I don't like the sound of a web-centric OS. I do my best to keep my computer from going online for any reason when I'm not actively using the Internet for something. An OS based around the web sounds like it would be next to impossible to effectively have control over. Google can already read all my email and see everything I search for, and their traffic analysis servers seem to be contacted in the loading of nearly every website too. The function of their primary software (the search engine) is to be a searchable database of pretty much the entire web. If they make an OS that's intended to be integrally tied to the web, it's not at all unlikely that they'd collect and catalogue as much information as possible from that as well. I don't know what they would intend to DO with all the info about how everyone uses their computers, but I can't trust a panopticon, now matter how benevolent it appears to be.
Also, aside from the privacy concerns, I've seen enough scifi to question the wisdom of letting a single corporation install an inherently web-ready OS on every piece of computing hardware in the world. Maybe it's a stretch, but it just seems like one tiny step away from possibly enabling a corporately controlled worldwide botnet. I know that's how I'd do it if I had any interest in world domination.
A light and friendly GUI makes me happy though.
Yes, time to get out our tinfoil hats everyone... because windows of course isn't a web ready OS...... Oh wait, what?
Microsoft would be, and has been trying to do the exact same thing that google has done well, the only difference is they haven't been nearly as successful with it. All of your arguments could be used for MS/Windows as well..... So basically, you dont like the idea of using a computer.
Aren't those the people who still use Internet Explorer?
If Google's new OS can convince the masses to stop using Internet Explorer, then I fully support and endorse this web-based operating system. IE, in all its incarnations, continues to be the bane of the web development community. I despise having to cater to its outmoded standards, when every other browser is leaps and bounds ahead.
Like a computer were only to be used for web browsing hehehe... I have readed this chrome OS is aimed more for netbooks, but i'm not sure now :S. If Google is behind it, no doubt it could be popular, but if people prefer windows because it's more complete, it could be a total FIASCO.
In europe, windows 7 will not have Internet Explorer. The standard user who buy a cheap computer for internet and ofimatic, use mainly IE becuse they don't want to worry about "programs".
BTW, IE8 is very good
Let's give time to time, it's too soon to talk hehe . Chrome has not landed enough good as google expected. FF users still prefer FF, the same for opera, and safari is getting more popular and more used. The cake of internet is mainly browsed with IE (6 - 8 ), and that's a fact.
Bing is also growing and offers better things than google.
Some of you guys are crazy. This isn't a OS that is going to be on your workstation. This also isn't going to be the OS to play crysis on, at least at first.
The majority of average users that play games well play them online. They play casual game or online poker or peggle.
Even though it is built on a linux kernal, I doubt it is only a GUI. I'm sure they are tearing it apart to optimize in there own crazy way.
Yes, time to get out our tinfoil hats everyone... because windows of course isn't a web ready OS...... Oh wait, what?
(...)So basically, you dont like the idea of using a computer.
!! Ha, I guess so, yeah.
I was just thinking of quotes like this one from the article:
"Google is coming at this fresh and, because it is based on a set of services that reside on the web, it is the first really post-web operating system, designed from the ground up, and reconceived for a web world," Mr Enderle told the BBC.
It just sounds weird. I don't know what they mean by that or what that guy's basing it on. It's probably just hype and buzzwords to make it sound more unique, I guess, but the first thing I pictured was my hard drive behaving like Drop Box and driver updates streaming in the background without even telling me.
That's probably not at all what it's going to be like though.
I can't help but feel that google is trying to slowly take over the world. the symbol that they show on http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8139711.stm looks like a robotic eye waiting to track everything you do and turn all the electronics in your house against you.
Per nailed it. Plus, haters, nobody is saying this will come out next year and unseat Windows. That is absurd. It will come out next year and have a shot at getting a majority share of Netbooks within a few years after that. Then it will grow and evolve, and a few years down the line from now, it might be a viable desktop alternative. OK? We are not predicting the future, we are saying that somebody taking a Speed/Stability/Security approach to a OS from the ground up could POTENTIALLY be a game changer and that it worked like a charm for the Chrome Browser.
this thread sounds like all the pre-OSX threads on the net, it will be a neat OS but the rapture isn't coming.
OSX was, like Windows, an evolution of a UI that got started in the early '80s. Of course the Google OS will inherit from that tradition where it makes things easier on the users, but unlike MS and Apple, they do not have a current market share to be scared about losing if they change what people are used to. They actually have a clean slate. That hasn't really happened before with a software company with the scale required to compete in the OS market for real.
My thoughts: PCs as they are will coexist with this Google OS. The Chrome OS will fill a 'market', but will not replace PCs as you see them. I don't think people are even reading all the details about ChromeOS.
