5 ms·
Google Plans to Introduce a PC Operating System (for netbooks)
- sfphotoarts 17y ago"“Chrome is basically a modern operating system,” Mr. Andreessen said." This is an odd comment to make coming from an ex coder.
- mahmud 17y agoFounder of Netscape. He should know what a browser is, but maybe he knows a bit too much; maybe sees web apps, in that weird out-of-touch way that visionaries tend to "see" things, as a replacement to desktop apps.
- wmf 17y agoIt's consistent with his statement 15 years ago that "Netscape will soon reduce Windows to a poorly debugged set of device drivers." (Except this time Chrome has reduced Linux to a well-debugged set of device drivers.)
- sketerpot 17y agoIt's not like they have a whole lot of devices to drive. They know up-front what small set of hardware platforms it will have to support. Handy, I'm sure, if they want things like hardware-accelerated H.264 decoding.
- vaksel 17y agoso basically it'll be a custom version of linux, with Google tools like Chrome etc thrown into the mix
- pufuwozu 17y agoI feel that Linux can really work for the average user, it just needs some good branding and marketing. Canonical has performed fairly well with Ubuntu but it'll be interesting to see if Google can "bring it to the masses".
- vaksel 17y agoI don't think your average user really knows anything about the OSes. For most people, the only OS they know, is the one that came pre-installed by the computer manufacturer. Instead of good branding/marketing, Linux needs a good sales team to pitch to manufacturers. Linux will continue losing, until the manufacturers add to their custom builds: Linux (-$100) or Microsoft Windows(+$100)
- zimbabwe 17y agoAll Google has to do is strip down Linux, provide excellent driver support, and make things look pretty. They've got the infrastructure in place with Gears, they control the browsing environment. Users don't need to know anything about Linux. All they need to know is that it's made by Google and works.
- cpach 17y agoBut in order to make the manufacturers interested, they would have to be convinced that the buyers would be satisfied with Linux. Considering the user experience of current Linux desktops, I'm not sure we will se that happen in the near future.
- ErrantX 17y agowhere does it say they're using Linux as a base? Im not saying they aren't: it's just there is no suggestion they are. and, y'know the press release feels like a level shot at all modern OS's. Unless they've said otherwise I reckon were looking at something new (which is great IMO) EDIT: bleh I read from the bottom up (in terms of the front page) so Google Blog was last :) I see the source.
- gregparadee 17y agohttp://2ze.us/Y9 http://2ze.us/Y9
- 10ren 17y agoInteresting that the link text is fully black, and not faded out as normal text would be for "-7" worth of downvotes.
- kirubakaran 17y agoHN fades only non-link text. Example: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=401885 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=401885
- mahmud 17y agoThat URL leads to here: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/introducing-google-chrome-os.html http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/introducing-google-ch...
- eb 17y agoThis isn't twitter. You don't need to shorten URLs.
- derwiki 17y agoThis article is chock full of bad grammar. I've generally found NYTimes to be reputable, but this makes me question how hastily this was pushed out. Can anyone find another source corroborating this news?
- Adrenalist 17y agoYeah - I noticed this too. It seems like they wanted to 'scoop' the story before Google announced it on their own blog perhaps? I'm not one to criticize another person's grammar or writing style, but it was unusually bad with this NY Times article.
- lunchbox 17y agoAnnouncement of Google Chrome OS: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/introducing-google-chrome-os.html http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/introducing-google-ch...
- vaksel 17y agothe name is pretty crappy, Chrome means browser to everyone, what's the point of doubling it's meaning? Couldn't they come up with something unique like Google Doorway or Google Vents or Google Tunnel if we use the Windows example, it'd go like: Damn my windows just crashed. The OS or the browser?
- rms 17y agoI don't think Chrome has had enough penetration among the average consumer to mean anything yet. How many people use Chrome? It's just a word; apparently they are branding their consumer desktop platform as Chrome. Chrome is a much better name than Doorway or Vents or Tunnel. It's different than Windows. It's fast and shiny.
- rms 17y agoIn addition to fast and shiny, Chrome is elemental. It's really a great brand name for their attempt to make the dominant web operating system, where web operating system means the underlying software infrastructure from bottom up required to run advanced web services perfectly.
- netsp 17y agoI assume that is the point. Users unable to differentiate Browser from OS.
- buugs 17y agoIf you look at the google video asking what a browser is chrome doesn't really mean browser to anyone... The main thing is that google means something to everyone and that is all that will end up mattering. edit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ (What is a Browser?)
