[starman]

Ok, a browser as an OS.

I don't get it.

Here's my problem with it. Let's say hypothetically, a browser OS is good for you RIGHT NOW. You go out, buy some crappy netbook with Chrome OS on it, and you're in love with the thing. Fair enough.

Then comes that day when you need ONE thing that a browser OS can't give you. You just wasted $severalhundred on some piece of crap that you can't use again because now you need something with some real power that a browser OS can't handle.

Someone tell me why you wouldn't buy a netbook with Linux on it.

[Sealobo]

what real power are you referring to? can an average 5-year old PC handle today's web-surfing experience such as HD youtube clip? no, i guess not. however, the majority of web surfing is light-weight, and i believe the foreseeable bottleneck would be the wireless connection speed.

[nonhuman]

What do you think Chrome OS couldn't provide that some other Linux distro could? They made it quite clear that they're engineering things such that many hardware features will be accessible to web apps. Much of this is already possible on other OSes with any modern (non-IE) browser and HTML5, Chrome OS will just abstract this distinction away and (attempt to) make it seamless to combine online and offline content.

Really, I think it's wrong to think of it as a browser-based OS. It's still running on top of the Linux kernel, and I don't think there's going to be anything that Chrome OS can't do that any other general purpose OS can.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by Sealobo 

what real power are you referring to? can an average 5-year old PC handle today's web-surfing experience such as HD youtube clip? no, i guess not. however, the majority of web surfing is light-weight, and i believe the foreseeable bottleneck would be the wireless connection speed.

Two days ago I was watching HD Hulu content over 802.11g on a 5 year old 1.2 GHz iBook G4 with 768 MB of RAM running 10.5.8 without a problem. I'm currently writing this on the same iBook, though I just maxed it out to 1.25 GB or RAM which does make a significant difference. I suppose you could argue that an Macs are not your average computer, but still... And if I were to install a source-based *nix distribution (Gentoo, Exherbo, and FreeBSD are my favorites) I could run nothing but optimized code which makes a huge difference for this sort of thing (I routinely watch 1080p content on an equally old PC with a 1.2 GHz Athlon 64 running FreeBSD 7, and got even better performance with the same hardware running Gentoo).

[The Godfather]

Unusable for 99% of the people, who choose to save their $$$ by not getting a tethering plan and paying per MB overages for working on your computer on the go.
If this catches on, the Western world would have sunk into a new unheard level of retarded consumerism.
On the other hand, if this was targeted at replacing Android, rather than revolutionizing the laptop, it would make sense.
MS and Apple will surely invent something that will blow Chrome out of the water in 2010.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by The Godfather 

Unusable for 99% of the people, who choose to save their $$$ by not getting a tethering plan and paying per MB overages for working on your computer on the go.
If this catches on, the Western world would have sunk into a new unheard level of retarded consumerism.
On the other hand, if this was targeted at replacing Android, rather than revolutionizing the laptop, it would make sense.
MS and Apple will surely invent something that will blow Chrome out of the water in 2010.

What are you talking about? Apps on Chrome OS will work just fine without an internet connection. That's kinda the whole point.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by starman 

Here's my problem with it. Let's say hypothetically, a browser OS is good for you RIGHT NOW. You go out, buy some crappy netbook with Chrome OS on it, and you're in love with the thing. Fair enough.

Then comes that day when you need ONE thing that a browser OS can't give you. You just wasted $severalhundred on some piece of crap that you can't use again because now you need something with some real power that a browser OS can't handle.

Well, that’s hardly unique to Chrome OS. For example, let’s say hypothetically, a Mac with no expansion or FireWire is good for you RIGHT NOW. You go out, buy some Mac laptop with no ExpressCard slot, and you’re in love with the thing. Fair enough.

Then comes that day when you need ONE thing that an expansion-less laptop can’t give you. You just wasted $severalthousand on some piece of crap that you can’t use again because now you need something with some real power than an expansion-less computer can’t handle.

At least with the Chrome OS machine you can go install Windows or Linux or maybe hackintoshed OS X on it if the OS fails to do it for you anymore.

