6 ms·

No thanks Google, we've got Ubuntu

104 points by nreece 17y ago

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
Raphael 17y ago
Using the Linux kernel in GCOS is not intended to compete with mos Linux distributions, rather it is to keep the lights on.
- michaelneale 17y ago
  Similar with Android.
sadiq 17y ago
This is why the open source movement is so interesting, we're seeing competition and innovation in Operating Systems like never before. The cost of taking world-class components (like the kernel, filesystems, windowing systems) is so low that it makes sense for people and companies to experiment, as we're seeing now. Chrome OS would be prohibitively expensive to develop if they weren't able to take so much off of the shelf.
- netsp 17y ago
  On the same note, without Open Source, netbooks may never have gotten a start. Microsoft could have charged a prohibitive license fee to sell $350 laptops. They could have refused to continue XP. Windows 7 for netbooks would never have been necessary.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
greyman 17y ago
The author seems to see Chrome OS as just another linux distro, and asks why not to take Ubuntu and make it better. But I don't think that's the case. They will just take the Linux kernel and build browser-based OS, which will be quite a different product from Ubuntu. I am looking forward to this. It seems to me, no offense, that Linux just didn't win against Windows, and that doesn't seem to change in the next few years. Even on netbooks, most people preferred Windows Xp for $50 to a free Ubuntu, and Win7 is supposed to be even better. It seems to me that Ubuntu is just a niche product, while Chrome OS could have bigger appeal.
- woodsier 17y ago
  What I find more troubling is this notion that variety (or fragmentation as they call it) is bad. They very clearly state it is an OS geared for low-resource netbook style computers, where browsers are up and running within seconds of pressing the on button. We don't have one of these yet, afaik. Why not work with Ubuntu? It's geared to be the Windows of Linux, an all-round competitor and jack of all trades. In my mind, this would be stupid. That's like the original Ubuntu developers getting grief because they weren't building on some other distro, which may have been built with a different use in mind. I like using Unix for my server, Win7 for my home laptop, and hopefully giving a stable version of Chrome OS a swing down the line on my girlfriend's netbook. If anything, it sounds like they want to build "down" from ditro's such as Ubuntu, not up. I'd rather not use a baseball bat in a game of tennis. Variety is a good thing.
  - secret 17y ago
    Isn't this browser OS concept essentially what the Crunchpad aims to be? Edit: Of course, the crunchpad is also the hardware component, making it more all-in-one.
    - roc 17y ago
      The Crunchpad aims to be a browser. Specifically: a finger-friendly one. GoogleOS would still be dealing with things like USB devices, a variety of internal hardware, offline processing, keyboard/mouse UI, desktop-class apps, etc.
    - jlees 17y ago
      Now, Google Chrome OS running on the CrunchPad, wouldn't that be something...
    - TheBuddy 17y ago
      You can see the comparison here between Arrington's vision and Google's post. http://crunchpadfans.com/2009/07/08/google-steals-fusiongaragearrington-concept-by-announcing-new-google-chrome-os/ http://crunchpadfans.com/2009/07/08/google-steals-fusiongara...
ErrantX 17y ago
Indeed the same argument could apply to any new distro - why not drop your ideas and go make Ubuntu better. Answer: because that is not the point of Open Source.
- raganwald 17y ago
  I logged into make that point _of Ubuntu itself_. Ubuntu was a new distribution at one time, launched in the face of existing popular options. If Ubuntu is wonderful, is it wonderful in spite of not rolling its ideas into the popular distributions at the time? Or is it wonderful precisely because it was able to decisively forge its own path? And if so, why shouldn't that same logic apply to Chrome?
ktharavaad 17y ago
