11 ms·

I don't see the point in using a crippled operating system when it will prevent you from quickly editing a low res screen cast or editing an image in the GIMP.

I don't see the point in using a crippled operating system when it will prevent you from quickly editing a low res screen cast or editing an image in the GIMP. Machines in that price range have enough performance to do some of these tasks even if they're not optimal for them. If I'm on the move away from a bigger system I might still need to do it though, so not having that capacity just because of someone's "in the cloud" dream is silly. It's already bad enough that Google maims some of the Nexus line by disabling tethering. Android is also inflexible in many ways regarding having a local easy to use file system etc. I personally can't wait to get off Android and onto Ubuntu mobile or Firefox OS.

bobbydavid 13y ago
As stated in the article, the "point" is to have the same functionality for a fraction of the cost. You can still run image editing software or whatever you'd run on your workstation using NX. That's somewhat inconvenient, but then it boots faster with no malware, and you are guaranteed nothing important is only stored locally. So it's a trade-off, not a "crippling" as you've put it. Some folks, like the author, barely notice a difference in quality yet save $1000, and that feels good.
- dj2stein9 13y ago
  you are guaranteed nothing important is only stored locally. That's what scares me the most. Unless I have the option of not using Google's infrastructure, and can run my own "ChromeOS Storage/Auth Server" on a computer of my choice, then I'd never trust the OS. Google is expecting a surreal amount of trust that no single corporation should be given.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- jkldotio 13y ago
  I can get the same functionality in terms of hardware at the more or less same cost, certainly not $1000 more as you claim. A 1.7gighz ARM or the other versions aren't more powerful than a 1.6gighz or higher Atom processor at the same price point. And I can run a real operating system on that hardware with no problems. My laptop boots in less than 10 seconds and I trust Ubuntu just as much as a Chromebook for security. If you are worried about the security of local files you can encrypt your drive, very simply in the last few versions of Ubuntu but I don't bother, if needs be. None of the points you make in favour of the Chromebook are exclusive to it, what's exclusive to it though is you can't get access to the vast flexibility of a local system and have to go through NX. That's all fine for people who only do back-end stuff, or Google if they want their employees to "dog food" living in the cloud, but for someone who wants to be able to do normal everyday things like edit images, test locally or any of the many other advantages of a flexible system it doesn't really cut it. If there were locally running JavaScript equivalents for image editing and everything else we'd be a bit closer to feature parity but I still wouldn't see the major attraction.
  - w0utert 13y ago
    >> None of the points you make in favour of the Chromebook are exclusive to it, what's exclusive to it though is you can't get access to the vast flexibility of a local system and have to go through NX. Adding to that working with remote GUI apps simply sucks compared to running them locally, for all kinds of reasons. It's less responsive, applications don't always integrate well with the rest of the OS (think keyboard/language settings, terminal capabilities, reliable copy/paste), you lose things like local search, some applications you rarely use will not be available on the remote, and if your network connection goes down you lose your session. And who's going to set up and maintain the NX service? If having your work in the cloud matters a lot, I would much rather just mount some remote filesystem for storing it, and run all my dev tools locally. I tend to agree I don't see the point here, since when is a cheap machine to SSH to some other box anything special, let alone a viable replacement for a dev system? I did stuff like this (SSH-ing to a remote host, editing webpages there, viewing the result locally) literally 10 years ago on a Pentium-233 laptop you couldn't even give away for free today because no-one would want to have it. For $250 there's a lot of decent notebooks that would do everything a Chromebook does, and adequately run a modern linux distro to boot.
  - 6ren 13y ago
    $1000 is an exaggeration, but chromebooks really are significantly cheaper than netbooks/laptops: $250 ARM and $199 Celeron. But you know, just now considering the restrictions that Apple, Google and Microsoft put on their mobile machines, because they can, creates a real opportunity for Firefox OS (and yes ubuntu). Though niche, as most consumers won't care... unless the restrictions go too far.
