relatively minimal tweaking?
If it's *nix-based and open source, shouldn't it be able to support things like GIMP and OpenOffice (more robust then GoogleDocs, not as fully featured as Word) with relatively minimal tweaking?
Except everything is web based apps running from the browser, which is why I invoked the webtop + linux definition of this operating system.
For application developers, the web is the platform. All web-based applications will automatically work and new applications can be written using your favorite web technologies.
That said, I'm sure offline apps could be run from the linux OS with tweeking, but that would undermine the whole "cloud based computing" nature of Chrome OS.
I want to know more about their windowing system. Specifically, they announced that Chrome OS will be "open sourced." You all think that'll include the windowing system?
Compare to the Apple case, where Darwin (their BSD version) is open source, but the GUI is closed.
There's some talk that Googles replacement windowing system might be based on directfb since apparently Google has been contributing some code to it for some reason..
My sense, lately, is that Google has shifted more and more of its resources to active warfare against Microsoft, at the expense of extending support to other pieces of software.
I base this on two pieces of evidence. One: I'm still waiting for Chrome on Mac. Two: I'm still waiting for Gears on Firefox 3.5.
I understand that this is not really evidence of anything.
that would kinda be a deal breaker for a lot of folks who are attached to their firefox plug-ins, which is going to be a lot of the folks who'd think about switching to the chrome OS. It's going to run on linux, so you should be able to get some version of firefox to run. The new window system may play a bit of hell with it, but I'd imagine they'd have compatibility built into it so it can run apps other than those specifically created for it.
redx on
They moistly come out at night, moistly.
0
Options
HachfaceNot the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking ofDammit, Shepard!Registered Userregular
edited July 2009
I'm guessing there'd be full access to the command line.
My netbooks got a dual core atom processor, a gig of ram, and a 180 gb non-solid state hdd. That's a pretty decent amount of computing power.
Hopefully they are thinking more about having a well designed an minimal UI(to work with the tiny screens) than they are about it being a watered down OS. It's going to be running linux, which means you should be able to do anything with it you can with any other OS, other than gaming.
My netbooks got a dual core atom processor, a gig or ram, and a 180 gb non-solid state hdd. It doesn't need a watered down OS.
I mostly interested linux based stuff with better drivers and a UI better tuned for a small screen that will still let me run more than 3 applications at a time.
Someone in G&T posted something about Moblin, which appears to be very similar to the Chrome OS concept (linux + webbrowser + netapps frontend) built by Intel for use in netbooks and MIDs. It uses a Gecko rendering engine for the webbrowser (which is what Firefox uses) and allows for access to both online and offline apps. I haven't tried it out yet (downloading it now) but it looks nice and can even live boot from a USB drive:
If it's *nix-based and open source, shouldn't it be able to support things like GIMP and OpenOffice (more robust then GoogleDocs, not as fully featured as Word) with relatively minimal tweaking?
Except everything is web based apps running from the browser, which is why I invoked the webtop + linux definition of this operating system.
This is news to me. Have we got a [citation] for that?
So far, I understand Chrome OS to certainly be optimized for web apps, but also a "fully featured" OS otherwise.
My netbooks got a dual core atom processor, a gig of ram, and a 180 gb non-solid state hdd. That's a pretty decent amount of computing power.
Hopefully they are thinking more about having a well designed an minimal UI(to work with the tiny screens) than they are about it being a watered down OS. It's going to be running linux, which means you should be able to do anything with it you can with any other OS, other than gaming.
Which netbook is that? Last I'd heard, there were no manufacturers/no plans for any dual core netbooks since no one wanted to draw people away from their real notebook bussiness.
My netbooks got a dual core atom processor, a gig of ram, and a 180 gb non-solid state hdd. That's a pretty decent amount of computing power.
Hopefully they are thinking more about having a well designed an minimal UI(to work with the tiny screens) than they are about it being a watered down OS. It's going to be running linux, which means you should be able to do anything with it you can with any other OS, other than gaming.
Which netbook is that? Last I'd heard, there were no manufacturers/no plans for any dual core netbooks since no one wanted to draw people away from their real notebook bussiness.
My eeePC 1000he is dual core (I just booted it up to double-check).
My netbooks got a dual core atom processor, a gig of ram, and a 180 gb non-solid state hdd. That's a pretty decent amount of computing power.
Hopefully they are thinking more about having a well designed an minimal UI(to work with the tiny screens) than they are about it being a watered down OS. It's going to be running linux, which means you should be able to do anything with it you can with any other OS, other than gaming.
Which netbook is that? Last I'd heard, there were no manufacturers/no plans for any dual core netbooks since no one wanted to draw people away from their real notebook bussiness.
My eeePC 1000he is dual core (I just booted it up to double-check).
And googling for 1000HE dual core just brings up people talking about the 1000HE in compairison to other dual core netbooks. Which I guess means there ARE dual core netbooks, but NOT the 1000HE.
If it's *nix-based and open source, shouldn't it be able to support things like GIMP and OpenOffice (more robust then GoogleDocs, not as fully featured as Word) with relatively minimal tweaking?
