Printable View
Hi,
I just heard on cnn that Google are planning to release an operating to rival Microsoft's newer operating systems such as Vista. The operating system Google are planning to release will to called "Chrome" (Yes, just like the browser) and it will be released next year! The operating system is apparently going to be open source too.
Edit:
Google Chrome Operating System
What are your thoughts on this?
Nightwalker
i can't wait to see.
But im using the new windows 7 atm and vista and xp are nothing on it
and i know google will fail at making a OS.
god what else thay going to make
phones
web browers
OS
Search engines.
google earth
google etc etc, Im sick of google
There's another thread around here that links to a blog entry about it...appears to be a web-based OS that's running on a Linux kernel of somekind... I don't know... it could quite possibly be the biggest, most spectacular failure since "BOB"... or at least since "Clippy"...
-tg
It appears as if it's going more of a web browser rather than an operating system. However, where have Google been hiding? Don't they realize that Linux can be downloaded and can be used without it needing to be installed?Quote:
Originally Posted by techgnome
Maybe we could merge both thread together since they are both talking about the OS that Google are thinking of releasing.
Edit:
I have included the link to the blog about the Google Chrome OS in the first post! Thanks, to kregg for posting it in his chit-chat about thread the operating system.
Not everyone thinks its the bees knees!
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/07..._chrome_redux/
hehehehe.... I think I'd have to agree with El Reg there... hehehehe....
-tg
TBH,
Goggle have produced arguably to best Search engine, and have succeeded in this area far more than any of the competition.
if they offer an OS that is cheap does not tie you in to selling off your kids if they deem it to be in the interest of you using a PC then I hope the succeed in this venture.
What viable alternative is there to Windows to the basic user ? I have dabbled with Linux and would say it is too much work for the average Joe who only want to go online and perv, bank, shop, and sign up to pron sites with an email account.
Windows breaks the bank and the licence terms are just crazy. Apply need a new computer. so a free or cheap alternative can only be a good thing
it would be good for MS to get some real competition.
But it's just a striped down Lunix with Crome browser (at least from what I read). So we are back to the Internet is the computer you need nothing locally right?
Its for subnotebooks and the market niche is very real... even with XP home the OS is sluggish hence the linux advantage as OS in terms of performance on intel atom. Google can also bundle applications out of the box, e.g. open office, chrome, etc. The real challenge would be to make these applications easy to setup/use/learn for a user that has already been used to using applications typically bundled with MS. Once the learning curve problem is out of the way then the price advantage of bundling open source OS and applications will reduce microsoft's presence in the subnotebook market. After all... do you really need all the features (and the CPU consumption) of MS products when all you gonna do is surf, chat, blog, write simple docs using your subnotebook?
no, BUT, when I do need those items, I shouldn't be held hostage to my ability to get an internet connection to use them.
At least with local OS installs, when I install an app, I can use it even if I'm not connected to the internet. Not everyone has a high speed connection. At least with Windows, (and Linux, OSX, and others) if some thing happens to the connection, I haven't lost any thing.
-tg
I may be wrong but I don't think Google will make such a blatant mistake in creating an alternative OS. It would be like exerting lots of money/effort on marketing hype to sell a solar powered car that needs desert strong sunlight to run, hardly anyone would want to use nor buy such a product if they can only use it when they are in the middle of the desert during the day.Quote:
Originally Posted by techgnome
oh? You don't?
Seems pretty straight forward and obvious.... they've taken the "Browser is the window to the world" idea and moved it a little further out there....Quote:
Originally Posted by from the linked blog
-tg
I heard somewhere (can't remember where) that we are moving more and more to a web based system and that desktop applications are going out of fashion.Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryMazzone
The Chrome browser is nothing! It doesn't appear to support the basic short cut functions nor does it allow easy access to javascript. I wonder what functionality Google will leave out of their Chrome browser? Maybe security or a registry. :oQuote:
Originally Posted by leinad31
"I heard somewhere (can't remember where) that we are moving more and more to a web based system and that desktop applications are going out of fashion." << I've been hearing that for 10+ years now... still hasn't happened... What I think will happen is that you will see SOME apps go that way (SOA anyone? AaS?) but I don't think EVERYTHING will go that way... there are too many mission critical apps out there to risk it over the internet.