  - lelandbatey 13y ago
    Can you link to this notebook you're talking about? I'd love a $200 notebook that's better than a Chromebook.
    - alphamale3000 13y ago
      It's called a Chromebook with Ubuntu on it.
- greggman 13y ago
  Went to Best Buy, typed "laptop", first result Toshiba - Satellite 15.6" Laptop - 4GB Memory - 320GB Hard Drive - Satin Black Model: C855D/S5103 • SKU: 8119044 62 Ratings $279.99 That's 2x the ram and I get 320 HD which even if you don't want to use it for storage it's pretty awesome when running any OS that supports virtual memory. Have you looked at how much virtual memory your average Linux distro ends up using? That was just the first hit. There's plenty of machines in the same price range as a chromebook that have better specs, more power and therefore more freedom.
  - fishtoaster 13y ago
    To be fair, that one is more than twice the weight of a chromebook (5.5 lbs vs 2.5).
    - tacticus 13y ago
      and a much worse battery life and significantly larger. That's not a laptop that's a luggable
      - deleted 13y ago
        [deleted]
    - greggman 13y ago
      And arguably more than twice as powerful. You can run nearly every Windows app including games like Call of Duty, Portal, Farcry etc. You can run Photoshop, Lightroom, Office etc.. You can run VC++, gcc and even have room to store your project. All things you can't do on the same priced Chromebook. Only 1 year ago before the Retina MBP every MBP being carried by the majority of geeks around Silicon Valley weighed 5.6lbs yet that did not stopped them from carrying them as laptops
  - seabrookmx 13y ago
    Why would you want to use virtual memory? I bet that laptop has a 5400 rpm hard drive - there is no way I want it to be swapping on and off of it at every opportunity. The OS would grind to a halt. For most developers' usage, you'd be better off with a 32gb SSD than with the 320gb slow-as-hell spinner drive. Not to mention a cheap 15.6" laptop gets terrible battery life. My $250 Chromebook gets 6.5-7hours, even when running Ubuntu via crouton.
- jsz0 13y ago
  save $1000, and that feels good If price/value is the main concern a used 4-5 year old x86 laptop is a way better deal. I have an old HP nc8430 for this purpose. Sells on eBay for about $100-$150 these days. Blows away a low end ARM ChromeBook on performance, price and flexibility.
  - seabrookmx 13y ago
    But not on weight/battery life. It all depends on your priorities.
    - workbench 13y ago
      Maybe not battery life/weight… but on being an actual computer with storage you can rely on and a properly supported operating system.
      - seabrookmx 13y ago
        Actual computer as compared to what? A modern Atom processor with an SSD and a few gigs of RAM isn't a powerhouse, but it's plenty for dev work on the go unless you're a graphics programmer or you need a local copy of a large database etc. The file storage is the one that made me leery. I solved the issue by using owncloud, which so far seems to be working pretty well. The performance could be better but I'm pretty sure that's due to my slow upload connection. I don't get your last point though. Chrome OS has a pretty rapid pace of development and is getting new features every day. They also have tech support for those who need it.
- macspoofing 13y ago
  Chromebooks are not that much cheaper. They don't give you that much extra battery life. They are extremely limited in functionality and I feel a proper "developer machine" should have more than just ssh.
stanleydrew 13y ago
Genuinely curious, since I've used every nexus device to date: which ones disable tethering? I can't recall one that does.
- ecspike 13y ago
  All of the GSM ones tether fine. The Verizon Galaxy Nexus needed rooting or a workaround to tether. That was more so a Verizon issue that Google's choice. Also remember that Verizon had disabled Google Wallet on that model in favor of the still not launched ISIS. It's a moot point now because the Nexus 4 is GSM-only.
- jkldotio 13y ago
