7 ms·

Please, FOSS world, we need something like ChromeOS

58 points by beardyw 1y ago

lenerdenator 1y ago
We just need to stop reinventing the wheel.
- the8472 1y ago
  The tractor wheel, the race bicycle wheel or the 50000RPM flywheel?
  - BoiledCabbage 1y ago
    The fact that the customer just needs a vehicle to get to and from work, but they're offered tractor wheels and 50k RPM flywheels is exactly the problem. Stop inventing wheels, stop offering esoteric wheels and start solving customer problems simply.
    - bradfa 1y ago
      But there are customers who are looking for tractor wheels and flywheels. Maybe not you or people you know, but there's definitely large industries for both. Just like there's a market for "vehicle to get to work". Same thing exists in software. Linux caters to all the uses, from low power embedded systems to huge high performance computing systems and everything in between.
      - BoiledCabbage 1y ago
        > But there are customers who are looking for tractor wheels and flywheels. Maybe not you or people you know, but there's definitely large industries for both. Just like there's a market for "vehicle to get to work". Same thing exists in software. Linux caters to all the uses, from low power embedded systems to huge high performance computing systems and everything in between. And that's exactly the problem. Linux is so focused on ensuring it works for every possible user out there, that it never makes the tough choices to be optimized for the 80% of users. 80% of people drive cars and need simple care wheels and tires. But they're forced to think about 100 different types of wheels before they can go anywhere. My mom has never had to consider a flywheel in her life, and yet if her car were linux she's need to think about that, and everything from low power, high power, LED, gas powered, and oil powered headlights. She'd need to consider 50 types of seats, 7 seatbelt configurations, Linux is what you get when engineers own a product and there is no PM around to say 'No' and force you to make the hard decisions. It's good for what it is, but nobody is making it actually easy. There are just "complex" and "less complex" flavors of linux. None are actually consumer level of simple - they're just "simple" compared to the other variants of linux. Chrome OS is actually consumer level simple.
      - lenerdenator 1y ago
        I'm talking about the wheels that are analogous to the software needed for a decent consumer desktop computer. How many window managers are there? How many different package managers? Ways to prepare code for said package managers? Scripting shells? File systems? Hell, how many distros are there based on Debian and/or Ubuntu? If the goal is "free the world from proprietary software", then the talent spent on scratching an itch for a few thousand users is talent wasted because that isn't moving the needle fast enough. The three things driving consumer-grade (read: not enterprise or hobbyist) adoption of Linux right now are ChromeOS, gaming and the fact that Windows 10 support is ending soon. It has nothing to do with the fact that you can find just the right set of utilities for your Arch install.
        bradfa 1y ago
        But there's no money in making a consumer Linux OS. The market has shown this time and again. ChromeOS is effectively a loss leader, getting consumers and students into the Google ecosystem. MacOS is what you get if you want Apple hardware. That's about it for consumer oriented desktop/laptop *nix operating systems today. So if there's no money in something, then the only people who will show up to work on it are going to want to scratch their own itches because it's a hobby and fun/interesting to them.
        lenerdenator 1y ago
        Do we know the money stats on the Steam Deck? Android shouldn't be a loss leader at this point, though maybe it is in certain companies, and it's not exactly what most people think of when they think GNU/Linux.
        pjmlp 1y ago
        Steam Deck is only being successful by translating Windows on top of Linux. Valve failed to convince any major number of studios to bother about GNU/Linux, even when it would be relatively easy to port their games from Android NDK.
righthand 1y ago
Uhh…doesn’t a basic Debian install already do this? If you can’t be bothered to install basic af distro, then what is a ChromeOS clome going to do?
- theamk 1y ago
  It's all about security, especially for non-technical user. The Chrome OS is running trusted boot and immutable partition, and completely closed host system, with no user-installable apt [0]. This means it's impossible to completely break the system - nothing that user does will escape browser sandbox. And, for defense-in-depth, even if browser sandbox got compromised, there is no sudo nor ~/.bashrc nor any other executable per-user configs, so malicious software will disappear after reboot. And if you compromise kernel and modify disk directly, there is verified boot... And this is not just theoretical benefits, it's stops practical attacks. Are you sure that "bash | curl" command you typed was safe? Are you sure that "pip install" or "npm install" you did didn't actually install malware on your PC? It is possible to build systems like this based on open-source Linux, but this will be quite a lot of work, and may even require separated trusted builder machine. Definitely out of reach of non-technical user. [0] https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/chromiumos-design-docs/security-overview/ https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/chromiumos-design-docs/...
- the8472 1y ago
  I think steamos would be a better example, also mentioned in the article. Focus on a single application by default, immutable A/B OS filesystems, but can be opened if desired.
- lotharcable 1y ago
  Not even remotely close. This is why it was such a revolution when Ubuntu came out and quickly dominated the Linux desktop space. When it was new. It took Debian and made it something approachable. But even then it was a 1/3rd of what is described as needed in the article.
- tapoxi 1y ago
  The author's point is to use an immutable or atomic system. Debian uses a traditional package manager and over time those packages can get in a weird state. Battery runs out during package update? Third party repo disappears? GPG key changes? Distribution eliminates 32-bit library support? Nvidia drivers change? Distribution deprecates Xorg? Your everyday user doesn't know how to deal with that. An A/B partition scheme is very simple and the system as a whole is integration tested in CI. An OSTree based atomic system is pretty close, although there is some added complexity. Not to mention Debian out-of-the-box is a pretty miserable experience for everyday users. Their Nvidia drivers won't work, they can't figure out how to install Chrome, videos won't play due to missing codecs, etc.
sussmannbaka 1y ago
There were a bunch of these during the netbook boom and they were grandparent-proof. Sadly, all of my favorites (Moblin/Meego, Joli OS and xpud) are long dead.
- lotharcable 1y ago