-tg
Yeah, I can see the smaller portable type applications moving on to the internet but the applications dealing with confidential data and alike would be risky.Quote:
Originally Posted by techgnome
Can you please refrase that - I have difficulties to understand it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Davadvice
Do you know how much it cost to build?Quote:
Originally Posted by Davadvice
I never knew that cheap "can only be a good thing".Quote:
Originally Posted by Davadvice
Unlikely and just thinking that it isn't makes me feel real good.Quote:
Originally Posted by Davadvice
However, Microsoft can't be expected to do everything 100% For example their programming software such as the .net language programs, office, and a few others are good. However, when it comes to the internet I think it should left up to a company (ies) to build products for a web development point of view. The Microsoft products in that regard have been really lagging behind the rest.Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
The OS is not for us technically inclined. In the first place you wouldn't invest in an Atom processor when dual core is what you need on a daily basis. It is intended for another market entirely - it will definitely fall short of all our benchmarks and use cases.
Make an apples to apples comparison.
Was that directed at me? If so which part of my post are you referring to? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by leinad31
Nope no one in particular... it was the common theme of the thread. Consider this... such devices would normally not be supported by network/system admins since it is a security risk (XP home not professional), ergo it is more of for personnal use, hence business related use case arguments are not an apples to apples comparison.
It is for the typical Joe/Jane that likes to hang out at Starbucks and check on their facebook account. That's the market Google is targeting, not businesses nor those technically inclined.
Sorry but I find your remarks amusing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightwalker83
These days we are evaluating all of our web based applications whether it's built in house or by some extrnal vendor just to make sure every page is loaded and renders properly in every major webbrowser.
Browsers in scope are IE7/8, Firefox, Safari, Chrome (we left Opera out).
Guess what, IE7/8 so far are the big winners and no browser is even close (I cannot emphasize how many issues we found with Firefox, Safari and especially Chrome).
I would agree that FF is faster but I don't care if takes an extra second to load some page as long as page loads and renders correctly.
Since IE4 I am one very happy IE user.
Sorry, I wasn't talking about browsers but the web design software such as Dream Weaver, etc. Still, while Microsoft seem to be the when creating internet browsers their documentation on how to use some of the features could be better!Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
What?! Microsoft is the only major SW company that maitains a dedicated documentation website (msdn).Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightwalker83
It's huge and has practically everything documented for every product they've ever produced (not only recent btw). Navigation could be simpler, though...
Some other major SW companies like SAP also have similar support sites but those are very useless as you cannot find a damn thing and if you are lucky to find it content wouldn't be much helpful.
How could you (or anyone els) possibly say something like that remains a mystery to me.
Why do people try to put a lot of dirt on MS while being their customers?
What is wrong with being a giant SW house?
I like their products and am tired of reading and listening all the complaints about it. MS products are one of the most logically designed and very user friendly. Whether they miss on some features isn't much relevant, really.
If someone hates them so much then simply switch to Linux, Mac, DOS but stop complaining.
MS is the best SW house there is, period. Chrome OS? I don't see it getting out of pampers.
Their documentation is too verbose, could have been to the point... probably because it has marketing related text/hints every other section if not every other paragraph.Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
There are MS products described as "logically designed" which happened to be intended to steal the thunder of an existing application that is doing very well in the market and was already designed/developed by someone else. So saying MS is the best designer is simply being more than just a reasonable/sensible advocate.
As to Google OS... who knows... MS might end up copying yet another product made successful by someone else.
Get down off your high horse! Like I said above Microsoft aren't the best at everything. I agree with what leinad31 is saying.Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
Nothing is wrong with a big giant software house there just needs to be more competition. No one (it this thread at least) is saying Microsoft suck I'm just saying that from my experience with some Microsoft web development tools (not programming) that they really need to improve. I have noticed that Front page, etc which Microsoft market for web design lack most of the features that companies such as Adobe include in programs like Dream Weaver. I'm NOT having a general go at Microsoft.Quote:
Why do people try to put a lot of dirt on MS while being their customers?
What is wrong with being a giant SW house?
Frontpage is long gone... Are you aware of Microsoft® Expression® Studio?
Ah, yes! Forgot it was a different piece of software. However, a couple of years ago when I tried MES it lacked the same functions as Dream Weaver and I wrote a report comparing both MES and Dream Weaver. Although, Microsoft may have upgraded MES since I last used it but I still prefer Adobe because the extra features and programs.Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
Adobe hasn't done much to dreamweaver except buy it and put their name on it where Macromedia's was...Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightwalker83
As far as Microsoft's offerings for web development, based on you assessment, I guess you haven't looked in some time huh?
