3 ms·

"Question: what is the situation with ChromeOS?" I don't know, but why would anyone even consider running ChromeOS? The fact that you have to sign in (with a G

"Question: what is the situation with ChromeOS?" I don't know, but why would anyone even consider running ChromeOS? The fact that you have to sign in (with a Google account) gives Google unprecedented opportunity to track your activity in the OS. Even something as simple as printing to your desktop printer requires sending your documents via Google's cloud print service. Imagine having to sign in to Windows or your Mac with your email address and having to remain signed in always to use the OS. Most of us would be horrified. I'm just astonished by how little comment is made of Google's insatiable appetite to track and record online behaviour.

cloudwalking 13y ago
Being constantly signed in also gives you a lot of advantages. Not everybody has a huge distain for being signed in. There are plenty of people who PREFER a simpler OS with a simpler UI that doesn't get viruses or trojans, running on hardware cheaper than an iPad.
zmmmmm 13y ago
I am not concerned about "tracking" very much. I'm not sure what the giant issue is that you and others have with that (ie: exactly where and what is the harm you perceive, in concrete terms?). Btw, new versions of Windows all but force users to sign in with an email address and then proceed store all documents by default in SkyDrive. Skype is turned on and signing out is not allowed, thus you are every minute constantly advertising your presence and activity to Microsoft. Plus even searching your hard drive sends the query to Bing and shows ads to you as a result. So I am not sure Windows is on track to be much better than ChromeOS in that regard. But while I don't mind the "tracking", I consider freedom essential. An operating system must allow the freedom to develop applications that are hostile to the interests of the platform owner. That is the only defence against a descent into a monopolistic kind of dark ages. Eg: imagine if FireFox had never been allowed to run on Windows? We'd probably still be using IE6. New disruptive technologies can only develop when they have the freedom to do so, and it is rarely in the interests of the incumbents for it to happen. So this is what I care about far more than the implications for privacy and tracking etc.

cloudwalking 13y ago

Being constantly signed in also gives you a lot of advantages. Not everybody has a huge distain for being signed in. There are plenty of people who PREFER a simpler OS with a simpler UI that doesn't get viruses or trojans, running on hardware cheaper than an iPad.

zmmmmm 13y ago

I am not concerned about "tracking" very much. I'm not sure what the giant issue is that you and others have with that (ie: exactly where and what is the harm you perceive, in concrete terms?). Btw, new versions of Windows all but force users to sign in with an email address and then proceed store all documents by default in SkyDrive. Skype is turned on and signing out is not allowed, thus you are every minute constantly advertising your presence and activity to Microsoft. Plus even searching your hard drive sends the query to Bing and shows ads to you as a result. So I am not sure Windows is on track to be much better than ChromeOS in that regard. But while I don't mind the "tracking", I consider freedom essential. An operating system must allow the freedom to develop applications that are hostile to the interests of the platform owner. That is the only defence against a descent into a monopolistic kind of dark ages. Eg: imagine if FireFox had never been allowed to run on Windows? We'd probably still be using IE6. New disruptive technologies can only develop when they have the freedom to do so, and it is rarely in the interests of the incumbents for it to happen. So this is what I care about far more than the implications for privacy and tracking etc.