Except everything is web based apps running from the browser, which is why I invoked the webtop + linux definition of this operating system.
This is news to me. Have we got a [citation] for that?
So far, I understand Chrome OS to certainly be optimized for web apps, but also a "fully featured" OS otherwise.
Yeah, I would be very surprised if the OS did not come preloaded with offline versions of some of the more popular apps with synchronization features.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
0
Options
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
edited July 2009
I've only had brief exposure to Chrome (the web browser). Anyone know if it had integrated web trends / spyware for Google advertising purposes?
I can certainly see this being a good development for ARM processors (fuck knows they need a decent OS) but, really, what is the point for x86 systems? Especially since we are talking about x86 systems from late 2010.
Last summer I bought the missus an EEE PC for $350 which runs XP great. By the time this OS comes out I would expect netbook hardware to be quite capable of running Windows or MacOS as well as a power laptop or even a pretty good desktop can today (especially considering Windows 7 will be out by then, I use it at work and ye gawds does it kick ass compared to Vista on the exact same hardware).
Certainly ChromeOS would be using less resources than Windows or MacOS but is that really worth the tradeoffs?
Hmmm....I've been really happy with Chrome the web-browser, so this sounds like good news. On the other hand, I've also been really happy with Windows 7 (beats the shit out of Vista), so I'm not so sure. We shall see...
Hmmm....I've been really happy with Chrome the web-browser, so this sounds like good news. On the other hand, I've also been really happy with Windows 7 (beats the shit out of Vista), so I'm not so sure. We shall see...
You can run any OS that currently runs Chrome and get all the google apps and browser and whatnot as well as all your other stuff.
Or you can run the ChromeOS and get chrome and google apps and nothing else.
Am I missing something here? What is ChromeOS' killer app? More efficient use of system resources? That has never worked in the past as a feature simply because of the pace at which computers keep getting faster.
Hmmm....I've been really happy with Chrome the web-browser, so this sounds like good news. On the other hand, I've also been really happy with Windows 7 (beats the shit out of Vista), so I'm not so sure. We shall see...
You can run any OS that currently runs Chrome and get all the google apps and browser and whatnot as well as all your other stuff.
Or you can run the ChromeOS and get chrome and google apps and nothing else.
Am I missing something here? What is ChromeOS' killer app? More efficient use of system resources? That has never worked in the past as a feature simply because of the pace at which computers keep getting faster.
If it's free, it may displace other Linuxes on netbooks. OS cost is important on low cost computers. Of course, MS will just drop the crippled netbook version of Win7 to close to $0 to keep Google out.
Well, what if Google goes even lower? An ad-supported OS that subsidizes your netbook purchase? I don't see that working either, as it will be next to impossible to lock the netbook down to Chrome OS only.
Good for Google, but I don't see why Goggle would want to have a vendetta with Microsoft.
Honestly, if I were them, it'd just be because I could. "You think we could take on Microsoft?" "I don't know... sounds like a challenge, and I'm pretty bored right now."
This is going to be a huge uphill battle for Google. The reason MS pretty has monopoly on the OS market is from years and years of having deals with computer manufacturers and retailer to have their OS pre-installed on machine. Most people are too lazy to bother going out and downloading somethings that's (even if it's free) and jump through hoops to install it and make it work. People want to buy their computer, start it up, and start doing their thing. It was the same IE. Having pre-installed in Windows basically gave MS a virtual monopoly on the web browser market for a long time because people didn't want to bother installing anything else.
If Google can produce some deals to have Chrome OS pre-installed on netbooks, then it may have a shot, but with the existing contracts with MS, it may be very difficult to do, and unless they produce something that can truly blow the competition out of the water, I'd be close to calling this dead on the vine.
This is going to be a huge uphill battle for Google. The reason MS pretty has monopoly on the OS market is from years and years of having deals with computer manufacturers and retailer to have their OS pre-installed on machine. Most people are too lazy to bother going out and downloading somethings that's (even if it's free) and jump through hoops to install it and make it work. People want to buy their computer, start it up, and start doing their thing. It was the same IE. Having pre-installed in Windows basically gave MS a virtual monopoly on the web browser market for a long time because people didn't want to bother installing anything else.
If Google can produce some deals to have Chrome OS pre-installed on netbooks, then it may have a shot, but with the existing contracts with MS, it may be very difficult to do, and unless they produce something that can truly blow the competition out of the water, I'd be close to calling this dead on the vine.
Sure, MS has made their fortune on a largely ignorant and lazy consumer base. But the times, they are a-changing.
If Google can produce some deals to have Chrome OS pre-installed on netbooks, then it may have a shot, but with the existing contracts with MS, it may be very difficult to do, and unless they produce something that can truly blow the competition out of the water, I'd be close to calling this dead on the vine.