[The Godfather]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

What are you talking about? Apps on Chrome OS will work just fine without an internet connection. That's kinda the whole point.

I thought THE POINT was just the opposite. Doesn't the application actually run in Google's servers?

I saw the word "Stateless" in the "What is ChromeOS" video, and I thought all storage was in the cloud. None in your PC.

[starman]

Here's an example:

You want to make a podcast. How would you do that with Chrome OS.

Can't.

[CharlesS]

Who would try to use a netbook to do a podcast though?

[The Godfather]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

At least with the Chrome OS machine you can go install Windows or Linux or maybe hackintoshed OS X on it if the OS fails to do it for you anymore.

An unintentional Trojan horse for Linux distros. If ChromeOS ARM smartbooks start selling like hotcakes because they'll be even cheaper than netbooks, an important portion of these users will realize they need a proper desktop and install Ubuntu 10.04

[starman]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

Who would try to use a netbook to do a podcast though?

You COULD. All you need is a USB port and Audacity.

That's my point. You can't with Chrome OS because it's not possible AT ALL because of the OS.

[CharlesS]

But no one does. I doubt any of the kind of users who buy netbooks buy them to do podcasts with. It’s a fairly obscure usage.

And a netbook user did need that, s/he could just put Ubuntu on it for free, or Windows 7 for $30. S/he wouldn’t have wasted hundreds of dollars at all. I fail to see how it’s worse than what Apple does, where the limitations are in the hardware itself, are un-workaroundable, and are in machines that cost thousands rather than hundreds.

[starman]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

But no one does. I doubt any of the kind of users who buy netbooks buy them to do podcasts with. It’s a fairly obscure usage.

And a netbook user did need that, s/he could just put Ubuntu on it for free, or Windows 7 for $30. S/he wouldn’t have wasted hundreds of dollars at all. I fail to see how it’s worse than what Apple does, where the limitations are in the hardware itself, are un-workaroundable, and are in machines that cost thousands rather than hundreds.

You're not understanding me. Take podcasts out of the equation.

If you buy a laptop or a netbook running something like Linux, you can always do something with it IN THE FUTURE.

If you buy a machine with Chrome OS, you're limited to JUST WEB APPS. If you want to do something else, you can't.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by The Godfather 

I thought THE POINT was just the opposite. Doesn't the application actually run in Google's servers?

I saw the word "Stateless" in the "What is ChromeOS" video, and I thought all storage was in the cloud. None in your PC.

No, the point is that it's a seamless combination of apps and data that 'live' in the cloud and run locally. Even the current crop of web apps can largely run just fine without an internet connection (except that they are almost all geared specifically towards networked communications) thanks to HTML 5, or even HTML 4 and things like Google Gears and Mozilla Prism. Keep in mind that the meat of pretty much every 'web 2.0' app is Javascript, which means it's all being downloaded and run locally anyway, it's just data storage (and some manipulation) that typically happens on the server, but can just as easily happen locally.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by starman 

You COULD. All you need is a USB port and Audacity.

That's my point. You can't with Chrome OS because it's not possible AT ALL because of the OS.

Where are you coming up with this? You absolutely could. There are already web-based apps that handle audio, and even video communication. You can have a voice or video chat with people in Gmail. If you use Google Voice your voicemail is getting recorded directly into the cloud, and you can have your phone calls recorded live as well.

What on Earth makes you think that Chrome OS is going to lack a capability that already exists on top of essentially the same technology?

[starman]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

Where are you coming up with this? You absolutely could. There are already web-based apps that handle audio, and even video communication. You can have a voice or video chat with people in Gmail. If you use Google Voice your voicemail is getting recorded directly into the cloud, and you can have your phone calls recorded live as well.

What on Earth makes you think that Chrome OS is going to lack a capability that already exists on top of essentially the same technology?

*facepalm*

You can't do EDITING.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by starman 

*facepalm*

You can't do EDITING.