  Netbook boom happened and then people actually started trying to use them. That is why the netbook boom died. Because while they promised to make cheap Linux devices that anybody could use none of them actually delivered on it. In fact the whole thing was a fiasco. The classic Linux problem can be described as "9 clicks to shit". Meaning that a Linux desktop looks, on the initial viewing, as something that is actually usable and modern, but once you start clicking around things start going bad. Going bad quickly. A major problem cause of the problem is "linux is about choice" mentality. Another problem is that programmers specialize at being good at programming, but things like documentation and UI testing are their own disciplines that are separate and distinct in a lot of meaningful ways. So, in attempt to make up for this, they leave configuration and details up to user choice. It is effectively pawning off the last stages of development onto the end user, who are generally most ill-equipped to make technical decisions on software they are not familiar with. Instead of presenting something that "just works" users are presented with a myriad of choices and options that they have to make decisions about before ever actually being able to use the software. Having lots of choices in applications, widget libraries, desktops, ways to install software, init systems, etc etc... results in very significant complexity as it all has to work together. And complexity breeds bugs. So each and every user experience ends up being its own unique things. There is no "standard configuration" no "supported configuration" and no "documented configuration". The end result is that each user is forced to find ways to make the desktop work for their specific use case. Essentially finding a magic combination of things that isn't broken for what they specifically want. The desktop will still be full of buggy behavior, but just not in the way that that particular user cares about. This creates a extraordinary of frustration and friction when time comes to doing the things that the desktop is actually intended for... which is getting actual work done. This isn't a problem for a certain class of highly technical users that love technical minutia and configuring things. Knowing how to carve a working system out of a OS riddled with historical artifacts and highly technical choices is a badge of honor for many people. But this isn't how most people want to do things. Netbook boom tried to fix this in certain ways, but all that ended up happening is that each little corporation tried to do their own thing and then abandoned it when they realized there was no money to be made and they really lacked the resources and expertise to make it work.
tapoxi 1y ago
I think that's just EndlessOS: https://www.endlessglobal.com/foundation/access/operating-system https://www.endlessglobal.com/foundation/access/operating-sy...
- jacknews 1y ago
  "Endless OS: A PC as Simple as a Phone" I get the sentiment, but honestly anytime I try to use a modern smartphone it almost takes a short flight. Hidden UI gestures, active sides, functionality limited to 'popular' cases, etc. Totally unusable and frustrating, IMHO.
- acrophiliac 1y ago
  I like what EndlessOS is trying to do but it prioritizes the ability to be a complete OS that doesn't need an internet connection, whereas the article wants a browser-first OS (and assumes an internet connection). So aren't those kind of different use cases?
  - tapoxi 1y ago
    I think it's also the immutable nature of EndlessOS, its not something you can break as easily as a regular Linux distribution, and acts much more like ChromeOS.
bgwalter 1y ago
The goal is banishing any and all questions of what to download, what desktop, what apps, packaging formats, software stores, user accounts, backing up, all of it: run the browser locally, sync the data – and only the data – to the cloud. That is not really popular in the open source world. Who finances the cloud, is it open, who can read or sell your data?
- acrophiliac 1y ago
  Hopefully there would be an option to turn off cloud sync.
- spankalee 1y ago
  I think the idea pairing would be with with a very open cloud-app based solution. Something like Sandstorm where you can install your own cloud apps and have them available via the web on all your devices. I really with Mozilla would get in this game. For most apps for most people, hosted PWAs make the most sense. But right now we're either stuck with local native software or only web apps from closed providers.
- babypuncher 1y ago
  I would argue it goes against the desires of the open source world. ChromeOS is a product designed to suck people further in to the Google ecosystem. All its limitations, like basically being a web browser with access to the Android Play store, are built around that. The simplicity of not having to worry about anything else is how Google sells that as a benefit of their platform to the masses. I don't know any of my fellow nerds who want a ChromeOS kind of experience, so why would any of us dedicate our free time to making one?
  - SirFatty 1y ago
    "I don't know any of my fellow nerds who want a ChromeOS kind of experience, so why would any of us dedicate our free time to making one?" Interesting perspective. Per the article, this is a method of circumventing the W10 issue coming up.. I would guess that you have family members or friends that might be caught up in that? Even ones that are not nerds?
benrutter 1y ago
I think project bluefin has a similarish philosophy of being a "cloud first os", would definitely recommend checking it out: https://projectbluefin.io/ https://projectbluefin.io/ In all honesty though, there's a tonne of easy to recommend distros which don't need set up if you are a "normie" just wanting to get online: - Elementary - Mint - Ubuntu I think the real "secret sauce" for ChomeOS' success is basically big coorporate backing and being from-a-store-buyable. I think the truth is that nobody other tham techies is likely to want to install an OS themselves.
- esperent 1y ago
  I recently (two weeks ago) decided to finally switch from Windows to plain Ubuntu as a daily desktop. I'm well experienced with it from managing servers and have used it occasionally at a desktop in the past. I've had - and continue to have, a ton of minor and a few large problems. First, wifi. Apparently there's often problems with Intel killer 6e laptop cards, which required me to enter loads of console commands that I didn't understand to fix. I did finally fix it, but I'm not sure exactly what did it. A couple of hours work over a few days to fix this. I work from an external monitor plugged into my laptops HDMI port with the lid closed, and it seems Ubuntu is massively confused by this. I'm constantly having to open the laptop to get a login screen to show, then logging in and closing it, then opening it again because now the desktop doesn't show. My laptop screen resets to minimum brightness every restart. I did a driver update and suddenly my external monitor wasn't recognized at all so I had to roll back. And at least several hours more on other issues. Oh yes, if I suspend then try to wake, I get a black screen or occasionally the Ubuntu startup screen but can never get back to the login screen until I do a hard reset. The Bluetooth audio was set to headset quality (mono) and the only way to fix this, following 20 minutes research, was to install a different audio settings app. All of these things, I can fix. I don't want to, but as a technically savvy user I can do it, with enough hours put in. But there's no way I'd suggest anyone else in my family or friends to use it unless they clearly tell me that they would enjoy tinkering with their operating system.
  - benrutter 1y ago
