Google Chrome Operating System

[Davadvice]

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.

[kleinma]

well better then the MS do the same thing and paying them for it I suppose?

You mean how Microsoft is offering web versions of it's Office 2010 applications for free?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microso...b_Applications

[Nightwalker83]

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.

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.

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.

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.

They wouldn't have a chance Microsoft would just buy them out!

[leinad31]

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

[leinad31]

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.

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.

[RhinoBull]

For all of you who hates Microsoft read this.

[kleinma]

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.

In 2008 google made around 22 billion dollars in revenue. Not bad, but 97% of that revenue came from ads. 97 percent!!!

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.

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.

The article was not biased towards either, in fact it bashed them pretty equally.

[leinad31]

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.

[leinad31]

For all of you who hates Microsoft read this.

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.

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.

[RhinoBull]

I'm very skeptical of such lists...

Like I said: "For all of you who hates Microsoft ..."

And if you are to label other people as MS haters then logically there would be MS lovers....

Which is why I am here at practically Microsoft product supported board.

[leinad31]

Like I said: "For all of you who hates Microsoft ..."



Which is why I am here at practically Microsoft product supported board.

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).

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?

[RhinoBull]

Nope I don't hate Microsoft, I'm just more objective compared to some people.

You want to think that you don't however you sound exactly opposite.
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.

[leinad31]

You want to think that you don't however you sound exactly opposite.
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 <<<<<.

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.

[Nightwalker83]

You want to think that you don't however you sound exactly opposite.
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.

I don't hate Microsoft I just find some of the products are lacking in features, functions, etc.

[Lord Orwell]

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.

i hate to disagree, but the netbook sales disagree with what you said here.
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.

[leinad31]

i hate to disagree, but the netbook sales disagree with what you said here.
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/Netbook

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....

[Nightwalker83]

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.

[Lord Orwell]

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.

[Lord Orwell]

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.

[Nightwalker83]

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.

[RhinoBull]

This is the first time I have heard of the netbook.

I'm surprised - they aren't new things these days and quite popular. Check these links out:
HP Mini 1000
Dell Mini
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netbook
A Quick Guide to Netbooks

[Nightwalker83]

I'm surprised - they aren't new things these days and quite popular.

Thanks! Now that I seen the picture of what they look like they seem to be smaller than an ordinary laptop? So I'm wondering what advantage would there be in getting a netbook over a normal sized laptop?

[techgnome]

Simplicity, and ease of transport. My father in law got one from work, so that as he travels, he can get access to his email and stuff. It's not designed for power, they are a convenience and ease of use machine. It's not meant to replace the desktop, but supliment it.

-tg

[abhijit]

There's a nice article on Chrome, in this week's information week. It may be shiny and new, but it has a long way to go before it can unseat windows.

Windows will continue to be the OS of choice on a desktop for some more years.

[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.

1) "Could" is not the same as "did", I have yet to hear of vendors pre-installing CE in subnotebooks. And I read the following online, "Further, when putting together Origami, its recent Ultra Mobile PC reference design--the task WinCE was expressly designed to deliver--Microsoft also ditched WinCE to use NT. "

2) Vista was not a contender due to its resource requirements.

3) Windows 7 still not available.

There was no feasible alternative. MS did what any company in their position would do... ensure that they have a product positioned for the sudden market need even if it happened to be a product supposed to be at the end of its life cycle. Same goes more or less for desktop/workstation front... most businesses prefer XP Pro and MS acted accordingly (extension).

I find it entertaining that there are people who would nitpick on terminology... for most laymen "no choice" and "forced" in that context are interchangeable.

[Lord Orwell]

1) "Could" is not the same as "did", I have yet to hear of vendors pre-installing CE in subnotebooks. And I read the following online, "Further, when putting together Origami, its recent Ultra Mobile PC reference design--the task WinCE was expressly designed to deliver--Microsoft also ditched WinCE to use NT. "

2) Vista was not a contender due to its resource requirements.

3) Windows 7 still not available.

There was no feasible alternative. MS did what any company in their position would do... ensure that they have a product positioned for the sudden market need even if it happened to be a product supposed to be at the end of its life cycle. Same goes more or less for desktop/workstation front... most businesses prefer XP Pro and MS acted accordingly (extension).

I find it entertaining that there are people who would nitpick on terminology... for most laymen "no choice" and "forced" in that context are interchangeable.

we aren't disagreeing here. I am waiting to see if they start installing 7 on netbooks when it comes out.

I visited the links on netbooks posted below. according to wikipedia, an automobile jump-starter is a netbook accessory?

as for what is a netbook, asked earlier: one of these laptops is a netbook and the other is a subnotebook. Both of them are 12 inch screen and full keyboard with no optical drive.

[KiwiDexter]

I don't hate Microsoft I just find some of the products are lacking in features, functions, etc.

So you merely dislike them on general principles then Have yet to find an off the shelf package that does 100% what a power user wants it to do.

[Nightwalker83]

So you merely dislike them on general principles then Have yet to find an off the shelf package that does 100% what a power user wants it to do.

Yeah, if however, they still want us to pay lots of money and reduce the quality of their programs I wont though. Meaning I would hate them more not less.