  Nexus 7 3G bought outright entirely separately to any plan or network carrier. Tethering is entirely disabled and many forums confirm this. And while I theoretically could I am not going to install a "cracked" version of Android from a l33td00d7 user on a php forum just to get a fundamentally basic and useful networking feature which is present in other installs of Android and which there was no reason to turn off. The whole point of buying a Nexus device was to get away from the crap modifications (like the constant nagging, with a loud beep, to update the "Facebook integration" stuff from my phone's manufacturer which can't be turned off) and lack of basic updates on non-pure Android devices. I wanted a pure Android experience, one of my strong desires was to use it for tethering, Google promised a pure experience and it was a deception (can't remember if it was actually stated somewhere in the fine print, but I certainly read loads about the specifications before purchase and didn't see any mention of it). It's a disgrace and, along with a series of other pointless Apple-like restrictions worming their way into Android, it confirms Google is fully prepared to cripple things in the name of profits. And it's not even their own profits in this case, it was likely done at the behest of carriers and hugely damages what Nexus was supposed to be about and their brand, so it's even crazier. So while Canonical might try to put Amazon integration into the Unity bar, they know that you have to be able to turn it off or they will lose their users. The people at Google on the other hand know they can get away with it, although they might lose a few power users (post hoc, after taking their cash and disappointing them) they'd get a few more tie-ins with carriers, so they did it. What bugs me is that lots of people here work for Google and like to think of themselves as hackers fighting the good fight at the "do no evil" company. No, hackers don't ship devices with basic networking features crippled whilst pretending it's a restriction free device. I can't wait to wipe Android off my Nexus 7 once there is a robust Ubuntu release for it, and my next phone almost certainly won't be Android.
qwerta 13y ago
"crippled operating system" is far from reality. It is proper Linux on x86 with GUI layer. It is very easy to install proper desktop environment (such as KDE or Gnome) and use it as normal laptop. Intellij Idea runs just fine on Chromebook. Only problem is small disk space (16GB).
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
jrockway 13y ago
I switched to a (non-developer-mode) Chromebook recently for work. It's a great development machine for what I use it for. My main workstation basically runs Chrome, Emacs, and some xterms. On my Pixel, I can just use Secure Shell to ssh to my tmux session and be working on exactly what I was using on my desktop. (Port forwarding works too, if you're developing a web app or something.) It's like being at my desktop except the keyboard and ergonomics aren't as good. If I need to edit a screencast or image, two things I've never done for work ever in my life, I can just use Chrome Remote Desktop to log into my workstation. (I have a friend who logs in to his Windows machine at home using Chrome Remote Desktop and plays Final Fantasy. It's that usable!) For what it's worth, I never really used a laptop until I got my Chromebook Pixel, because it was so painful to keep it up to date and my configuration sync'd. My Thinkpad X220 has been sitting dead on my windowsill for about a year. With ChromeOS, I don't have to deal with that anymore; I can just open up my computer and use it. And it's that usability that makes it worthwhile to me. (I also love the touchscreen and high resolution display!) I'm also pretty excited about the flexibility of the Chrome APIs for writing packaged apps. One thing that made me apprehensive about switching from a Linux laptop to a Chromebook was that I wouldn't be able to use all the features of my portable HF SDR ham radio (an Elecraft KX3) while traveling with only my laptop. But, fixing this is just a simple matter of programming -- you can write a Chrome app that controls a USB device, and you can read incoming audio. (Meaning that you can tune the radio and read the I/Q signal via the soundcard. The only snag is that the Chromebook Pixel has only one channel of input, and you need two to reassemble the nearby radio signals. But a USB dongle can fix that problem.) Anyway, I'm looking forward to the era where complex cross-platform software is just a click away, and right now the tools exist. It's time to start using them!
- jsolson 13y ago
  I've recently done the same thing, although coming from the perspective of "you can have my MacBook Air when you pry it from my cold dead hands". It turns out that when all of your development has to happen on your Linux desktop anyway, which laptop you use matters a whole lot less. For people who live remotely, Chrome OS is perfectly serviceable. I think you have to already be in that remote mindset for it to be a comfortable switch, though. The objections I usually see (including those in this thread) relate to what the laptop can't do locally, and a lot of those objections are perfectly legitimate. There's a lot these little boxes can't do easily with the tools available today (which again, isn't to say these things aren't possible, just that they're not there yet), and for people who need those things making such a switch isn't going to be possible.

