Industry Majors Support Chrome OS, Free Software in the Making

[btarunr]

A day into its announcement, Google's ambitious new venture, the Chrome operating system, is receiving support from some of the biggest players in the IT industry. The company also confirmed that Chrome OS will be a free of charge software, requiring no purchase of license to use it. To ensure the OS gets adequate momentum, Google is working with the likes of HP, Acer, Lenovo, ASUS, Toshiba, Texas Instruments and Qualcomm (some of the most relevant names in the netbook industry). The company also detailed about the developer support it plans to spread, with possible pre-release versions towards the end of the year. To the consumer, this means that major computer manufacturers could sell netbooks with Chrome OS preinstalled, with seamless support for their hardware. Early community software development will ensure a good selection of software for the netbook by the time the OS becomes release-grade, ready to be shipped with millions of netbooks.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[SK-1]

I can hear the early reviews,..."Chrome needs some polishing"
But, it sounds like competition for MS. They better diversify.

 

[daehxxiD]

I can hear the early reviews,..."Chrome needs some polishing"
But, it sounds like competition for MS. They better diversify.

I would not see this as competition for MS; the only real competition MS has is Apple, Linux is and will always be a niche-OS. Seriously, even if google were to tinker with it so that it is usable by the masses...
Check the Netbook market. First Netbooks were shipped with easy to use Linux: sales were crap compared to Windows XP netbooks nowadays, to say it bluntly

And I don't really feel like installing anything google in the first place, Microsoft seems to be the lesser evil to me for some reason. I wouldn't trust google no info on my account, let alone installing an os of theirs.

 

[SK-1]

I would not see this as competition for MS; the only real competition MS has is Apple, Linux is and will always be a niche-OS.

You might be right,but Google is a bit more resourceful than Apple.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aTd2k.YdQZ.Y

 

[Deleted member 38767]

I would not see this as competition for MS; the only real competition MS has is Apple, Linux is and will always be a niche-OS. Seriously, even if google were to tinker with it so that it is usable by the masses...
Check the Netbook market. First Netbooks were shipped with easy to use Linux: sales were crap compared to Windows XP netbooks nowadays, to say it bluntly

And I don't really feel like installing anything google in the first place, Microsoft seems to be the lesser evil to me for some reason. I wouldn't trust google no info on my account, let alone installing an os of theirs.

Apple is no actual competition to MS simply because Mac OS works well with Macs, but how many PCs have you seen running it? On the other hand there were no major Linux distribution targeting the average PC user and the EeePC Linux had way to basic to be useful. I think Chrome OS will take the main stream PC users by storm simply because some major IT companies will jump on it like hungry wolfs on fresh meat.

 

[sideeffect]

Dixxhead Mac OS is Linux with a polished GUI on top.

As for this Google distro I think the netbook manufacturers would be better off going for a more established Linux build like Ubuntu but I guess they think Google can provide better support or maybe some money is changing hands?

It would be nice to have a new Operating system architecture that wasn't based on Linux. I don't see how this is going to be any different than Solaris or countless other alternatives that are already out there and splitting the development process up even more.

If Sun micro systems and Google could have worked together that might have been more interesting.

 

[Darknova]

Dixxhead Mac OS is Linux with a polished GUI on top.

Mac OS is based on BSD, which itself is based on Unix.

And I really don't see this as competition to MS for one simple reason. All the programs for Chrome OS will be browser-based, and hence hosted on Google servers.

There are a lot of people, myself included who want our applications installed on our PCs, where we can do what we want with them.

This is another step towards Cloud Computing, and I'm hating every step.

Still, if I had a netbook or similar low-powered laptop (oh wait, I do lol) I'd definitely put it on there, the less the laptop has to do the better, but there's no way it would be my main OS.

 

[twicksisted]

Mac OS is based on BSD, which itself is based on Unix.

And I really don't see this as competition to MS for one simple reason. All the programs for Chrome OS will be browser-based, and hence hosted on Google servers.

There are a lot of people, myself included who want our applications installed on our PCs, where we can do what we want with them.

This is another step towards Cloud Computing, and I'm hating every step.

Still, if I had a netbook or similar low-powered laptop (oh wait, I do lol) I'd definitely put it on there, the less the laptop has to do the better, but there's no way it would be my main OS.

untill it can run crysis

 

[Easo]

Nha, i wont compete with MS, especially after Win 7 (i have a lot of faith into it).

 

[Darknova]

untill it can run crysis

Crysis in a browser

 

[mdm-adph]

I would not see this as competition for MS; the only real competition MS has is Apple, Linux is and will always be a niche-OS. Seriously, even if google were to tinker with it so that it is usable by the masses...
Check the Netbook market. First Netbooks were shipped with easy to use Linux: sales were crap compared to Windows XP netbooks nowadays, to say it bluntly

Yeah, it's just a niche-OS used by like 70% of servers across the Internet. Absolutely no support for it at all.

But, as for public perception, that's why this isn't "Linux" -- this is "Chrome." If Google is smart, they won't use the word "Linux" at all, just like Apple hardly ever uses "Unix" anywhere. That'll instantly deal with the "this is just a niche-OS" problem.

And I don't really feel like installing anything google in the first place, Microsoft seems to be the lesser evil to me for some reason. I wouldn't trust google no info on my account, let alone installing an os of theirs.

You're kidding me, right?