    Ooof! That sounds rough and also makes me realise a huge oversight in my original comment. I've been using linux on desktop for about 12 years and will always pick a laptop that's known to have good compatibility otherwise the endless hardware issues are a big timesuck. Some distros are better than others for hardware support but I think it'd be disingenious to make out like any solve the problem. If you have a laptop with good support, or even better, a linux specific one, it really is an experience that can work out of the box. Maybe that's a big part the appeal of being buy-in-a-shoppable. Somebody has figured out for you what works, and you don't have to be your own guinea pig.
rapnie 1y ago
TIL about Endless OS: Recommended for Learners, Parents, and Schools https://www.endlessos.org/ https://www.endlessos.org/ > Many of our technologies are distributed together within Endless OS. This is not your typical Linux distribution. We don’t use rpm, apt, or any other packaging system. In our quest for simplicity and robustness, we use a read-only root file system managed by OSTree with application bundles overlaid on top. Most desktop Linux distributions are oriented towards tech-savvy users and developers, but we have a different target user.
- brennoflavio 1y ago
  This is the solution, but as it was mentioned already the challenge is to get it pre installed and tested across a wide range of devices
- mixmastamyk 1y ago
  What are application bundles?
  - autoexec 1y ago
    looks like it's just pre-selected software and flatpak. They offer a way to add whatever software you want to the list.
floppyd 1y ago
Linux desktop in general suffers from not having good "default" options. I can't really recommend any single distro, can't recommend even a single desktop environment as good for most people. Mint is very good, but it looks painfully dated in many places. Fedora is very good, but Gnome Shell is not for everyone in the slightest and debian base is just too wide-spread to ignore. Ubuntu is very good, but actually it's not that good in 2025 because canonical spent 15 years reinventing the wheel and not finishing any.
- righthand 1y ago
  > I can't really recommend any single distro, can't recommend even a single desktop environment as good for most people. I can and do all the time: KDE Plasma + Debian Testing
  - i80and 1y ago
    My experience is that distros with traditional package management can't be counted on to work over the long term without manual administrator intervention. Debian in particular would not be my first choice, or my second, for people who can't do their own system administration. (And this is a bit of the problem: nobody can agree on this stuff)
    - righthand 1y ago
      Nobody agreeing on this stuff is freedom and beauty. If you want a managed OS there are already many options. You look at Linux as an issue because someone you know can’t do system administration, something Debian almost requires none of. I look at Linux as an opportunity to rip people off their safe OS and introduce them to something that works but allows deep customization when they’re ready. You’re operating out of fear, I’m operating out of faith. I really don’t care if the user “gets it”. They barely get their mobile device.
    - npteljes 1y ago
      This touches on a larger problem that I think we tech people don't address as much as we should. That the modern big tech OS (Windows, MacOS, Android, iOS) has a huge advantage, which is that it's managed. Actively supported by the vendor, well after the purchase. That, and the heavy restriction of the user makes the computer orders of magnitude more stable. With Linux this is not the way. The closest I can get is unattended-upgrades.
joshmarinacci 1y ago
I don't think this would work. A big part of why ChromeOS is so simple is the Google services backing it. Without the unified login, automated backups, verified app store, and hardware certification ChromeOS wouldn't be the easy to use system that it is.
- rglullis 1y ago
  FWIW, back in 2013 I was working at Deutsche Telekom in a project that was attempting to do "ChromeOS, but for Enterprise", built on top of Ubuntu and a heavily modified Firefox. We had a list of target devices to test against, but given the Ubuntu base it was pretty easy to get it running everywhere. All the office were based on open source systems. DT wanted to make money mostly on their data plans + device management services. The project failed for one reason: Enterprise IT is the opposite of price sensitive. I had talks with a couple of CIOs who were interested in the idea, but realized that commiting to a solution that could slash their budgets by 80% would be career suicide.
  - mixmastamyk 1y ago
    Why not charge more, then some funds could be sent upstream? Edit: answer below does not explain why price can’t be raised even higher.
    - rglullis 1y ago
      Because the problem was any reduction in cost, and the status quo (Microsoft) was familiar and safe.
      - mixmastamyk 1y ago
        Familiar and “safe” might be it.
    - rglullis 1y ago
      "Not being price sensitive" does not mean "looking always for the most expensive solution".
sampton 1y ago
ChromeOS is genius in edging out Microsoft dominance in office software. Most interns only know how to use Google docs thanks to Chrome books.
willi59549879 1y ago
There are too many Linux distributions so we need to create a new one?
- dorkypunk 1y ago
  Relevant: https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/
sollewitt 1y ago
> Nothing in this is really difficult. Providing drivers for all the hardware and peripherals that all work together in all the permutations is properly hard. I’d argue it’s the root issue. Google can test each ChromeOS release against their Chromebooks to make sure everything works. If something fails, someone in Google can root cause on a matching hardware configuration easily. This is not feasible for a general desktop Linux distribution because there are too many permutations. If the distribution is targeted at non-technical users the matter of root causing an issue on a hardware configuration the maintenance team can’t replicate becomes intractable. A solution might be to literally only support Google Chromebooks, to constrain the possibility space, but even that is a big undertaking if the goal is to match ChromeOS for quality.
LordDragonfang 1y ago
I've been touting the chromeOS banner for years. It makes a huge amount of sense to have an OS optimized for the place most people are going to be spending 90% of their time - the browser - without any extra bloat. Then if you need more, just add those features. Gone are the days when you couldn't do certain things on a chromebook as well - assuming you have the hardware to support it, you can do almost anything you can do on a "proper" linux distro that you can on a chromebook, because you can run a full containerized distro and all the apps that come from it. I've got VSCode in my dock and can do web development easier than on a Windows desktop.
- msgodel 1y ago
  I think the problem is that the way ChromeOS was originally sold it was extremely user hostile and also made it completely impossible to "just add those features" back so in most people's mind they hear "ChromeOS" and think "oh it's even more useless than Android."
NoboruWataya 1y ago