For an example of what the chromeOS might end up like, take a look at this: http://www.thinkgos.com/index.html http://www.thinkgos.com/index.html Ironically, its called gOS which implies strong google connections and thats reinforced by the integration of all the google apps. I think it boots up in a few seconds, only has a chrome-like browser running and custom launcher for certain apps.
- peregrine 17y ago
  I was thinking about that as soon as I saw this. I think Google's strategy is a little bit different in that Google will be a browser first an operating system second.
trezor 17y ago
I think the author raises a valid point. Back in the days, when Microsoft was the big, bad guy which everyone feared, not a monopolist, but the Monopolist, the One That Had To Be Stopped(tm), the current state of affairs was as following: * Microsoft controlled the OS * Microsoft had a Office suite (and defacto control of interchange file-formats) * Microsoft had a web-browser * Microsoft has a mobile platform (with support for the Office file formats and little else) Now let's take a look at Google whose ass everyone seems collectively interested in kissing: * Google controls the majority of all web search * Google controls the majority of free web-mail * Google apps not only makes it their software but they also control your data * Google also has access to your local data albeit only if you use Google desktop search * Google tracks users everywhere on the web Google analytics lets them know what you are doing and why * Google has a browser * Google has a mobile OS Oh! And it in ties closely with all of Google's services * Google has a closed platform for application hosting Again they have total access to all your data And now Google wants to make a desktop OS to further make sure they control every part of your daily activities. But I guess it is entirely unproblematic that they can track your every activity wherever you are, on whatever device you are and whatever platform you are using. They are the good guys, right? And it's not like they have lock-in on the file-formats you use, they just have lock-in on your actual data. I mean who cares about that? After all they are using web-standards to do the stuff they do, so it can't be bad, right? Edit: Posts like this makes me wish HN had markdown support for unordered lists allready.
- ErrantX 17y ago
  solution (if you dont trust them). dont use Google, it's perfectly possible to do so.
  - trezor 17y ago
    That doesn't alter the fact that they are much more in control of what most users do, yet people regard Microsoft as the one we should be afraid of. And how would you know if you send mail to someone using gmail or gmail hosted that google doesn't use this information against you? You don't. I'm not saying we need to shut down Google, just that I find it odd that most of the FOSS world still regards Microsoft as the one we should be afraid of and avoid at all cost. After all: Google does have its arsenal of closed-source solutions with varying degrees of lock-in and little to no options for opting out once your data is harvested. If the day comes that the government wants to go big brother on us, I'm pretty sure Google and/or their data will first on the list of things they want to get under their control, not Microsoft.
TweedHeads 17y ago
Yes thanks Google, we've got Ubuntu and we want more options. Better options.
wglb 17y ago
See, but it is not a one size fits all kind of thing. If you have an iphone or ipod or a mac, you also have freebsd. If you have other cellphones, you have another os. And his thinking is influenced by the system administrator point of view.
jncraton 17y ago
Mozilla Firefox is completely independent and not pushing anyone's agenda I'm not sure that this is strictly true. The majority of the revenue from Firefox comes from the search deal with Google. http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/08/28/mozilla-extends-lucrative-deal-with-google-for-3-years/ http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/08/28/mozilla-extends-lucrati...
noonespecial 17y ago
I shudder to think what ubuntu would run like on an arm with 128 meg. Ubuntu is cool on by daul core 4Ghz. Much less cool on my old 500Mhz PIII (even the XFCE edition). Why not just say ubuntu is for big computers, chrome/os for small ones and not try to shoehorn any one thing onto everything?