Why not? Maybe there are not currently any apps that allow you to do that, but there are no technical limitations that make it impossible to do audio editing on the web. And even if there were, we know for a fact that Chrome OS is going to leverage HTML 5's local storage facilities so it's very likely that such an app would actually allow you to do the recording and editing on your local drive and then sync up to the web to avoid latency issues. All while still using nothing other than standards compliant web technologies.

You're trying to insist that the current landscape of web apps some how described the entirety of what's possible for web apps. This is patently false. There's is absolutely no reason that Chrome OS would be in any way more limited in capabilities than other operating systems, none whatsoever.

[The Godfather]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

But no one does. I doubt any of the kind of users who buy netbooks buy them to do podcasts with. It’s a fairly obscure usage.

The podcast producing population is pretty tiny compared to the netbook user universe. However, the first podcast was produced with less horsepower than a 1.6GHz Atom, so it is entirely possible. You can get a couple of USB microphones for $17 with a Singstar PS2 game.

If gmail can do video conferencing on your browser, Google can definitely do a podcasting cloud app if they wanted to.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by starman 

You're not understanding me. Take podcasts out of the equation.

If you buy a laptop or a netbook running something like Linux, you can always do something with it IN THE FUTURE.

If you buy a machine with Chrome OS, you're limited to JUST WEB APPS. If you want to do something else, you can't.

Setting aside the good arguments that others have brought that there’s no real reason podcasting apps couldn’t work on Chrome OS, if you want to do something with an OS like Linux IN THE FUTURE, then you can always just install some other OS like Linux IN THE FUTURE and do whatever the hell you want. It’s a safe investment as far as that goes. By contrast, if you need expansion for something on your Mac IN THE FUTURE, then I hope you have a disposable $2000 lying around for a whole new machine.

[starman]

OK, smartguy, let's try this.

You buy this thing, you think it's the greatest thing ever.

Then you want to play <insert game here>

THEN what do you do? Wait for Unreal Tournament to be supported in a BROWSER?

[CharlesS]

I dunno. It couldn’t possibly be an option to install an OS that runs the app you want to run. I certainly haven’t pointed that out three times already in this thread.

(not that netbook hardware would be well suited to running 3D games in the first place)

[Sealobo]

So... i guess Chrome OS will never get updated for additional apps to handle further functions? Google must be ****ing stupid!

[The Godfather]

Then you wipe and install Ubuntu and have a nice game of Mahjong.

[starman]

Originally Posted by Sealobo 

So... i guess Chrome OS will never get updated for additional apps to handle further functions? Google must be ****ing stupid!

Yeah, they mentioned it in that video..TWICE. No updates...EVER?

Right....

[Sealobo]

Originally Posted by starman 

OK, smartguy, let's try this.

You buy this thing, you think it's the greatest thing ever.

Then you want to play <insert game here>

THEN what do you do? Wait for Unreal Tournament to be supported in a BROWSER?

when a person buy something, he should be aware of the product's limitation.

you wouldn't buy a toaster hoping that it will make pizza... no?

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by starman 

OK, smartguy, let's try this.

You buy this thing, you think it's the greatest thing ever.

Then you want to play <insert game here>

THEN what do you do? Wait for Unreal Tournament to be supported in a BROWSER?

You're the one making moronic arguments. If what you want to do is play games, why the hell are you buying a netbook that focuses entirely on internet usage? And again, calling it a browser is misleading. The 'browser' part of it is equivalent to the Finder: it's an interface that gives you access to the capabilities of the computer and the apps that it runs. The majority of the processing going on in web apps, even today, is happening on your local computer anyway.

You can't dismiss an OS that's not even going to be released for another year based on the lack of software that's available for it. That's just ridiculous. Chrome OS will, undoubtedly, support every function that the majority of netbook purchasers want from the very beginning. That's all it needs to do. If you want something outside that limited use-case then Chrome OS is not for you, and a netbook probably isn't either. So why are you wasting your time?

[The Godfather]

Originally Posted by Sealobo 

So... i guess Chrome OS will never get updated for additional apps to handle further functions? Google must be ****ing stupid!

They would probably resurrect VRML to allow for 3D games in the Chrome browser. Probably netbooks can do PSP-grade graphics. Game devs won't bite the business of developing for ad revenues.