bobbydavid 13y ago

As stated in the article, the "point" is to have the same functionality for a fraction of the cost. You can still run image editing software or whatever you'd run on your workstation using NX. That's somewhat inconvenient, but then it boots faster with no malware, and you are guaranteed nothing important is only stored locally. So it's a trade-off, not a "crippling" as you've put it. Some folks, like the author, barely notice a difference in quality yet save $1000, and that feels good.

dj2stein9 13y ago
you are guaranteed nothing important is only stored locally. That's what scares me the most. Unless I have the option of not using Google's infrastructure, and can run my own "ChromeOS Storage/Auth Server" on a computer of my choice, then I'd never trust the OS. Google is expecting a surreal amount of trust that no single corporation should be given.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
jkldotio 13y ago
I can get the same functionality in terms of hardware at the more or less same cost, certainly not $1000 more as you claim. A 1.7gighz ARM or the other versions aren't more powerful than a 1.6gighz or higher Atom processor at the same price point. And I can run a real operating system on that hardware with no problems. My laptop boots in less than 10 seconds and I trust Ubuntu just as much as a Chromebook for security. If you are worried about the security of local files you can encrypt your drive, very simply in the last few versions of Ubuntu but I don't bother, if needs be. None of the points you make in favour of the Chromebook are exclusive to it, what's exclusive to it though is you can't get access to the vast flexibility of a local system and have to go through NX. That's all fine for people who only do back-end stuff, or Google if they want their employees to "dog food" living in the cloud, but for someone who wants to be able to do normal everyday things like edit images, test locally or any of the many other advantages of a flexible system it doesn't really cut it. If there were locally running JavaScript equivalents for image editing and everything else we'd be a bit closer to feature parity but I still wouldn't see the major attraction.
- w0utert 13y ago
  >> None of the points you make in favour of the Chromebook are exclusive to it, what's exclusive to it though is you can't get access to the vast flexibility of a local system and have to go through NX. Adding to that working with remote GUI apps simply sucks compared to running them locally, for all kinds of reasons. It's less responsive, applications don't always integrate well with the rest of the OS (think keyboard/language settings, terminal capabilities, reliable copy/paste), you lose things like local search, some applications you rarely use will not be available on the remote, and if your network connection goes down you lose your session. And who's going to set up and maintain the NX service? If having your work in the cloud matters a lot, I would much rather just mount some remote filesystem for storing it, and run all my dev tools locally. I tend to agree I don't see the point here, since when is a cheap machine to SSH to some other box anything special, let alone a viable replacement for a dev system? I did stuff like this (SSH-ing to a remote host, editing webpages there, viewing the result locally) literally 10 years ago on a Pentium-233 laptop you couldn't even give away for free today because no-one would want to have it. For $250 there's a lot of decent notebooks that would do everything a Chromebook does, and adequately run a modern linux distro to boot.
- 6ren 13y ago