> Where Google's team put innovative effort into ChromeOS was in making it robust enough to be sold to the masses in the hundreds of millions of units, with no tech support. It's immutable, with image-based updates. It has two root partitions, one of which updates the other, so there's always a known good one to fall back to if an update should fail. This is probably the only part of the article that is compelling. I guess having a simple, immutable Linux distro that prioritises being hard to break over many other things could indeed be a good thing for getting less tech-savvy users over to Linux. But even then, who do they expect to maintain it? I would guess that many distros are maintained by people who are passionate about using them, and I suspect the overlap of FOSS maintainers and people who want to use such a locked-down, stripped-back system is small. And if the distro really didn't have many native apps, then users would either need to rely on Google for all their services anyway (somewhat defeating the point), or the "FOSS world" would also need to produce (and maintain, and host) a full suite of browser-based apps to rival Google's. Which is very far from easy. The idea of "friction" comes up again and again whenever we talk about open products (whether it's FOSS or open platforms like the ones in the Fediverse, etc). People want an experience that is completely smooth and frictionless, while remaining free and open. But IMO freedom is friction. Fundamentally it means being able to choose, and not being completely reliant on megacorps, and being able to tinker and explore, and all of these things are sources of friction. Like, the author complains that there are so many distros to choose from, but how would adding another distro to the mix address that?
tytso 1y ago
This is ultimately a business model problem. There are FOSS projects out there; some of them are even listed in the article. The problem is that making it "Just Work(tm)" is hard; it's a lot of work, requiring a large number of engineers. And funny thing, engineers prefer food with their meals. Saying "FOSS world" we need XXX is pretty useless. As a FOSS mainatinaer, the answer I always give people demanding their favorite pet feature is, "clean, maintainable patches are appreciated", ChromiumOS is free software; someone could take it use it as the basis for something like ChromeOS. But the author of the article has basically admitted that the derivitives of Chromium would quickly fail if Chromium stoped being something that they could free ride off of. Shouldn't that tell you everything about what the problem is with this picture?
- jeroenhd 1y ago
  Programmers do stuff for free, all the time. People also donate to foundations so some programmers can be paid to make free stuff. It's how we got the Linux desktop as we know it. Programmers often stop worrying about the details once they're satisfied, though, and there are a lot of details. Yes we could add thumbnails to the file picker, but we also need to support Nvidia hardware and the archive application is missing a few much more interesting compression formats, plus there are a bazillion logged bugs that actually crash software rather than being a minor inconvenience. In theory someone could set up a collective of programmers, designers, and translators to create a usable Linux desktop for the Windows 10 refugees, but it'll require a lot of effort from a lot of volunteers and a lot of people who happen to share the same principles and preferences. ChromeOS works because there's a single entity that can hire a small group of designers to tell an army of programmers what they want everything to look and work like. There are actually projects and companies that fork ChromeOS, but they're pretty small and once Google stops maintaining the OS they're going to collapse pretty quickly.
  - autoexec 1y ago
    > ChromeOS works because there's a single entity that can hire a small group of designers to tell an army of programmers what they want everything to look and work like. ChromeOS works because it's pre-installed on selected hardware devices where it's been configured and tested before any user even get it into their hands which would solve the majority of the problems no matter what OS you're using. Then they also take all power away from the user do make any changes to those systems which helps solve the rest. Ultimately though, most people who know anything at all about computers want the power to make changes to what's installed on them.. Everyone I know who got a chromebook did it first and foremost because they were inexpensive and every one of them at one point or another found themselves frustrated by the limitations. A privacy respecting linux system won't be able to use massive amounts of data collection to lower the price of the hardware like Google can.
AdmiralAsshat 1y ago
Well there was that novel CloudReady solution, which would have allowed people to repurpose old PCs/laptops and replace them with ChromiumOS, but then Google acquired them, and it became "ChromeOS Flex". [0] Not sure where it went from there. Presumably once ChromeOS gets axed (or merged into Android), Flex would go away, too. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChromeOS_Flex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChromeOS_Flex
- jeroenhd 1y ago
  Once the Android+ChromeOS amalgamation becomes usable on laptops, it's a matter of time before the next CloudReady pops up its head. Androidx86 already does a job running Android on PC hardware, it just lacks proper desktop behaviour. If ChromeOS' desktop environment makes it into Android, that problem is pretty much solved.
bee_rider 1y ago
The basic problem of this line of thinking has always been (and always will be) that FOSS, in the end, is just a loose-knit community of people who do eachother the favor or sharing out the programs they made. There’s absolutely no reason for that community to go and try to attract a bunch of non-technical people who won’t be able to contribute back. Who wants to deal with a bunch of users who only switched because Windows 10 stopped updating? I’m going to have to switch my stupid gaming PC away from Windows because it stops updating, and I don’t even want to deal with myself in that context, because he’s a grumpy guy that just wants to relax and play videogames after working (in Linux) all day. Valve might be able to do it, but it won’t really be a FOSS community project, it will be a proprietary layer on top of FOSS (maybe an Open Source layer on top of FOSS, but it will still be proprietary in the sense that they’ll mostly do the development in-house and in the service of their business model). Which is totally fine, but subservient to their business needs. I mean… the Register reports on Free Software stuff a lot. Maybe they are the entity that should do it.
pjmlp 1y ago
It will never happen due to the religious issues FOSS has with hardware support, that is why Firefox OS died, and only LG cares about WebOS.
poisonborz 1y ago
This "simplicity" the author strives for is a fallacy. Simplicity means something different for everyone.
bogwog 1y ago
A fedora atomic fork with nothing but Chrome/Firefox + Gnome or KDE would do this. ...But who would use that? If you know how to install an operating system on a laptop, you're already not the target audience for this. OEMs aren't going to ship this Linux any more than they would've shipped any others. Chrome OS worked because it had the marketing budget of a megacorp behind it, one motivated to push people onto their cloud services to cement their monopoly. I wonder if there were significant numbers of people who actually went out of their way to get a Chromebook over a regular laptop? I'd imagine those that did just did so due to the lower price without knowing the difference, or they had it forced on them by their school/employer.
wolvesechoes 1y ago
FOSS world needs to realize that software and user freedom are political goals and can be only achieved through political action. Rest is accidental, yet most effort is being spent on that. That's why even though we have more FOSS code than ever, users have least amount of freedom and agency.