[starman]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

You're the one making moronic arguments. If what you want to do is play games, why the hell are you buying a netbook that focuses entirely on internet usage? And again, calling it a browser is misleading. The 'browser' part of it is equivalent to the Finder: it's an interface that gives you access to the capabilities of the computer and the apps that it runs. The majority of the processing going on in web apps, even today, is happening on your local computer anyway.

You can't dismiss an OS that's not even going to be released for another year based on the lack of software that's available for it. That's just ridiculous. Chrome OS will, undoubtedly, support every function that the majority of netbook purchasers want from the very beginning. That's all it needs to do. If you want something outside that limited use-case then Chrome OS is not for you, and a netbook probably isn't either. So why are you wasting your time?

GOOGLE CALLS IT A BROWSER OS.

And again, this OS can't expand past a BROWSER. That's my point. If you buy it because you only play Yahoo games and surf and check email, that's great, but the instant you want to expand past that, you have a several hundred dollar doorstop.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by starman 

You're not understanding me. Take podcasts out of the equation.

If you buy a laptop or a netbook running something like Linux, you can always do something with it IN THE FUTURE.

If you buy a machine with Chrome OS, you're limited to JUST WEB APPS. If you want to do something else, you can't.

I agree with you, it would be a dumb purchase for me.

Then again, I think buying an iMac and disposing of a perfectly good monitor when you upgrade is kind of dumb. I think spending over $2 or whatever for a lame ass ring tone is dumb. I think installing software that puts a cute little monkey in some sort of toolbar and hijacks your browser is dumb. This doesn't stop hundreds upon hundreds of people from buying into this sort of stuff.

Then again, maybe these things aren't dumb to other people.

(the above was just some stuff I thought of off the top of my head)

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by starman 

GOOGLE CALLS IT A BROWSER OS.

Yes, they do. And it's misleading when they do it too, not because it isn't technically true, but because the vast majority of people really have no idea what the word 'browser' means let alone how one would use one as an 'operating system' (which Google isn't, the operating system is Linux, on top of which they're running some new, custom window manager, on top of which they're running something based off the Chrome browser.

And again, this OS can't expand past a BROWSER. That's my point. If you buy it because you only play Yahoo games and surf and check email, that's great, but the instant you want to expand past that, you have a several hundred dollar doorstop.

Yes, but your point is wrong. You're completely misunderstanding what they're saying. We can already, right now, today use a BROWSER to run applications with no internet connection. Most (all? I'm not entirely sure.) of Google's web apps support offline operation: you can set up Gmail, Google Reader, and even Google Wave to download content to a local database that is stored on your hard drive and allows you to come back to it, at your convenience, and read it when you're offline. You can even reply to emails and waves (though obviously they don't get sent until you get back online). Already the BROWSER is handling tasks that previously were well beyond the capabilities of BROWSERS.

People already, every day, use their BROWSER for real-time audio and video communications. BROWSERS are already using technologies such as WebGL to enable hardware accelerated 2D and 3D graphics. BROWSERS already are leveraging new technologies to give web apps access to all the capabilities of your hardware.

So yes, maybe Chrome OS will never be able to expand beyond the capabilities of a BROWSER, but fortunately for Google, the capabilities of a BROWSER are constantly expanding to the point where they can pretty much already do just about everything you might want from your operating system.

[The Godfather]

Verizon and AT&T are rooting for ChromeOS so they can sell they $80/month dataplans to frigging everybody.

[Sealobo]

Originally Posted by The Godfather 

Verizon and AT&T are rooting for ChromeOS so they can sell they $80/month dataplans to frigging everybody.

wow... that's insanely expensive.

[starman]

So let's say there's a web app to do something.

And you can't get a connection.

You're screwed. I don't want to bank on that. I'll stick with my Macbook Pro.

I also don't see multimedia EDITING in a browser. Sure it can pass data to/from (using Flash btw), but the browser ITSELF isn't doing that work....an addon is. One that doesn't come with your OS or browser by default. You neglected to point that out.

There's also a big issue now with web fonts and licensing. That won't be pretty to watch.