- krschultz 17y ago
  Ubuntu Netbook Remix runs faster than Moblin & Windows XP on an Intel Atom - the primary CPU for netbooks. When they say ARM they mean something that can compete with the Atom, not some of the lower level ones.
- maggie 17y ago
  "I shudder to think what ubuntu would run like on an arm with 128 meg" It's not bad.
- rbanffy 17y ago
  Have you seen how much memory a couple tabs open in Chrome take? Heavy browser usage in a 128 megabyte machine is ludicrous. What I fear is that a viable low-memory option for ARM-based netbooks kills the need for memory expansion on them. I want a light and inexpensive netbook, but I also need 2+ gigabytes if RAM to work. And no. I won't return to a full-size (and full-weight) notebook.
wlievens 17y ago
Great news for ARM, I guess.
- rbanffy 17y ago
  I would prefer a desktop-like OS for ARM-based devices. If the mainstream go for simpler OSs for those smartbooks, there will be little demand for a multi-gigabyte RAM with real hard-disk class of non-x86 machines. I love my Acer Aspire One and use it as my main development system, but I have no need for its Windows compatibility and would trade it for longer battery life any day. And a cache-heavy 4+ core ARM with decent FP capability would still need less juice than a single-core Atom.
eli 17y ago
You can email Linus Torvalds or Mark Shuttleworth directly and get answers to your Linux questions, sometimes within minutes or hours. I call BS. At best, maybe you can get answers like that because you're a already a Linux wizard. Linus and Mark are not going to help me set up my network printer with Ubuntu.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  If you need help with setting up your network printer with Ubuntu you can find dozens of avenues where you can get that answer (you could email me for instance, I'd be happy to help you ;) ), also, last time I did this myself the process was completely painless. I realize that you are speaking tongue in cheek but it is a less than fortunate example. Oh, and the offer to help is serious in case you really have that problem.
  - eli 17y ago
    Hey, every OS has support forums (and Ubuntu's are above average), but "I can just email the kernel developer" is not a rational way to deal with set up and support issues. Support isn't the real issue anyway. You can always buy support (it's not like the support you get with Windows is anything special anyway). Ubuntu (and Linux generally) is great as a server. I gave up on Ubuntu on the desktop. It was very hard to set up and configure. Sleep/resume was flaky on my Thinkpad. On my desktop it took several days of trying different drivers and hacking xorg.conf to get my second monitor to work properly, and my cheapo webcam is flat-out not supported by any driver I could find (and I really looked). Yeah, these are mostly driver issues that aren't really Linux's "fault" -- but who cares. In Windows everything just worked out of the box. I think Google will have the same problems. People aren't going to be happy if they buy a Google PC and nothing happens when they plug in their ancient, oddball plotter printer.
eleitl 17y ago
> The growing dominance of Ubuntu (at least on the desktop, the server room seems to have been won by Red Hat) Not my server room, for certain. Debian is doing very nicely there. Desktop yes (along with Win XP and OS X), but I could go to Debian there, if I wanted to.
jacoblyles 17y ago
If google sees a need that isn't being met by the community, then it doesn't make sense to partner with an existing effort that already has its own people, mission, biases, and agenda. Ubuntu is very different from the Chrome OS. It sounds like the author is angry at Google for competing with a product that he is emotionally invested in. While I can understand his emotional investment, I think it is foolish to get angry at companies for innovating and providing the world with new technologies.
known 17y ago
Users do not run OS. They run Applications. Hence it is rational to compare Usability, Performance and Functionality of GNOME/KDE/FOSS/Google Applications with Microsoft Applications.