58 points by beardyw 1y ago

lenerdenator 1y ago

We just need to stop reinventing the wheel.

the8472 1y ago
The tractor wheel, the race bicycle wheel or the 50000RPM flywheel?
- BoiledCabbage 1y ago
  The fact that the customer just needs a vehicle to get to and from work, but they're offered tractor wheels and 50k RPM flywheels is exactly the problem. Stop inventing wheels, stop offering esoteric wheels and start solving customer problems simply.
  - bradfa 1y ago
    But there are customers who are looking for tractor wheels and flywheels. Maybe not you or people you know, but there's definitely large industries for both. Just like there's a market for "vehicle to get to work". Same thing exists in software. Linux caters to all the uses, from low power embedded systems to huge high performance computing systems and everything in between.
    - BoiledCabbage 1y ago
      > But there are customers who are looking for tractor wheels and flywheels. Maybe not you or people you know, but there's definitely large industries for both. Just like there's a market for "vehicle to get to work". Same thing exists in software. Linux caters to all the uses, from low power embedded systems to huge high performance computing systems and everything in between. And that's exactly the problem. Linux is so focused on ensuring it works for every possible user out there, that it never makes the tough choices to be optimized for the 80% of users. 80% of people drive cars and need simple care wheels and tires. But they're forced to think about 100 different types of wheels before they can go anywhere. My mom has never had to consider a flywheel in her life, and yet if her car were linux she's need to think about that, and everything from low power, high power, LED, gas powered, and oil powered headlights. She'd need to consider 50 types of seats, 7 seatbelt configurations, Linux is what you get when engineers own a product and there is no PM around to say 'No' and force you to make the hard decisions. It's good for what it is, but nobody is making it actually easy. There are just "complex" and "less complex" flavors of linux. None are actually consumer level of simple - they're just "simple" compared to the other variants of linux. Chrome OS is actually consumer level simple.
    - lenerdenator 1y ago
      I'm talking about the wheels that are analogous to the software needed for a decent consumer desktop computer. How many window managers are there? How many different package managers? Ways to prepare code for said package managers? Scripting shells? File systems? Hell, how many distros are there based on Debian and/or Ubuntu? If the goal is "free the world from proprietary software", then the talent spent on scratching an itch for a few thousand users is talent wasted because that isn't moving the needle fast enough. The three things driving consumer-grade (read: not enterprise or hobbyist) adoption of Linux right now are ChromeOS, gaming and the fact that Windows 10 support is ending soon. It has nothing to do with the fact that you can find just the right set of utilities for your Arch install.
      - bradfa 1y ago
        But there's no money in making a consumer Linux OS. The market has shown this time and again. ChromeOS is effectively a loss leader, getting consumers and students into the Google ecosystem. MacOS is what you get if you want Apple hardware. That's about it for consumer oriented desktop/laptop *nix operating systems today. So if there's no money in something, then the only people who will show up to work on it are going to want to scratch their own itches because it's a hobby and fun/interesting to them.
        lenerdenator 1y ago
        Do we know the money stats on the Steam Deck? Android shouldn't be a loss leader at this point, though maybe it is in certain companies, and it's not exactly what most people think of when they think GNU/Linux.
        pjmlp 1y ago
        Steam Deck is only being successful by translating Windows on top of Linux. Valve failed to convince any major number of studios to bother about GNU/Linux, even when it would be relatively easy to port their games from Android NDK.

righthand 1y ago

Uhh…doesn’t a basic Debian install already do this? If you can’t be bothered to install basic af distro, then what is a ChromeOS clome going to do?

theamk 1y ago
It's all about security, especially for non-technical user. The Chrome OS is running trusted boot and immutable partition, and completely closed host system, with no user-installable apt [0]. This means it's impossible to completely break the system - nothing that user does will escape browser sandbox. And, for defense-in-depth, even if browser sandbox got compromised, there is no sudo nor ~/.bashrc nor any other executable per-user configs, so malicious software will disappear after reboot. And if you compromise kernel and modify disk directly, there is verified boot... And this is not just theoretical benefits, it's stops practical attacks. Are you sure that "bash | curl" command you typed was safe? Are you sure that "pip install" or "npm install" you did didn't actually install malware on your PC? It is possible to build systems like this based on open-source Linux, but this will be quite a lot of work, and may even require separated trusted builder machine. Definitely out of reach of non-technical user. [0] https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/chromiumos-design-docs/security-overview/ https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/chromiumos-design-docs/...
the8472 1y ago
I think steamos would be a better example, also mentioned in the article. Focus on a single application by default, immutable A/B OS filesystems, but can be opened if desired.
lotharcable 1y ago
Not even remotely close. This is why it was such a revolution when Ubuntu came out and quickly dominated the Linux desktop space. When it was new. It took Debian and made it something approachable. But even then it was a 1/3rd of what is described as needed in the article.
tapoxi 1y ago
The author's point is to use an immutable or atomic system. Debian uses a traditional package manager and over time those packages can get in a weird state. Battery runs out during package update? Third party repo disappears? GPG key changes? Distribution eliminates 32-bit library support? Nvidia drivers change? Distribution deprecates Xorg? Your everyday user doesn't know how to deal with that. An A/B partition scheme is very simple and the system as a whole is integration tested in CI. An OSTree based atomic system is pretty close, although there is some added complexity. Not to mention Debian out-of-the-box is a pretty miserable experience for everyday users. Their Nvidia drivers won't work, they can't figure out how to install Chrome, videos won't play due to missing codecs, etc.

sussmannbaka 1y ago

There were a bunch of these during the netbook boom and they were grandparent-proof. Sadly, all of my favorites (Moblin/Meego, Joli OS and xpud) are long dead.