I can't wait to see Windows-type policies with this crap.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by starman 

So let's say there's a web app to do something.

And you can't get a connection.

You're screwed. I don't want to bank on that. I'll stick with my Macbook Pro.

For the millionth time, these apps will and already do function without an internet connection. As long as you've already downloaded the program, which I assume Chrome will do automatically and transparently, you're good to go. This is exactly the same position you'd be in with your MacBook Pro if you found yourself without an internet connection and without the app you needed.

I also don't see multimedia EDITING in a browser. Sure it can pass data to/from (using Flash btw), but the browser ITSELF isn't doing that work....an addon is. One that doesn't come with your OS or browser by default. You neglected to point that out.

Yes, you're probably right about we won't see much in the way of multimedia editing on Chrome OS. Nor will you see much multimedia editing on netbooks running any other OS. This is not a failing of Chrome OS, this is the limitations of netbooks.

And so what if it uses Flash? Do things that use Flash today not count as web apps just because they use Flash? Does the fact that every single thing that people use Flash for today can be accomplished with nothing other than HTML 5, CSS 3, and JavaScript mean nothing?

Once again, your 'problems' have nothing to do with Chrome or it's capabilities, but rather with your inability to accept or recognize that browsers are capable of things that you claim they are not.

There's also a big issue now with web fonts and licensing. That won't be pretty to watch.

Yes, that's an issue. But not any bigger of an issue that it would be with any other browser running on any other OS. And again, there are a number of potential solutions to this problem already in the works. And this is not a new issue that only affects Chrome OS, every other operating system also has to deal with font licensing.

Once again you're pointing out problems that have either already been solved, are in the process of being solved, or are not unique to Chrome OS.

I can't wait to see Windows-type policies with this crap.

With Linux? Which is what Chrome OS is.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by starman 

GOOGLE CALLS IT A BROWSER OS.

And again, this OS can't expand past a BROWSER. That's my point. If you buy it because you only play Yahoo games and surf and check email, that's great, but the instant you want to expand past that, you have a several hundred dollar doorstop.

… or you just install Linux or Windows on it and get on with your life.

[The Godfather]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

… or you just install Linux or Windows on it and get on with your life.

It will be open source. All you'll need to do is mount the SDD somewhere else and edit the rc.conf file and copy the gnome terminal binary.

It would be funny if the FOSS community beat Google to the punch and releases FirefoxOS and X11OS before 2010.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

… or you just install Linux or Windows on it and get on with your life.

Install on what? One of the requirements for Chromium is to not have a HDD.

Also, what happens when you don't have internet access?

[The Godfather]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Install on what? One of the requirements for Chromium is to not have a HDD.

Also, what happens when you don't have internet access?

Some people are speculating that it should have Google Gears (a non-standard web browser extension), which would allow it to execute Apps locally and open documents from your tiny storage.

[besson3c]

Yeah, I would think it would have at least enough storage to cache content. It would probably just have some flash based drive or something.

[The Godfather]

If somebody beats me at compiling the source code
Getting and Building a Chromium-Based OS (The Chromium Projects)
Please post a review.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Install on what? One of the requirements for Chromium is to not have a HDD.

Doesn't it have an SSD in it?

[starman]

Originally Posted by Sealobo 

when a person buy something, he should be aware of the product's limitation.

you wouldn't buy a toaster hoping that it will make pizza... no?

So you pretty much agree with me.

Why buy a toaster when you think you may need to make pizza someday?

I just don't see the point of a browser-based OS. You're pretty much painting yourself into a corner as far as future use goes.

So maybe you just want toast today, but what if you say "huh, I'd like to make pizza today"?

[nonhuman]

For ****'s sake people, is it that hard to actually read up on the thing you're talking about? Chrome OS will absolutely 100% be able to run apps without an internet connection. This will not require some fancy new technology, the technology to do this already exists. Google Gears is one such technology, but even that won't be necessary because HTML 5 already supports all these features. This, in fact, already happens on the iPhone. Web apps for the iPhone that use the proper HTML 5 tags, when they are bookmarked to your home page as apps, are actually downloaded and run locally against a local SQLite database, and will work even without a network connection. For example: you can use Gmail on your iPhone in airplane mode to read email that's already been downloaded, mark things as spam, label things, archive things, and write emails. Everything you do will be synced back to your Gmail account when you get internet access, just like any other email client.