This is going to be a huge uphill battle for Google. The reason MS pretty has monopoly on the OS market is from years and years of having deals with computer manufacturers and retailer to have their OS pre-installed on machine. Most people are too lazy to bother going out and downloading somethings that's (even if it's free) and jump through hoops to install it and make it work. People want to buy their computer, start it up, and start doing their thing. It was the same IE. Having pre-installed in Windows basically gave MS a virtual monopoly on the web browser market for a long time because people didn't want to bother installing anything else.
If Google can produce some deals to have Chrome OS pre-installed on netbooks, then it may have a shot, but with the existing contracts with MS, it may be very difficult to do, and unless they produce something that can truly blow the competition out of the water, I'd be close to calling this dead on the vine.
Sure, MS has made their fortune on a largely ignorant and lazy consumer base. But the times, they are a-changing.
Never underestimate the laziness of the average consumer.
Posts
Google is pretty good at designing interfaces, though. I'd prefer they re-evaluate what parts of a GUI are important and release with a new interface that can get us away from the startbutton/taskbar paradigm that's dominated since Windows 95. With an option for "legacy UI" for users who just want it to work like Windows.
More like Linux + Google GUI + Chrome. I understand they won't be using Gnome/KDE. In fact, I would be surprised if they used X11 at all.
So it's a bit like Mac OS X/iPhone OS, which is BSD + Apple GUI + Safari.
Edit: Yes it did:
...its architecture is described as "Google Chrome running within a new windowing system on top of a Linux kernel."
Compare to the Apple case, where Darwin (their BSD version) is open source, but the GUI is closed.
Except everything is web based apps running from the browser, which is why I invoked the webtop + linux definition of this operating system.
That said, I'm sure offline apps could be run from the linux OS with tweeking, but that would undermine the whole "cloud based computing" nature of Chrome OS.
This is being discussed in G&T as well:
I base this on two pieces of evidence. One: I'm still waiting for Chrome on Mac. Two: I'm still waiting for Gears on Firefox 3.5.
No just a random thought.
Hopefully they are thinking more about having a well designed an minimal UI(to work with the tiny screens) than they are about it being a watered down OS. It's going to be running linux, which means you should be able to do anything with it you can with any other OS, other than gaming.
Someone in G&T posted something about Moblin, which appears to be very similar to the Chrome OS concept (linux + webbrowser + netapps frontend) built by Intel for use in netbooks and MIDs. It uses a Gecko rendering engine for the webbrowser (which is what Firefox uses) and allows for access to both online and offline apps. I haven't tried it out yet (downloading it now) but it looks nice and can even live boot from a USB drive:
This is news to me. Have we got a [citation] for that?
So far, I understand Chrome OS to certainly be optimized for web apps, but also a "fully featured" OS otherwise.
Which netbook is that? Last I'd heard, there were no manufacturers/no plans for any dual core netbooks since no one wanted to draw people away from their real notebook bussiness.
My eeePC 1000he is dual core (I just booted it up to double-check).
Are you super sure?
Cause the Atom N280 is NOT a dual core chip.
And this has an Atom N280 chip.
And googling for 1000HE dual core just brings up people talking about the 1000HE in compairison to other dual core netbooks. Which I guess means there ARE dual core netbooks, but NOT the 1000HE.
Yeah, I would be very surprised if the OS did not come preloaded with offline versions of some of the more popular apps with synchronization features.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Last summer I bought the missus an EEE PC for $350 which runs XP great. By the time this OS comes out I would expect netbook hardware to be quite capable of running Windows or MacOS as well as a power laptop or even a pretty good desktop can today (especially considering Windows 7 will be out by then, I use it at work and ye gawds does it kick ass compared to Vista on the exact same hardware).
Certainly ChromeOS would be using less resources than Windows or MacOS but is that really worth the tradeoffs?
You can run any OS that currently runs Chrome and get all the google apps and browser and whatnot as well as all your other stuff.
Or you can run the ChromeOS and get chrome and google apps and nothing else.
Am I missing something here? What is ChromeOS' killer app? More efficient use of system resources? That has never worked in the past as a feature simply because of the pace at which computers keep getting faster.
If it's free, it may displace other Linuxes on netbooks. OS cost is important on low cost computers. Of course, MS will just drop the crippled netbook version of Win7 to close to $0 to keep Google out.
Well, what if Google goes even lower? An ad-supported OS that subsidizes your netbook purchase? I don't see that working either, as it will be next to impossible to lock the netbook down to Chrome OS only.
So yeah, no idea.
Anyway, this: Google's vanity OS is Microsoft's dream is an interesting read for those who think Google is attempting to displace MS.
Very interesting take on things. Kind of makes Bing being a big pile of shit seem more sensible.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
If Google can produce some deals to have Chrome OS pre-installed on netbooks, then it may have a shot, but with the existing contracts with MS, it may be very difficult to do, and unless they produce something that can truly blow the competition out of the water, I'd be close to calling this dead on the vine.
Sure, MS has made their fortune on a largely ignorant and lazy consumer base. But the times, they are a-changing.
Like HP, Acer, and friends?
Replace "Google" and "Linux" with "Apple" and "BSD."
Suddenly it's obvious how retarded his point is.
Never underestimate the laziness of the average consumer.