Pros:
Boots fast
Will probably be free
Will fill the needs for the average web user/social networker
Re-imagines the way OSs function, and will provide necessary competition
Cons:
You will NEED to buy a new computer. You can run it virtually, but it requires new hardware for support on the motherboard.
Cloud computing, which has more the following Cons of it's own:
If you don't have an Internet connection, you have no system
Less secure personal information. What company is going to put their private information on 'the cloud'?
Virus' will spread much more easily, and will likely become more common, since everyone's system will be on the same servers.
Not likely to handle 3D applications
Personally, I could see using this with a netbook, or a computer I use as a terminal elsewhere in my house (like maybe in the kitchen for recipes, or media in the living room). I will still always have a regular PC unless they somehow find a way to overcome ALL those cons... or they stop making regular PCs/OSs.
I don't get it. I never believed the netbook hype. Lets bring a machine that won't fit in my pocket everywhere with us! Wow, that seems so convenient! Not.
And then Chrome, to me it looks like a normal OS that can do less. What exactly is the added value of this? I can hook up my camera? Wow, finally. Like i couldn't do that on windows 98. They try to bring it as a revolution but it's nothing new. Just my thoughts.
I'll have to check that out when I get home, since work blocks youtube, but I'm referring to 3D gaming type stuff. Is it supporting that? I would think that would need to reside on the client end.
It will support o3d, so yes. It will. I assume keeping a local cache of downloaded textures versus all textures being sent all the time through the cloud. The web program itself though will probably be streaming, and have no offline ability.
11. A more human usable file system. Instead of these purely, computer logic based, Windows explorer. Files are organised more in a human recognisable manner. Virtual File system, so that files can be in more than two places at once. You can organise them like rooms in a house, perhaps DVDs on a shelf. They adapt to your usage, and you can arrange them in a lot more ways than just date, alphabetical and size etc.
I cant see Googles OS getting very far, their Browser hasnt, most people just go with whats installed originally on their pc.
What it might do is put the willys up microsoft. With an improved OS, just over there, they could end up with lots of annoyed customers moaning "why cant you do that?". It could force them to innovate.
Hell yes, chrome rocks. Imagine how much free RAM there would be for Photoshop if they took the same approach to the entire OS? Windows can fuck right off.
from what i gathered, you wont ever use photoshop on Chrome OS, since all chrome is for, is applications on the internet.
Unless of course, Adobe starts charging yearly fees for you to connect to their servers and open Photoshop from there, or operate like Steam, instead of installing an application and running it from your ChromePC. I love the Chrome Browser, i use the shit out of it, but i would be afraid to go to an OS, since maybe 2% of websites i go to do not like Chrome.
This seems more like a tool with the same ideas and in the same vain as Facebook, but as an entire computer that they sell and is marketable, instead of just a website.
Which companies? And I mean for EVERYTHING, not just sharing ideas/meetings. I'm talking all development and source existing on the cloud.
My company definitely would not. Everything is kept on a local server, and they won't even create a separate server to provide web-hosting, because they are worried about pathways into the internal servers.
That's just the way I see it... maybe it takes rethinking how things are done, that I haven't wrapped my mind around yet, but the brain-bank at Google has.
From what I've read about ChromeOS, they are talking about storing everything on the online servers. You would no longer have a local storage.
Obviously, that doesn't stop you from storing things to a local drive, but that's not how it's been explained. They expect you to have your work on the cloud, and work using apps on the cloud. Essentially all your apps become web-apps and your work would be stored that way.
after watching the video instead of reading about it, it does seem a lot cooler than my initial impression. It would be nice to have local applications on it like you suggested docrob, instead of solely being limited to web apps - since most are not good.
my only thought is what do you do about slow connections? or places without internet? What about slow internet? We can say "its fast now!" but north america is still behind other areas of the world in terms of internet connectivity.
moose, while understandable, the whole point of it is for a world where we are constantly connected to the internet.
would be awesome with this for a pad like netbook with touchscreen, little storage, low profile, everything is stored online, and its constantly connected.
Replies
Yes, time to get out our tinfoil hats everyone... because windows of course isn't a web ready OS...... Oh wait, what?
Microsoft would be, and has been trying to do the exact same thing that google has done well, the only difference is they haven't been nearly as successful with it. All of your arguments could be used for MS/Windows as well..... So basically, you dont like the idea of using a computer.
If Google's new OS can convince the masses to stop using Internet Explorer, then I fully support and endorse this web-based operating system. IE, in all its incarnations, continues to be the bane of the web development community. I despise having to cater to its outmoded standards, when every other browser is leaps and bounds ahead.
