4 ms·
Hello all. I am the Jeff Nelson under discussion. I am not surprised some people are calling this claim into doubt since its was work done back in 2006 and 20
by jeff-nelson 14y ago
Hello all. I am the Jeff Nelson under discussion.
I am not surprised some people are calling this claim into doubt since its was work done back in 2006 and 2007. It sounds like many of these questions are being raised by people outside of Google or individuals who joined the project after 2007.
First, let me reassure you that while I was not able to walk out of Google with my email history or design documents, Google sent me long correspondence about the Chrome OS patent after I left Google. I don't believe this correspondence is covered by any NDA since it was sent to me after I left Google, and I have retained all of that correspondence.
I published the work called "Google OS" on a company wide email list in April 2007, with subject line "Google OS", and received hundreds of positive comments from other engineers at that time. I also held a tech talk on "Google OS" in May 2007. Anyone at the company in April 2007 will likely retain a copy of the original "Google OS" email, search for subject line "Google OS" in April 2007.
The operating system that I invented, as described in the April 2007 email on a company wide email list, was a webapp-centric chopped-down Linux with a Chrome browser front-end. The operating system had almost no applications installed on it, instead all of the functionality came from webapps; performing any operation on the desktop launched a Chrome window to one of many webapps. The original April 2007 version of the operating system that was published on a company wide email list was substantially identical to the publicly released Chromebook product, as was the writeup in the original 2007 email.
Further, back in 2007, I had meetings with Jeff Huber (VP of Google's consumer products group), Larry Page (now CEO), several other directors and managers, and even presented a techtalk - all of these meetings on Chrome OS project. By the end of 2007, I was working with a product manager, and together we were able to convince management to launch the Chrome OS project and assign head count to the project by the end of 2007. In August 2007, my product manager and I even met with an external hardware vendor to have exploratory talks regarding their interest in distribution a Chrome OS laptop.
All of this is verifiable both from the email record, such as the April 2007 "Google OS" email to a company wide mailing list, and also by those who met with me on Chrome OS in 2007, including Larry Page himself. Further, I retain the hard copies of the correspondence with Google that was sent to me after I left the company on the subject as well, which I don't believe is covered by any sort of NDA.
I hope this clears up some of the controversy. Again, I am not surprised that many of you who either worked on Chromebook or joined Google after 2007 have never heard of me. Once I left Google, there would have been no reason to continuously bring up my name as the original inventor, and I have chosen not to come forward until the patent was finalized and published. I apologize to those of you who may have been confused by this.
So to summarize:
1. I wrote the original Chrome OS and published it on a company wide email list in April 2007.
2. I wrote the patent in 2007, which is now accepted and published by the USPTO as of August 2012 and shows my name as inventor.
3. I convinced management to launch and assign head count to the original Chrome OS project by the end of 2007.
- dreyfiz 14y agoA strong defense which I found convincing, especially because the effort required to disprove it is now more significant than "Any of you guys ever hear of this Jeff Nelson? Me neither." At the time (with zero information) I thought that on balance he was likely to be inflating his claims. Also, because I was annoyed at all the unfunny, low-effort jokes posted in the comments on the linked G+ page, which felt like piling-on, I confess that I'm pleased at the turnabout. Good twist.
- jrogers65 14y agoWould you mind posting (potentially redacted) copies of those emails, just so that we can get an idea of what was involved in GoogleOS? It would be nice if some of the people you worked with piped up to tell us more about this too. I suppose that they will see what is happening and do so some time soon anyway as this is getting quite a bit of exposure. For everyone else, here's confirmation of the patent - Jeff's name is indeed on it: http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=8,239,662.PN.&OS=PN/8,239,662&RS=PN/8,239,662 http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Se... > Inventors: Nelson; Jeffrey (Mountain View, CA) This seems legitimate to me and, frankly, the responses from Peter Kasting and other Google employees look to be immature and childish. Perhaps most Google employees are not as professional and high caliber as they appear on the surface.
- magicalist 14y agoThere were jokes made in that thread, but can you point to any of Peter Kasting's actual comments that would qualify as immature and childish? I only know Peter's work on chrome/webkit bug reports and occasional sites where "pkasting" shows up (he has a single comment as an hn user), but I've only known him to be communicative and supportive, and this is more than a small overreaction to paint him like this when all his post amounts to is "this doesn't sound right. anyone know more?" and his additional comments are specific and not emotionally charged. Hopefully the irony in your post isn't lost on you. As for the patent, it doesn't seem all that chromeos specific, actually. For instance, the claims are very focused on an OS that is or can be stored server-side, with the client fetching an image from the server (that includes the user's preferences?) on startup and dumping it again at shutdown. The patent process tends to make ideas more generic as they are recorded, but even a generous interpretation of this doesn't really cover chromeos or the OS he described in the blog post (at least the part he most emphasized, the idea of keeping everything in RAM). ChromeOS doesn't get OS updates that differently than other operating systems (and certainly not as new images every time it connects to the update server), and the preferences sync system stands totally separate from the rest. This doesn't invalidate the blog post, but I don't really think the patent backs up the specific claim of "inventing chromebook".