Yes, that is true!Quote:
Originally Posted by kleinma
No, I haven't looked at the Microsoft web design tools since I wrote the report mentioned above. However, I was thinking of downloading Virtual Web Developer and seeing what it is like.Quote:
As far as Microsoft's offerings for web development, based on you assessment, I guess you haven't looked in some time huh?
Edit:
I'm downloading VWD now!
Edit II:
Damn! It appears I downloaded it for no reason because it deals with the programming aspect of the web rather than the design part. While, I am interested in the coing part I have no background in coding which is strange because I am more into the coding aspect of websites rather than the design part.
VWD is really aimed at developers. You probably would be more interested in this
http://www.microsoft.com/expression/..._Overview.aspx
Thanks! I noticed that the only real difference between the current version of MEW and Adobe products is expression web has the .Net components as well as AJax whereas Adobe Dream Weaver has normal asp but Adobe also have Flash.Quote:
Originally Posted by kleinma
I guess we should get back on to talking about Chrome now!
Exactly so tg, surprisingly a lot of computer hardware isn't hooked to the net due to mission critical information etc. Currently working with a client who keep their R&D systems completely separate from any sort of web connection.Quote:
Originally Posted by techgnome
As usual a lot of bollocks being pushed by various tech companies and management consultants with only one in every ten ideas ever having the chance to fail.
<<Sits back with popcorn and waits the epic failure of chrome OS>>
my cell phone does all of that, rendering a subnotebook obsolete. And it's not a smartphone.Quote:
Originally Posted by leinad31
microsoft is the company that wanted to do it all 100%, including run other companies (such as mozilla) out of business.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightwalker83
Quote:
Originally Posted by leinad31
businesses would love it. They have always leaned towards a setup where all apps were on a single system and you connected with dumb terminals. This is only a step up from that.Quote:
Originally Posted by leinad31
wondering when they changed their name. They were beta testing "google os" a while ago, and talks i have heard indicated that android would be making the migration to home systems.Quote:
Originally Posted by KiwiDexter
Yes, I know! However, if Microsoft have a monopoly on all the programing stuff then it would cost the customer lots of money because there is no competition. Also, if a company does 100% of the programming, etc wouldn't the risk of mistakes in the software increase?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Orwell
Expected answer from someone not from Asia. Correct guess? Consider that subnotebooks is currently the only considerable positive growth market for PC vendors and that the trend started in Asia. Typically only executives and upper management can afford full use of smartphone features in my country since its the company that foots the bill. It will also largely depend on preference of most people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Orwell
So true. That's why MS lost its focus. It was very simple at the start...Win OS in every PC... and we all know the the impact of that focused and powerful vision. Nowadays? Yeah its presence is everywhere but hardly the oomph you'd expect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Orwell
Reread the blog and realized its just a blog of a vision. Discussions on technical aspects are just academic at this point. But if we were to pursue your argument then it would be a single open source system.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Orwell
Not familiar so no comment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Orwell
unix is not open and never has been. The fact is businesses are almost always anti-open source merely because of tech support. and i didnt read any blog. I was referring to what someone else said.
"The software architecture is simple — Google Chrome running within a new windowing system on top of a Linux kernel." as stated in http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/...chrome-os.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by Lord Orwell
As to citing business use case as argument, please refer to preceding posts regarding making an apples to apples comparison.
Rhino You know what I was getting at… I was only stating that competition to MS can only serve the consumer well and that the product from Google will be aimed at netbooks and not us “techies” i may have set a scene !!
:)
The google OS is probably just another way for google to track everything you do and also serve you some ads while its doing it. ;) You know, the 2 things google does best.
Oh but it will be open source and free right? this must mean it is the best OS to come along in years
well better then the MS do the same thing and paying them for it I suppose?
lets take another angle on this. what if a little known company set up and created a viable alternative to windows. I doubt the reactions would be the same. why do some people hate large companies and others have such a strong allegiance.
If you look at these things at product level then I imagine we would all have different opinions.
I hate the idea of Twitter simply because of all the hype and the fact that there are so many idots that want to let others know their business.