- andeka 17y agoI feel like this was Schmidt's dream with Sun in the 80s.
- steveklabnik 17y agoYou're not the only one: http://deals.venturebeat.com/2009/07/08/how-googles-chrome-os-has-deep-roots-in-eric-schimdts-past/ http://deals.venturebeat.com/2009/07/08/how-googles-chrome-o...
- chaosmachine 17y agox86 Android Live CDs and Chrome OS on the same day? Wow.
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- netsp 17y agoThe time to do this was 2 years ago, when netbooks were desperately looking for an operating system. Now they have adapted themselves (slightly higher cost/specs) to Windows XP, and people are fairly comfortable with that. The market is established & shaving an extra $50 off the price is not as much of an issue. The near future will have Windows 7 netbooks & Ubuntu for netbook to provide some theoretical competition. That doesn't mean this definitely won't take off, but a Google backed operating system made for small screens & cheap hardware could have been the default choice 2 years ago.
- swolchok 17y agoI have to disagree -- $50 is 20% of the price of the cheapest netbooks, and it's 10% of the price of relatively expensive $500 netbooks. The cheaper netbooks get, the more of an issue $50 is. The Eee PC was supposed to be the $200 laptop and we're still not there.
- inerte 17y agoThen MS will make it $40, $25, $5, $1. Some people would say it's anti-competitive, but Google can only provide a free netbook OS because of its ads business.
- netsp 17y agoThe problem is not just the license. It's also the hardware requirements.
- netsp 17y agoThat is my point. For the theoretical $200 impulse buy EeePc, that $50 would have been a deal breaker. Armchair strategising would have led you to that conclusion. An OS that lowered costs by that much would have been an obvious choice. That's why they originally launched on Linux. But over time, the specs drifted up. Consumers preferred XP. They were willing to pay for it. I don't know what the median price is, but I'm guessing around $400-$500. In other words, the market has moved towards Windows. Windows has also moved towards netbooks. Google OS could have been the default choice for netbook manufacturers at the time when there were petitions going to keep XP alive. When this launches (2010?), Windows 7 netbooks will be the default choice. That doesn't mean this won't work. maybe people will prefer Chrome OS to Windows 7 for netbooks. Maybe it will enable $200 netbooks, almost a distinct class. If that's the case, they still need to go through the market test. Do a lot of people really want a $200 netbook?
- 10ren 17y agoWeb browsers will evolve until they are operating systems. Those that can't will be replaced by those that can. Their aim seems to be instant web-access, which benefits google. Linux compatibility would seem secondary - and perhaps even deliberately omitted, as Google wants you to use web-apps, not desktop-apps. And if Google Chrome is fast enough, and offline operation is seamless enough, that might not be a problem at all. This is the thing that Microsoft feared from Netscape and Java. It got away that time. Round 2: the game has changed, but the outcome, even if preordained, remains as yet unknown.
- rjurney 17y agoSuper insightful +1 magic hat.
- edw519 17y ago"Round 2: the game has changed," I guess spending 10 years building infrastructure to support web apps had to happen first.
- 10ren 17y agoWhat are you thinking of as infrastructure? I suppose broadband is more widely available now (10 years ago I was on dialup at home, now my max is over 2MB/sec); PC hardware has become fast enough for Javascript/Flash/Java (and much improvement on their software implementation performance). From the developer point of view, AJAX-style dynamic webapps have become easier, with browser-support, dev tools, and a trained workforce; ditto for the server (esp. ruby on rails, but it's across the language-board, and DB, OR mapping, XML, JSON); and cheaper servers (which are also much more powerful). OK, OK! You've convinced me.
- andreyf 17y agoOne thing I don't understand: why pre-announce so early?
- snprbob86 17y agoThey are probably bringing hardware partners into the fold. They need some lead time to do that. Partners are notoriously bad at keeping secrets. Just ask anyone who worked on a big secret project at a large company: leaks come from 3rd parties almost exclusively.
- hs 17y agoplease don't repeat linux's mistake by allowing fsf to attach gnu/; gnu/chrome? yikes!
- cpach 17y agoHow could you stop them? Unless this OS is not built on the GNU toolchain.
- sketerpot 17y agoIf it uses the GNU userland, it still wouldn't be fit for a GNU/ name in the eyes of the FSF. Saying "GNU/Linux" means you're talking about a GNU system running on the Linux kernel. By that logic, this could be called Chrome/Linux. GNU doesn't figure into it significantly.
- Tichy 17y agoWhy would that fare better on netbooks than Linux?