Furthermore, apps for Chrome OS will have access to the computers graphics card for 2D and 3D acceleration. This capability is already a standard feature of HTML 5 and can already be used by all modern browsers. Google has stated that they will be working specifically on ensuring that Chrome OS gives web apps even greater access to local hardware than has previously been possible

But perhaps most importantly: Chrome OS is Linux. It is the Linux kernel running underneath, with X11 on top, a custom window manager over that, and software based on the Chrome browser providing the user interface. It runs locally off the SSD device required to be in the hardware that it's on. The 'browser' in this case serves the same purpose as the Finder, and will enable all the same functionality. If you don't believe me you can install and run Chrome OS in VirtualBox on your Mac today and test it out, but don't forget that there's a whole year of (now opensource) development that will be going on before Chrome OS is actually even released, meaning it will be far more capable upon release than it is today.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

For ****'s sake people, is it that hard to actually read up on the thing you're talking about? Chrome OS will absolutely 100% be able to run apps without an internet connection. This will not require some fancy new technology, the technology to do this already exists. Google Gears is one such technology, but even that won't be necessary because HTML 5 already supports all these features. This, in fact, already happens on the iPhone. Web apps for the iPhone that use the proper HTML 5 tags, when they are bookmarked to your home page as apps, are actually downloaded and run locally against a local SQLite database, and will work even without a network connection. For example: you can use Gmail on your iPhone in airplane mode to read email that's already been downloaded, mark things as spam, label things, archive things, and write emails. Everything you do will be synced back to your Gmail account when you get internet access, just like any other email client.

Furthermore, apps for Chrome OS will have access to the computers graphics card for 2D and 3D acceleration. This capability is already a standard feature of HTML 5 and can already be used by all modern browsers. Google has stated that they will be working specifically on ensuring that Chrome OS gives web apps even greater access to local hardware than has previously been possible

But perhaps most importantly: Chrome OS is Linux. It is the Linux kernel running underneath, with X11 on top, a custom window manager over that, and software based on the Chrome browser providing the user interface. It runs locally off the SSD device required to be in the hardware that it's on. The 'browser' in this case serves the same purpose as the Finder, and will enable all the same functionality. If you don't believe me you can install and run Chrome OS in VirtualBox on your Mac today and test it out, but don't forget that there's a whole year of (now opensource) development that will be going on before Chrome OS is actually even released, meaning it will be far more capable upon release than it is today.

But what if I want to use an app when I'm not connected to the internet? I can't do that!
hahahaha

[osiris]

I'll take a look at Chrome OS, it sounds like a new GUI on linux - which could be interesting.

Competition is good.

I just caught this comment in the demo : 10:56AM "There will be some things this won't be able to do. If you're a lawyer, editing contracts back and forth, this will not be the right machine for you.""

Sounds like privacy is an issue.

[osiris]

oops...

[starman]

Originally Posted by osiris 

I'll take a look at Chrome OS, it sounds like a new GUI on linux - which could be interesting.

Competition is good.

I just caught this comment in the demo : 10:56AM "There will be some things this won't be able to do. If you're a lawyer, editing contracts back and forth, this will not be the right machine for you.""

Sounds like privacy is an issue.

Right. Which makes me wonder what the whole point of this crap is.

Google's creating an unsecure OS, which relies on the 'net, and doesn't run anything except what's on the 'net.

It makes ZERO sense.

Just buy a Linux/Windows machine and you can do all that in your browser ALREADY, and you have your native apps, too.

Oh, but Chrome OS boots in 10 seconds. Seriously, is it THAT big of a deal?

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by starman 

Google's creating an unsecure OS, which relies on the 'net, and doesn't run anything except what's on the 'net.

[Andy8]

Google Chrome OS available as free VMWare download

Download link in the comments