lotharcable 1y ago
Netbook boom happened and then people actually started trying to use them. That is why the netbook boom died. Because while they promised to make cheap Linux devices that anybody could use none of them actually delivered on it. In fact the whole thing was a fiasco. The classic Linux problem can be described as "9 clicks to shit". Meaning that a Linux desktop looks, on the initial viewing, as something that is actually usable and modern, but once you start clicking around things start going bad. Going bad quickly. A major problem cause of the problem is "linux is about choice" mentality. Another problem is that programmers specialize at being good at programming, but things like documentation and UI testing are their own disciplines that are separate and distinct in a lot of meaningful ways. So, in attempt to make up for this, they leave configuration and details up to user choice. It is effectively pawning off the last stages of development onto the end user, who are generally most ill-equipped to make technical decisions on software they are not familiar with. Instead of presenting something that "just works" users are presented with a myriad of choices and options that they have to make decisions about before ever actually being able to use the software. Having lots of choices in applications, widget libraries, desktops, ways to install software, init systems, etc etc... results in very significant complexity as it all has to work together. And complexity breeds bugs. So each and every user experience ends up being its own unique things. There is no "standard configuration" no "supported configuration" and no "documented configuration". The end result is that each user is forced to find ways to make the desktop work for their specific use case. Essentially finding a magic combination of things that isn't broken for what they specifically want. The desktop will still be full of buggy behavior, but just not in the way that that particular user cares about. This creates a extraordinary of frustration and friction when time comes to doing the things that the desktop is actually intended for... which is getting actual work done. This isn't a problem for a certain class of highly technical users that love technical minutia and configuring things. Knowing how to carve a working system out of a OS riddled with historical artifacts and highly technical choices is a badge of honor for many people. But this isn't how most people want to do things. Netbook boom tried to fix this in certain ways, but all that ended up happening is that each little corporation tried to do their own thing and then abandoned it when they realized there was no money to be made and they really lacked the resources and expertise to make it work.

tapoxi 1y ago

I think that's just EndlessOS: https://www.endlessglobal.com/foundation/access/operating-system https://www.endlessglobal.com/foundation/access/operating-sy...

jacknews 1y ago
"Endless OS: A PC as Simple as a Phone" I get the sentiment, but honestly anytime I try to use a modern smartphone it almost takes a short flight. Hidden UI gestures, active sides, functionality limited to 'popular' cases, etc. Totally unusable and frustrating, IMHO.
acrophiliac 1y ago
I like what EndlessOS is trying to do but it prioritizes the ability to be a complete OS that doesn't need an internet connection, whereas the article wants a browser-first OS (and assumes an internet connection). So aren't those kind of different use cases?
- tapoxi 1y ago
  I think it's also the immutable nature of EndlessOS, its not something you can break as easily as a regular Linux distribution, and acts much more like ChromeOS.

bgwalter 1y ago

The goal is banishing any and all questions of what to download, what desktop, what apps, packaging formats, software stores, user accounts, backing up, all of it: run the browser locally, sync the data – and only the data – to the cloud. That is not really popular in the open source world. Who finances the cloud, is it open, who can read or sell your data?

acrophiliac 1y ago
Hopefully there would be an option to turn off cloud sync.
spankalee 1y ago
I think the idea pairing would be with with a very open cloud-app based solution. Something like Sandstorm where you can install your own cloud apps and have them available via the web on all your devices. I really with Mozilla would get in this game. For most apps for most people, hosted PWAs make the most sense. But right now we're either stuck with local native software or only web apps from closed providers.
babypuncher 1y ago
I would argue it goes against the desires of the open source world. ChromeOS is a product designed to suck people further in to the Google ecosystem. All its limitations, like basically being a web browser with access to the Android Play store, are built around that. The simplicity of not having to worry about anything else is how Google sells that as a benefit of their platform to the masses. I don't know any of my fellow nerds who want a ChromeOS kind of experience, so why would any of us dedicate our free time to making one?
- SirFatty 1y ago
  "I don't know any of my fellow nerds who want a ChromeOS kind of experience, so why would any of us dedicate our free time to making one?" Interesting perspective. Per the article, this is a method of circumventing the W10 issue coming up.. I would guess that you have family members or friends that might be caught up in that? Even ones that are not nerds?

benrutter 1y ago

I think project bluefin has a similarish philosophy of being a "cloud first os", would definitely recommend checking it out: https://projectbluefin.io/ https://projectbluefin.io/ In all honesty though, there's a tonne of easy to recommend distros which don't need set up if you are a "normie" just wanting to get online: - Elementary - Mint - Ubuntu I think the real "secret sauce" for ChomeOS' success is basically big coorporate backing and being from-a-store-buyable. I think the truth is that nobody other tham techies is likely to want to install an OS themselves.

esperent 1y ago
I recently (two weeks ago) decided to finally switch from Windows to plain Ubuntu as a daily desktop. I'm well experienced with it from managing servers and have used it occasionally at a desktop in the past. I've had - and continue to have, a ton of minor and a few large problems. First, wifi. Apparently there's often problems with Intel killer 6e laptop cards, which required me to enter loads of console commands that I didn't understand to fix. I did finally fix it, but I'm not sure exactly what did it. A couple of hours work over a few days to fix this. I work from an external monitor plugged into my laptops HDMI port with the lid closed, and it seems Ubuntu is massively confused by this. I'm constantly having to open the laptop to get a login screen to show, then logging in and closing it, then opening it again because now the desktop doesn't show. My laptop screen resets to minimum brightness every restart. I did a driver update and suddenly my external monitor wasn't recognized at all so I had to roll back. And at least several hours more on other issues. Oh yes, if I suspend then try to wake, I get a black screen or occasionally the Ubuntu startup screen but can never get back to the login screen until I do a hard reset. The Bluetooth audio was set to headset quality (mono) and the only way to fix this, following 20 minutes research, was to install a different audio settings app. All of these things, I can fix. I don't want to, but as a technically savvy user I can do it, with enough hours put in. But there's no way I'd suggest anyone else in my family or friends to use it unless they clearly tell me that they would enjoy tinkering with their operating system.
- benrutter 1y ago
  Ooof! That sounds rough and also makes me realise a huge oversight in my original comment. I've been using linux on desktop for about 12 years and will always pick a laptop that's known to have good compatibility otherwise the endless hardware issues are a big timesuck. Some distros are better than others for hardware support but I think it'd be disingenious to make out like any solve the problem. If you have a laptop with good support, or even better, a linux specific one, it really is an experience that can work out of the box. Maybe that's a big part the appeal of being buy-in-a-shoppable. Somebody has figured out for you what works, and you don't have to be your own guinea pig.