  $1000 is an exaggeration, but chromebooks really are significantly cheaper than netbooks/laptops: $250 ARM and $199 Celeron. But you know, just now considering the restrictions that Apple, Google and Microsoft put on their mobile machines, because they can, creates a real opportunity for Firefox OS (and yes ubuntu). Though niche, as most consumers won't care... unless the restrictions go too far.
- lelandbatey 13y ago
  Can you link to this notebook you're talking about? I'd love a $200 notebook that's better than a Chromebook.
  - alphamale3000 13y ago
    It's called a Chromebook with Ubuntu on it.
greggman 13y ago
Went to Best Buy, typed "laptop", first result Toshiba - Satellite 15.6" Laptop - 4GB Memory - 320GB Hard Drive - Satin Black Model: C855D/S5103 • SKU: 8119044 62 Ratings $279.99 That's 2x the ram and I get 320 HD which even if you don't want to use it for storage it's pretty awesome when running any OS that supports virtual memory. Have you looked at how much virtual memory your average Linux distro ends up using? That was just the first hit. There's plenty of machines in the same price range as a chromebook that have better specs, more power and therefore more freedom.
- fishtoaster 13y ago
  To be fair, that one is more than twice the weight of a chromebook (5.5 lbs vs 2.5).
  - tacticus 13y ago
    and a much worse battery life and significantly larger. That's not a laptop that's a luggable
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
  - greggman 13y ago
    And arguably more than twice as powerful. You can run nearly every Windows app including games like Call of Duty, Portal, Farcry etc. You can run Photoshop, Lightroom, Office etc.. You can run VC++, gcc and even have room to store your project. All things you can't do on the same priced Chromebook. Only 1 year ago before the Retina MBP every MBP being carried by the majority of geeks around Silicon Valley weighed 5.6lbs yet that did not stopped them from carrying them as laptops
- seabrookmx 13y ago
  Why would you want to use virtual memory? I bet that laptop has a 5400 rpm hard drive - there is no way I want it to be swapping on and off of it at every opportunity. The OS would grind to a halt. For most developers' usage, you'd be better off with a 32gb SSD than with the 320gb slow-as-hell spinner drive. Not to mention a cheap 15.6" laptop gets terrible battery life. My $250 Chromebook gets 6.5-7hours, even when running Ubuntu via crouton.
jsz0 13y ago
save $1000, and that feels good If price/value is the main concern a used 4-5 year old x86 laptop is a way better deal. I have an old HP nc8430 for this purpose. Sells on eBay for about $100-$150 these days. Blows away a low end ARM ChromeBook on performance, price and flexibility.
- seabrookmx 13y ago
  But not on weight/battery life. It all depends on your priorities.
  - workbench 13y ago
    Maybe not battery life/weight… but on being an actual computer with storage you can rely on and a properly supported operating system.
    - seabrookmx 13y ago
      Actual computer as compared to what? A modern Atom processor with an SSD and a few gigs of RAM isn't a powerhouse, but it's plenty for dev work on the go unless you're a graphics programmer or you need a local copy of a large database etc. The file storage is the one that made me leery. I solved the issue by using owncloud, which so far seems to be working pretty well. The performance could be better but I'm pretty sure that's due to my slow upload connection. I don't get your last point though. Chrome OS has a pretty rapid pace of development and is getting new features every day. They also have tech support for those who need it.
macspoofing 13y ago
Chromebooks are not that much cheaper. They don't give you that much extra battery life. They are extremely limited in functionality and I feel a proper "developer machine" should have more than just ssh.