I have never even logged on to the twits web site and have a firm opinion. I had a simaler opinion of the Ipod and that changed the day I got one.
You mean how Microsoft is offering web versions of it's Office 2010 applications for free?Quote:
Originally Posted by Davadvice
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microso...b_Applications
And... It is probably going to be difficult to use that you need to go into the registry or edit system files to enable programs and features.Quote:
Originally Posted by kleinma
I wonder how Google are going to handle system/program crashes? At the moment I use Vista and it is like you have to ask the system's permission before it falls over. :lol:
They wouldn't have a chance Microsoft would just buy them out!Quote:
Originally Posted by Davadvice
Since other topics were being thrown in the discussion, this link may be of interest to some. http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Q4....D581FBCCC.html
If it will be truly open source then such attempts will be easily and quickly brought to light since many people will be inspecting the code... and since it won't be a secret anymore then it can be addressed.Quote:
Originally Posted by kleinma
For all of you who hates Microsoft read this.
In 2008 google made around 22 billion dollars in revenue. Not bad, but 97% of that revenue came from ads. 97 percent!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by leinad31
If you think google gives away software just because it supports an open source movement, then you need to consider that maybe they just release free software because they can't make any money at it.
However if they release free software for people to use, they can serve you more ads, track users better to claim to provide better adsense to people viewing sites with google ads on them, etc..
This is from a decent article I read about the 2 companies facing off.
The article was not biased towards either, in fact it bashed them pretty equally.Quote:
Microsoft would love for everyone in the world to be using its Internet Explorer browser to search through Bing to find a story from its MSN portal to email via Hotmail or Outlook to a friend. Add in a smartphone running Windows Mobile and an Xbox in the living room for the kids, and you have a Microsoft family. And though it is much joked about, Microsoft is the dominant platform for software developers of all types, whether they are making small business software, massive online role-playing games or photo-editing utilities.
Google's ecosystem looks different. It starts with a Google Chrome browser (oddly running only on Windows) with a default homepage set to Google News or a customized Google homepage. From there you might go to Gmail and then click on a Word document sent to you as an attachment which Google will quickly -- and safely -- open for you in its online word processor.
But most importantly, Google wants you to search and travel around the web, hitting web pages that run Google-served ads and Google tracking cookies. You might think that Google is a really cool company to give away all this free technology, while never thinking about the persistent and silent data collection Google is undertaking to profile you in order to deliver you to advertisers for a premium.
Not much of a problem on my end since I am using Firefox with NoScript add-on installed so google-analytics can be enabled/disabled by choice... let me guess, your using IE kleinma?. And the per click revenue generation is a very big improvement over the spam/pop-ups in the old days and has already been accepted by most.
BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, why bash Google on that argument when we all know that Microsoft would do the same thing and is probably doing it now. The difference with the open source approach as described is that others can audit what your application is doing/capable, e.g. Firefox, and remedies can be put into place, e.g. NoScript. Same can't be said of a black box browser.
I'm very skeptical of such lists and so should everyone else. It's too marketing influenced (writers could have been paid) and in most cases not to be taken as 100% factual... if everyone will recall, most of the institutions, or their finance instruments/products/derivatives, that failed in wall street were ranked very high in comparable lists for their industry by so called independent rating experts.Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
I prefer to read news such as this http://blogs.computerworld.com/londo...ndows_platform
And if you are to label other people as MS haters then logically there would be MS lovers.
Like I said: "For all of you who hates Microsoft ..."Quote:
Originally Posted by leinad31
Which is why I am here at practically Microsoft product supported board.Quote:
Originally Posted by leinad31
Nope I don't hate Microsoft, I'm just more objective compared to some people. Actually, there are valid arguments as to why or how Google OS fail and some are related to OEM licensing... unfortunately some people just have to paint a picture that it will come about due to friendly competition, because company X is rated better, because of so and so noble/ideal characteristics. In reality it isn't all pink and rosy as some marketing and PR people would like everyone else to think or even READ (actually as with rating experts, we should also be skeptical of these people because of their motivations).Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
As to how or why Google OS will probably fail, I'm willing to let those defending MS excessively to list it out... why steal their thunder after all? And if I am to be the hater then it is the responsibility of the lover to lay it out factually and convincingly rather than resorting to whatever argument or pulling strings. And wouldn't it be strange to read that a labeled "MS hater" would be the one to figure it out?