rapnie 1y ago

TIL about Endless OS: Recommended for Learners, Parents, and Schools https://www.endlessos.org/ https://www.endlessos.org/ > Many of our technologies are distributed together within Endless OS. This is not your typical Linux distribution. We don’t use rpm, apt, or any other packaging system. In our quest for simplicity and robustness, we use a read-only root file system managed by OSTree with application bundles overlaid on top. Most desktop Linux distributions are oriented towards tech-savvy users and developers, but we have a different target user.

brennoflavio 1y ago
This is the solution, but as it was mentioned already the challenge is to get it pre installed and tested across a wide range of devices
mixmastamyk 1y ago
What are application bundles?
- autoexec 1y ago
  looks like it's just pre-selected software and flatpak. They offer a way to add whatever software you want to the list.

floppyd 1y ago

Linux desktop in general suffers from not having good "default" options. I can't really recommend any single distro, can't recommend even a single desktop environment as good for most people. Mint is very good, but it looks painfully dated in many places. Fedora is very good, but Gnome Shell is not for everyone in the slightest and debian base is just too wide-spread to ignore. Ubuntu is very good, but actually it's not that good in 2025 because canonical spent 15 years reinventing the wheel and not finishing any.

righthand 1y ago
> I can't really recommend any single distro, can't recommend even a single desktop environment as good for most people. I can and do all the time: KDE Plasma + Debian Testing
- i80and 1y ago
  My experience is that distros with traditional package management can't be counted on to work over the long term without manual administrator intervention. Debian in particular would not be my first choice, or my second, for people who can't do their own system administration. (And this is a bit of the problem: nobody can agree on this stuff)
  - righthand 1y ago
    Nobody agreeing on this stuff is freedom and beauty. If you want a managed OS there are already many options. You look at Linux as an issue because someone you know can’t do system administration, something Debian almost requires none of. I look at Linux as an opportunity to rip people off their safe OS and introduce them to something that works but allows deep customization when they’re ready. You’re operating out of fear, I’m operating out of faith. I really don’t care if the user “gets it”. They barely get their mobile device.
  - npteljes 1y ago
    This touches on a larger problem that I think we tech people don't address as much as we should. That the modern big tech OS (Windows, MacOS, Android, iOS) has a huge advantage, which is that it's managed. Actively supported by the vendor, well after the purchase. That, and the heavy restriction of the user makes the computer orders of magnitude more stable. With Linux this is not the way. The closest I can get is unattended-upgrades.

joshmarinacci 1y ago

I don't think this would work. A big part of why ChromeOS is so simple is the Google services backing it. Without the unified login, automated backups, verified app store, and hardware certification ChromeOS wouldn't be the easy to use system that it is.

rglullis 1y ago
FWIW, back in 2013 I was working at Deutsche Telekom in a project that was attempting to do "ChromeOS, but for Enterprise", built on top of Ubuntu and a heavily modified Firefox. We had a list of target devices to test against, but given the Ubuntu base it was pretty easy to get it running everywhere. All the office were based on open source systems. DT wanted to make money mostly on their data plans + device management services. The project failed for one reason: Enterprise IT is the opposite of price sensitive. I had talks with a couple of CIOs who were interested in the idea, but realized that commiting to a solution that could slash their budgets by 80% would be career suicide.
- mixmastamyk 1y ago
  Why not charge more, then some funds could be sent upstream? Edit: answer below does not explain why price can’t be raised even higher.
  - rglullis 1y ago
    Because the problem was any reduction in cost, and the status quo (Microsoft) was familiar and safe.
    - mixmastamyk 1y ago
      Familiar and “safe” might be it.
  - rglullis 1y ago
    "Not being price sensitive" does not mean "looking always for the most expensive solution".

sampton 1y ago

ChromeOS is genius in edging out Microsoft dominance in office software. Most interns only know how to use Google docs thanks to Chrome books.

willi59549879 1y ago

There are too many Linux distributions so we need to create a new one?

dorkypunk 1y ago
Relevant: https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/

sollewitt 1y ago

> Nothing in this is really difficult. Providing drivers for all the hardware and peripherals that all work together in all the permutations is properly hard. I’d argue it’s the root issue. Google can test each ChromeOS release against their Chromebooks to make sure everything works. If something fails, someone in Google can root cause on a matching hardware configuration easily. This is not feasible for a general desktop Linux distribution because there are too many permutations. If the distribution is targeted at non-technical users the matter of root causing an issue on a hardware configuration the maintenance team can’t replicate becomes intractable. A solution might be to literally only support Google Chromebooks, to constrain the possibility space, but even that is a big undertaking if the goal is to match ChromeOS for quality.

LordDragonfang 1y ago

I've been touting the chromeOS banner for years. It makes a huge amount of sense to have an OS optimized for the place most people are going to be spending 90% of their time - the browser - without any extra bloat. Then if you need more, just add those features. Gone are the days when you couldn't do certain things on a chromebook as well - assuming you have the hardware to support it, you can do almost anything you can do on a "proper" linux distro that you can on a chromebook, because you can run a full containerized distro and all the apps that come from it. I've got VSCode in my dock and can do web development easier than on a Windows desktop.

msgodel 1y ago
I think the problem is that the way ChromeOS was originally sold it was extremely user hostile and also made it completely impossible to "just add those features" back so in most people's mind they hear "ChromeOS" and think "oh it's even more useless than Android."