stanleydrew 13y ago

Genuinely curious, since I've used every nexus device to date: which ones disable tethering? I can't recall one that does.

ecspike 13y ago
All of the GSM ones tether fine. The Verizon Galaxy Nexus needed rooting or a workaround to tether. That was more so a Verizon issue that Google's choice. Also remember that Verizon had disabled Google Wallet on that model in favor of the still not launched ISIS. It's a moot point now because the Nexus 4 is GSM-only.
jkldotio 13y ago
Nexus 7 3G bought outright entirely separately to any plan or network carrier. Tethering is entirely disabled and many forums confirm this. And while I theoretically could I am not going to install a "cracked" version of Android from a l33td00d7 user on a php forum just to get a fundamentally basic and useful networking feature which is present in other installs of Android and which there was no reason to turn off. The whole point of buying a Nexus device was to get away from the crap modifications (like the constant nagging, with a loud beep, to update the "Facebook integration" stuff from my phone's manufacturer which can't be turned off) and lack of basic updates on non-pure Android devices. I wanted a pure Android experience, one of my strong desires was to use it for tethering, Google promised a pure experience and it was a deception (can't remember if it was actually stated somewhere in the fine print, but I certainly read loads about the specifications before purchase and didn't see any mention of it). It's a disgrace and, along with a series of other pointless Apple-like restrictions worming their way into Android, it confirms Google is fully prepared to cripple things in the name of profits. And it's not even their own profits in this case, it was likely done at the behest of carriers and hugely damages what Nexus was supposed to be about and their brand, so it's even crazier. So while Canonical might try to put Amazon integration into the Unity bar, they know that you have to be able to turn it off or they will lose their users. The people at Google on the other hand know they can get away with it, although they might lose a few power users (post hoc, after taking their cash and disappointing them) they'd get a few more tie-ins with carriers, so they did it. What bugs me is that lots of people here work for Google and like to think of themselves as hackers fighting the good fight at the "do no evil" company. No, hackers don't ship devices with basic networking features crippled whilst pretending it's a restriction free device. I can't wait to wipe Android off my Nexus 7 once there is a robust Ubuntu release for it, and my next phone almost certainly won't be Android.

qwerta 13y ago

"crippled operating system" is far from reality. It is proper Linux on x86 with GUI layer. It is very easy to install proper desktop environment (such as KDE or Gnome) and use it as normal laptop. Intellij Idea runs just fine on Chromebook. Only problem is small disk space (16GB).

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

jrockway 13y ago

I switched to a (non-developer-mode) Chromebook recently for work. It's a great development machine for what I use it for. My main workstation basically runs Chrome, Emacs, and some xterms. On my Pixel, I can just use Secure Shell to ssh to my tmux session and be working on exactly what I was using on my desktop. (Port forwarding works too, if you're developing a web app or something.) It's like being at my desktop except the keyboard and ergonomics aren't as good. If I need to edit a screencast or image, two things I've never done for work ever in my life, I can just use Chrome Remote Desktop to log into my workstation. (I have a friend who logs in to his Windows machine at home using Chrome Remote Desktop and plays Final Fantasy. It's that usable!) For what it's worth, I never really used a laptop until I got my Chromebook Pixel, because it was so painful to keep it up to date and my configuration sync'd. My Thinkpad X220 has been sitting dead on my windowsill for about a year. With ChromeOS, I don't have to deal with that anymore; I can just open up my computer and use it. And it's that usability that makes it worthwhile to me. (I also love the touchscreen and high resolution display!) I'm also pretty excited about the flexibility of the Chrome APIs for writing packaged apps. One thing that made me apprehensive about switching from a Linux laptop to a Chromebook was that I wouldn't be able to use all the features of my portable HF SDR ham radio (an Elecraft KX3) while traveling with only my laptop. But, fixing this is just a simple matter of programming -- you can write a Chrome app that controls a USB device, and you can read incoming audio. (Meaning that you can tune the radio and read the I/Q signal via the soundcard. The only snag is that the Chromebook Pixel has only one channel of input, and you need two to reassemble the nearby radio signals. But a USB dongle can fix that problem.) Anyway, I'm looking forward to the era where complex cross-platform software is just a click away, and right now the tools exist. It's time to start using them!

jsolson 13y ago
I've recently done the same thing, although coming from the perspective of "you can have my MacBook Air when you pry it from my cold dead hands". It turns out that when all of your development has to happen on your Linux desktop anyway, which laptop you use matters a whole lot less. For people who live remotely, Chrome OS is perfectly serviceable. I think you have to already be in that remote mindset for it to be a comfortable switch, though. The objections I usually see (including those in this thread) relate to what the laptop can't do locally, and a lot of those objections are perfectly legitimate. There's a lot these little boxes can't do easily with the tools available today (which again, isn't to say these things aren't possible, just that they're not there yet), and for people who need those things making such a switch isn't going to be possible.