104 points by nreece 17y ago

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

Using the Linux kernel in GCOS is not intended to compete with mos Linux distributions, rather it is to keep the lights on.

michaelneale 17y ago
Similar with Android.

sadiq 17y ago

This is why the open source movement is so interesting, we're seeing competition and innovation in Operating Systems like never before. The cost of taking world-class components (like the kernel, filesystems, windowing systems) is so low that it makes sense for people and companies to experiment, as we're seeing now. Chrome OS would be prohibitively expensive to develop if they weren't able to take so much off of the shelf.

netsp 17y ago
On the same note, without Open Source, netbooks may never have gotten a start. Microsoft could have charged a prohibitive license fee to sell $350 laptops. They could have refused to continue XP. Windows 7 for netbooks would never have been necessary.

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

greyman 17y ago

The author seems to see Chrome OS as just another linux distro, and asks why not to take Ubuntu and make it better. But I don't think that's the case. They will just take the Linux kernel and build browser-based OS, which will be quite a different product from Ubuntu. I am looking forward to this. It seems to me, no offense, that Linux just didn't win against Windows, and that doesn't seem to change in the next few years. Even on netbooks, most people preferred Windows Xp for $50 to a free Ubuntu, and Win7 is supposed to be even better. It seems to me that Ubuntu is just a niche product, while Chrome OS could have bigger appeal.

woodsier 17y ago
What I find more troubling is this notion that variety (or fragmentation as they call it) is bad. They very clearly state it is an OS geared for low-resource netbook style computers, where browsers are up and running within seconds of pressing the on button. We don't have one of these yet, afaik. Why not work with Ubuntu? It's geared to be the Windows of Linux, an all-round competitor and jack of all trades. In my mind, this would be stupid. That's like the original Ubuntu developers getting grief because they weren't building on some other distro, which may have been built with a different use in mind. I like using Unix for my server, Win7 for my home laptop, and hopefully giving a stable version of Chrome OS a swing down the line on my girlfriend's netbook. If anything, it sounds like they want to build "down" from ditro's such as Ubuntu, not up. I'd rather not use a baseball bat in a game of tennis. Variety is a good thing.
- secret 17y ago
  Isn't this browser OS concept essentially what the Crunchpad aims to be? Edit: Of course, the crunchpad is also the hardware component, making it more all-in-one.
  - roc 17y ago
    The Crunchpad aims to be a browser. Specifically: a finger-friendly one. GoogleOS would still be dealing with things like USB devices, a variety of internal hardware, offline processing, keyboard/mouse UI, desktop-class apps, etc.
  - jlees 17y ago
    Now, Google Chrome OS running on the CrunchPad, wouldn't that be something...
  - TheBuddy 17y ago
    You can see the comparison here between Arrington's vision and Google's post. http://crunchpadfans.com/2009/07/08/google-steals-fusiongaragearrington-concept-by-announcing-new-google-chrome-os/ http://crunchpadfans.com/2009/07/08/google-steals-fusiongara...

ErrantX 17y ago

Indeed the same argument could apply to any new distro - why not drop your ideas and go make Ubuntu better. Answer: because that is not the point of Open Source.

raganwald 17y ago
I logged into make that point _of Ubuntu itself_. Ubuntu was a new distribution at one time, launched in the face of existing popular options. If Ubuntu is wonderful, is it wonderful in spite of not rolling its ideas into the popular distributions at the time? Or is it wonderful precisely because it was able to decisively forge its own path? And if so, why shouldn't that same logic apply to Chrome?

ktharavaad 17y ago

For an example of what the chromeOS might end up like, take a look at this: http://www.thinkgos.com/index.html http://www.thinkgos.com/index.html Ironically, its called gOS which implies strong google connections and thats reinforced by the integration of all the google apps. I think it boots up in a few seconds, only has a chrome-like browser running and custom launcher for certain apps.

peregrine 17y ago
I was thinking about that as soon as I saw this. I think Google's strategy is a little bit different in that Google will be a browser first an operating system second.

trezor 17y ago

I think the author raises a valid point. Back in the days, when Microsoft was the big, bad guy which everyone feared, not a monopolist, but the Monopolist, the One That Had To Be Stopped(tm), the current state of affairs was as following: * Microsoft controlled the OS * Microsoft had a Office suite (and defacto control of interchange file-formats) * Microsoft had a web-browser * Microsoft has a mobile platform (with support for the Office file formats and little else) Now let's take a look at Google whose ass everyone seems collectively interested in kissing: * Google controls the majority of all web search * Google controls the majority of free web-mail * Google apps not only makes it their software but they also control your data * Google also has access to your local data albeit only if you use Google desktop search * Google tracks users everywhere on the web Google analytics lets them know what you are doing and why * Google has a browser * Google has a mobile OS Oh! And it in ties closely with all of Google's services * Google has a closed platform for application hosting Again they have total access to all your data And now Google wants to make a desktop OS to further make sure they control every part of your daily activities. But I guess it is entirely unproblematic that they can track your every activity wherever you are, on whatever device you are and whatever platform you are using. They are the good guys, right? And it's not like they have lock-in on the file-formats you use, they just have lock-in on your actual data. I mean who cares about that? After all they are using web-standards to do the stuff they do, so it can't be bad, right? Edit: Posts like this makes me wish HN had markdown support for unordered lists allready.