In europe, windows 7 will not have Internet Explorer. The standard user who buy a cheap computer for internet and ofimatic, use mainly IE becuse they don't want to worry about "programs".
BTW, IE8 is very good
Let's give time to time, it's too soon to talk hehe
Bing is also growing and offers better things than google.
The majority of average users that play games well play them online. They play casual game or online poker or peggle.
Even though it is built on a linux kernal, I doubt it is only a GUI. I'm sure they are tearing it apart to optimize in there own crazy way.
I was just thinking of quotes like this one from the article: It just sounds weird. I don't know what they mean by that or what that guy's basing it on. It's probably just hype and buzzwords to make it sound more unique, I guess, but the first thing I pictured was my hard drive behaving like Drop Box and driver updates streaming in the background without even telling me.
That's probably not at all what it's going to be like though.
windows 7 day one purchase right here
/troll
cheers for that image blaizer
OSX was, like Windows, an evolution of a UI that got started in the early '80s. Of course the Google OS will inherit from that tradition where it makes things easier on the users, but unlike MS and Apple, they do not have a current market share to be scared about losing if they change what people are used to. They actually have a clean slate. That hasn't really happened before with a software company with the scale required to compete in the OS market for real.
[ame]
Pros:
- Boots fast
- Will probably be free
- Will fill the needs for the average web user/social networker
- Re-imagines the way OSs function, and will provide necessary competition
Cons:- You will NEED to buy a new computer. You can run it virtually, but it requires new hardware for support on the motherboard.
- Cloud computing, which has more the following Cons of it's own:
- If you don't have an Internet connection, you have no system
- Less secure personal information. What company is going to put their private information on 'the cloud'?
- Virus' will spread much more easily, and will likely become more common, since everyone's system will be on the same servers.
- Not likely to handle 3D applications
Personally, I could see using this with a netbook, or a computer I use as a terminal elsewhere in my house (like maybe in the kitchen for recipes, or media in the living room). I will still always have a regular PC unless they somehow find a way to overcome ALL those cons... or they stop making regular PCs/OSs.And then Chrome, to me it looks like a normal OS that can do less. What exactly is the added value of this? I can hook up my camera? Wow, finally. Like i couldn't do that on windows 98. They try to bring it as a revolution but it's nothing new. Just my thoughts.
[ame]
http://code.google.com/apis/o3d/
I just don't understand why they didn't get with the OpenGL group to improve opengl to be able to stream 3d over the web.
I'd like to remind them that as a trusted PC personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground sugar caves.
11. A more human usable file system. Instead of these purely, computer logic based, Windows explorer. Files are organised more in a human recognisable manner. Virtual File system, so that files can be in more than two places at once. You can organise them like rooms in a house, perhaps DVDs on a shelf. They adapt to your usage, and you can arrange them in a lot more ways than just date, alphabetical and size etc.
I cant see Googles OS getting very far, their Browser hasnt, most people just go with whats installed originally on their pc.
What it might do is put the willys up microsoft. With an improved OS, just over there, they could end up with lots of annoyed customers moaning "why cant you do that?". It could force them to innovate.
from what i gathered, you wont ever use photoshop on Chrome OS, since all chrome is for, is applications on the internet.
Unless of course, Adobe starts charging yearly fees for you to connect to their servers and open Photoshop from there, or operate like Steam, instead of installing an application and running it from your ChromePC. I love the Chrome Browser, i use the shit out of it, but i would be afraid to go to an OS, since maybe 2% of websites i go to do not like Chrome.
This seems more like a tool with the same ideas and in the same vain as Facebook, but as an entire computer that they sell and is marketable, instead of just a website.
Which companies? And I mean for EVERYTHING, not just sharing ideas/meetings. I'm talking all development and source existing on the cloud.
My company definitely would not. Everything is kept on a local server, and they won't even create a separate server to provide web-hosting, because they are worried about pathways into the internal servers.
That's just the way I see it... maybe it takes rethinking how things are done, that I haven't wrapped my mind around yet, but the brain-bank at Google has.
Obviously, that doesn't stop you from storing things to a local drive, but that's not how it's been explained. They expect you to have your work on the cloud, and work using apps on the cloud. Essentially all your apps become web-apps and your work would be stored that way.
All I use my netbook for is internet things when I'm not in font of my desktop, so this would be perfect.
Though, I think it's a bit unfair to benchmark right now, since it really is only a preview and not a completed system.
my only thought is what do you do about slow connections? or places without internet? What about slow internet? We can say "its fast now!" but north america is still behind other areas of the world in terms of internet connectivity.
would be awesome with this for a pad like netbook with touchscreen, little storage, low profile, everything is stored online, and its constantly connected.