NoboruWataya 1y ago

> Where Google's team put innovative effort into ChromeOS was in making it robust enough to be sold to the masses in the hundreds of millions of units, with no tech support. It's immutable, with image-based updates. It has two root partitions, one of which updates the other, so there's always a known good one to fall back to if an update should fail. This is probably the only part of the article that is compelling. I guess having a simple, immutable Linux distro that prioritises being hard to break over many other things could indeed be a good thing for getting less tech-savvy users over to Linux. But even then, who do they expect to maintain it? I would guess that many distros are maintained by people who are passionate about using them, and I suspect the overlap of FOSS maintainers and people who want to use such a locked-down, stripped-back system is small. And if the distro really didn't have many native apps, then users would either need to rely on Google for all their services anyway (somewhat defeating the point), or the "FOSS world" would also need to produce (and maintain, and host) a full suite of browser-based apps to rival Google's. Which is very far from easy. The idea of "friction" comes up again and again whenever we talk about open products (whether it's FOSS or open platforms like the ones in the Fediverse, etc). People want an experience that is completely smooth and frictionless, while remaining free and open. But IMO freedom is friction. Fundamentally it means being able to choose, and not being completely reliant on megacorps, and being able to tinker and explore, and all of these things are sources of friction. Like, the author complains that there are so many distros to choose from, but how would adding another distro to the mix address that?

tytso 1y ago

This is ultimately a business model problem. There are FOSS projects out there; some of them are even listed in the article. The problem is that making it "Just Work(tm)" is hard; it's a lot of work, requiring a large number of engineers. And funny thing, engineers prefer food with their meals. Saying "FOSS world" we need XXX is pretty useless. As a FOSS mainatinaer, the answer I always give people demanding their favorite pet feature is, "clean, maintainable patches are appreciated", ChromiumOS is free software; someone could take it use it as the basis for something like ChromeOS. But the author of the article has basically admitted that the derivitives of Chromium would quickly fail if Chromium stoped being something that they could free ride off of. Shouldn't that tell you everything about what the problem is with this picture?

jeroenhd 1y ago
Programmers do stuff for free, all the time. People also donate to foundations so some programmers can be paid to make free stuff. It's how we got the Linux desktop as we know it. Programmers often stop worrying about the details once they're satisfied, though, and there are a lot of details. Yes we could add thumbnails to the file picker, but we also need to support Nvidia hardware and the archive application is missing a few much more interesting compression formats, plus there are a bazillion logged bugs that actually crash software rather than being a minor inconvenience. In theory someone could set up a collective of programmers, designers, and translators to create a usable Linux desktop for the Windows 10 refugees, but it'll require a lot of effort from a lot of volunteers and a lot of people who happen to share the same principles and preferences. ChromeOS works because there's a single entity that can hire a small group of designers to tell an army of programmers what they want everything to look and work like. There are actually projects and companies that fork ChromeOS, but they're pretty small and once Google stops maintaining the OS they're going to collapse pretty quickly.
- autoexec 1y ago
  > ChromeOS works because there's a single entity that can hire a small group of designers to tell an army of programmers what they want everything to look and work like. ChromeOS works because it's pre-installed on selected hardware devices where it's been configured and tested before any user even get it into their hands which would solve the majority of the problems no matter what OS you're using. Then they also take all power away from the user do make any changes to those systems which helps solve the rest. Ultimately though, most people who know anything at all about computers want the power to make changes to what's installed on them.. Everyone I know who got a chromebook did it first and foremost because they were inexpensive and every one of them at one point or another found themselves frustrated by the limitations. A privacy respecting linux system won't be able to use massive amounts of data collection to lower the price of the hardware like Google can.

AdmiralAsshat 1y ago

Well there was that novel CloudReady solution, which would have allowed people to repurpose old PCs/laptops and replace them with ChromiumOS, but then Google acquired them, and it became "ChromeOS Flex". [0] Not sure where it went from there. Presumably once ChromeOS gets axed (or merged into Android), Flex would go away, too. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChromeOS_Flex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChromeOS_Flex

jeroenhd 1y ago
Once the Android+ChromeOS amalgamation becomes usable on laptops, it's a matter of time before the next CloudReady pops up its head. Androidx86 already does a job running Android on PC hardware, it just lacks proper desktop behaviour. If ChromeOS' desktop environment makes it into Android, that problem is pretty much solved.

bee_rider 1y ago

The basic problem of this line of thinking has always been (and always will be) that FOSS, in the end, is just a loose-knit community of people who do eachother the favor or sharing out the programs they made. There’s absolutely no reason for that community to go and try to attract a bunch of non-technical people who won’t be able to contribute back. Who wants to deal with a bunch of users who only switched because Windows 10 stopped updating? I’m going to have to switch my stupid gaming PC away from Windows because it stops updating, and I don’t even want to deal with myself in that context, because he’s a grumpy guy that just wants to relax and play videogames after working (in Linux) all day. Valve might be able to do it, but it won’t really be a FOSS community project, it will be a proprietary layer on top of FOSS (maybe an Open Source layer on top of FOSS, but it will still be proprietary in the sense that they’ll mostly do the development in-house and in the service of their business model). Which is totally fine, but subservient to their business needs. I mean… the Register reports on Free Software stuff a lot. Maybe they are the entity that should do it.

pjmlp 1y ago

It will never happen due to the religious issues FOSS has with hardware support, that is why Firefox OS died, and only LG cares about WebOS.

poisonborz 1y ago

This "simplicity" the author strives for is a fallacy. Simplicity means something different for everyone.

bogwog 1y ago

A fedora atomic fork with nothing but Chrome/Firefox + Gnome or KDE would do this. ...But who would use that? If you know how to install an operating system on a laptop, you're already not the target audience for this. OEMs aren't going to ship this Linux any more than they would've shipped any others. Chrome OS worked because it had the marketing budget of a megacorp behind it, one motivated to push people onto their cloud services to cement their monopoly. I wonder if there were significant numbers of people who actually went out of their way to get a Chromebook over a regular laptop? I'd imagine those that did just did so due to the lower price without knowing the difference, or they had it forced on them by their school/employer.

wolvesechoes 1y ago

FOSS world needs to realize that software and user freedom are political goals and can be only achieved through political action. Rest is accidental, yet most effort is being spent on that. That's why even though we have more FOSS code than ever, users have least amount of freedom and agency.