You want to think that you don't however you sound exactly opposite.Quote:
Originally Posted by leinad31
There is very simple explanation for that - you are trying very hard to prove your "innocence"... :)
Although I wouldn't want to turn this into a personal attack kind of replies.
Best regards.
You already did. Only thing left for you to do is be true to form and click the hazard icon on the left side <<<<<.Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
I can't help it if that is your impression PRhinoBull. It also can't be helped that MS OS has architectural flaws (http://www.roughlydrafted.com/Oct05.5Flaws.html) but which OS doesn't? At least I was responsible enough to research on the other side of the matter rather than leaving it at just that level of debate then resorting to whatever argument. Taken with a grain of salt (since its a pro Mac site) there are still relevant points raised here http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Hom...EF7FAFD3A.html.
In addition to what was already mentioned, Google OS will also have to address OEM barrier since target user market is content with a subnotebook that works...they won't be technically savvy enough to consider replacing an OS that already provides what they need, and they already paid for it so why incur additional cost. Also Google OS won't have the luxury of dedicated hardware platform such as with Mac OS. Just like toothbrush and toothpaste they go hand in hand.
Nor does Google have retail experience and channels to sell the OS themselves. As with Microsoft's OEM, their pay per click scheme is a guaranteed gravy train that is addicting to companies but leaves their competence/experience to compete in dynamic consumer markets such as subnotebooks OS uncertain. With smartphones they can simply bundle their mobile OS, but with subnotebooks it is not as simple due to OEM and the element of choice of consumers.
In short it may end up as technically sound/ideal, but non marketable.
I don't hate Microsoft I just find some of the products are lacking in features, functions, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
i hate to disagree, but the netbook sales disagree with what you said here.Quote:
Originally Posted by leinad31
Originally netbooks came with linux installed, and sales were sluggish. Since you can now get an xp license if you are an oem and installing it on a netbook for a mere $5, there is no longer any reason for manufacturers to rock the boat here. Now that netbooks come with the familiar windows os, people are lining up to buy a brand-new portable computer compatible with most of the software they already own for a mere $199. Do you really think they would line up as much if it ran cell phone applications?
also it is interesting to note that the links you posted reference xp and there is a version of 7 designed for netbooks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NetbookQuote:
Originally Posted by Lord Orwell
Yes, users prefer the familiar over something totally new. I did say that it was in addition to what was already mentioned. If it could be pinned exactly on only one factor then Google just has to throw money at that one factor to succeed.
The latest post was meant to show that already in a difficult position (going after laptop/desktop users market), in going solo on this project and with no vendor partnerships to market the product then it will definitely be difficult for Google even if the OS is good.
It should also be worth mentioning that MS was forced to extend XP so that other OS won't have the chance to get a foothold. After all once Joe/Jane realizes it isn't so hard to transfer....
Forced? You can't say that if it was their own decision to stop other companies from transferring their software over to another systems. :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by leinad31
microsoft was forced to do no such thing. they could have released a version of windows ce that would run on netbooks. The problem was that windows vista's hardware requirements are so steep it won't even run on netbooks. Who could have predicted the sudden popularity of computers so weak in power they are only good for basic web surfing, email, etc? I wasn't joking earlier when i said my cellphone has all the same capabilities, including office document support. I can even link a full keyboard to it. I bought a more powerful used laptop on ebay for $100, and it's got a decent-sized screen. Granted it's slightly lacking on battery compared to a netbook, but it's not bad at 1.5 hours.
The popularity has probably everything to do with battery life and price, although you can beat the battery life if you undervolt a centrino. I've seen people get 8 hours of usage. Linux may be great for a lot of things, but the casual user simply doesn't want to learn a new os when the old one works just fine. Google OS will face the same hurdle. Linux has been in the market for a very, very long time, and still doesn't have much of a market share, although it may be higher than reported due to the fact a user can install the same disc on multiple pcs.
as an addendum, i wonder what exactly qualifies a system to be a netbook? My p3 Dell laptop seems to fit the bill. It is capable of booting from internet, operating without a hard drive, and doesn't have an internal cd drive, although it comes with an attachment that has one. It also has a 11 inch screen. However it is listed as a subnotebook.
So there is such a computer as a netbook? It wasn't a spelling mistake last time and you actually meant notebook? This is the first time I have heard of the netbook.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Orwell