Want to know why Google isn't more evil than Microsoft? Practically everything they do is open-source. That alone is enough for someone like me to hold them in higher regard. (And please don't repeat that tired stuff about Google "having your info" -- Microsoft has just as much.)

 

[mdm-adph]

Honestly, though, I wish people would stop talking about the Chrome OS "killing" Windows. It's not supposed to, and it's not going to anyway.

It's more than likely going to be an OS for the next generation of "tablet" netbooks, or something -- devices that people aren't going to expect being able to install Word or Photoshop on, anyway.

Get it? It'll compete against Microsoft in a market where they don't have a very good footing. The Chrome OS isn't really going to be run on normal PC's.

 

[JATownes]

It looks like apple isn't happy with the new Google OS...----->http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/07/08/chrome_os_may_push_google_ceo_off_of_apples_board.html

 

[ShadowFold]

It will compete in the laptop/netbook market, but this will never succeed in the desktop market. That is, unless it has DirectX support. Because I'm not going to use an OS that can't play all my PC games. I might try it on my laptop, but I'm quite happy with Vista on it.

 

[vega22]

i wish them all the luck in the world

 

[Wile E]

I was all gung-ho about this, until I figured out it was cloud based. I'll pass, thank you very much. The last thing I need is to not be able to get something done because I lack an internet connection.

Cloud computing for the mainstream is a terrible idea. The internet infrastructure sucks balls.

 

[mdm-adph]

I was all gung-ho about this, until I figured out it was cloud based. I'll pass, thank you very much. The last thing I need is to not be able to get something done because I lack an internet connection.

Cloud computing for the mainstream is a terrible idea. The internet infrastructure sucks balls.

You do realize you're not going to have much choice in the future, right? Just wait until Monday when Microsoft makes their big announcement about going fully Cloud in the future. Why do you think Google timed their announcement for this week?

 

[newtekie1]

First Netbooks were shipped with easy to use Linux: sales were crap compared to Windows XP netbooks nowadays, to say it bluntly

The first netbooks were also 7", which the companies later found were simply way to small for the average consumer. Even the in the XP netbooks, the 7" ones sold like complete ass, which is why ASUS dropped the 7" model.

I think the linux netbooks would sell better if they were available in the 9" and 10" models more readily. I don't think they would outsell the XP models, but I think it would be close, especially if they were priced lower, and they should be priced lower since the Linux OS is free.

 

[mdm-adph]

The first netbooks were also 7", which the companies later found were simply way to small for the average consumer. Even the in the XP netbooks, the 7" ones sold like complete ass, which is why ASUS dropped the 7" model.

I think the linux netbooks would sell better if they were available in the 9" and 10" models more readily. I don't think they would outsell the XP models, but I think it would be close, especially if they were priced lower, and they should be priced lower since the Linux OS is free.

I think the best thing to do would be to follow HP's approach with Linux on their netbooks -- completely change around the way the OS looks so that it becomes more of an "appliance" and less of a laptop.

You should take a look at HP's "Mi" skin of Ubuntu that they use -- they're getting it right. You can hardly recognize it as either Linux or Windows. It looks more like the interface you'd get on a smartphone.

If you try and sell Linux by using the same standard OS components that people are used to -- windows, desktop icons, and the like -- people are going to expect it to work just like Windows, which isn't going to work. HP's getting it right -- their Mi OS doesn't look like Windows, so no one's going to expect it to run like Windows.

 

[newtekie1]

I think the best thing to do would be to follow HP's approach with Linux on their netbooks -- completely change around the way the OS looks so that it becomes more of an "appliance" and less of a laptop.

You should take a look at HP's "Mi" skin of Ubuntu that they use -- they're getting it right. You can hardly recognize it as either Linux or Windows. It looks more like the interface you'd get on a smartphone.

If you try and sell Linux by using the same standard OS components that people are used to -- windows, desktop icons, and the like -- people are going to expect it to work just like Windows, which isn't going to work. HP's getting it right -- their Mi OS doesn't look like Windows, so no one's going to expect it to run like Windows.

ASUS did similar with their Linux implementation.

Reminds me more off a smartphone OS than a computer OS. I think you are very right here, for the linux versions to be successful, they can't resemble Windows.

 

[mdm-adph]

ASUS did similar with their Linux implementation.

http://www.xpherion.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/eee_pc_ui.jpg

Reminds me more off a smartphone OS than a computer OS. I think you are very right here, for the linux versions to be successful, they can't resemble Windows.

Aye, I used the eeepc version once -- it was a good start, and HP is doing even better. It even looks gorgeous.

 

[Meecrob]

I was all gung-ho about this, until I figured out it was cloud based. I'll pass, thank you very much. The last thing I need is to not be able to get something done because I lack an internet connection.

Cloud computing for the mainstream is a terrible idea. The internet infrastructure sucks balls.

just wait, all the large companies want to do this, MS would like to make it so the critical parts of the OS/apps load dynamically over the net from their servers, you know, to insure nobody pirates windows or office.

they could then also charge you a "use fee" for each time you use your computer, dosnt that sound fun?

having to check if you can afford to load up office and type up a document

greedy bastages will just drive everybody to linux.......then people like us will just keep using old windows versions and playing old games

 

[newtekie1]

Aye, I used the eeepc version once -- it was a good start, and HP is doing even better. It even looks gorgeous.

http://gadgets.boingboing.net/hp-mi-home-screen-thumb-520x304.jpg

The new ubuntu based Eee interface looks very similar, both look gorgeous, IMO.(Both are ubuntu based.)