ErrantX 17y ago
solution (if you dont trust them). dont use Google, it's perfectly possible to do so.
- trezor 17y ago
  That doesn't alter the fact that they are much more in control of what most users do, yet people regard Microsoft as the one we should be afraid of. And how would you know if you send mail to someone using gmail or gmail hosted that google doesn't use this information against you? You don't. I'm not saying we need to shut down Google, just that I find it odd that most of the FOSS world still regards Microsoft as the one we should be afraid of and avoid at all cost. After all: Google does have its arsenal of closed-source solutions with varying degrees of lock-in and little to no options for opting out once your data is harvested. If the day comes that the government wants to go big brother on us, I'm pretty sure Google and/or their data will first on the list of things they want to get under their control, not Microsoft.

TweedHeads 17y ago

Yes thanks Google, we've got Ubuntu and we want more options. Better options.

wglb 17y ago

See, but it is not a one size fits all kind of thing. If you have an iphone or ipod or a mac, you also have freebsd. If you have other cellphones, you have another os. And his thinking is influenced by the system administrator point of view.

jncraton 17y ago

Mozilla Firefox is completely independent and not pushing anyone's agenda I'm not sure that this is strictly true. The majority of the revenue from Firefox comes from the search deal with Google. http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/08/28/mozilla-extends-lucrative-deal-with-google-for-3-years/ http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/08/28/mozilla-extends-lucrati...

noonespecial 17y ago

I shudder to think what ubuntu would run like on an arm with 128 meg. Ubuntu is cool on by daul core 4Ghz. Much less cool on my old 500Mhz PIII (even the XFCE edition). Why not just say ubuntu is for big computers, chrome/os for small ones and not try to shoehorn any one thing onto everything?

krschultz 17y ago
Ubuntu Netbook Remix runs faster than Moblin & Windows XP on an Intel Atom - the primary CPU for netbooks. When they say ARM they mean something that can compete with the Atom, not some of the lower level ones.
maggie 17y ago
"I shudder to think what ubuntu would run like on an arm with 128 meg" It's not bad.
rbanffy 17y ago
Have you seen how much memory a couple tabs open in Chrome take? Heavy browser usage in a 128 megabyte machine is ludicrous. What I fear is that a viable low-memory option for ARM-based netbooks kills the need for memory expansion on them. I want a light and inexpensive netbook, but I also need 2+ gigabytes if RAM to work. And no. I won't return to a full-size (and full-weight) notebook.

wlievens 17y ago

Great news for ARM, I guess.

rbanffy 17y ago
I would prefer a desktop-like OS for ARM-based devices. If the mainstream go for simpler OSs for those smartbooks, there will be little demand for a multi-gigabyte RAM with real hard-disk class of non-x86 machines. I love my Acer Aspire One and use it as my main development system, but I have no need for its Windows compatibility and would trade it for longer battery life any day. And a cache-heavy 4+ core ARM with decent FP capability would still need less juice than a single-core Atom.

eli 17y ago

You can email Linus Torvalds or Mark Shuttleworth directly and get answers to your Linux questions, sometimes within minutes or hours. I call BS. At best, maybe you can get answers like that because you're a already a Linux wizard. Linus and Mark are not going to help me set up my network printer with Ubuntu.

jacquesm 17y ago
If you need help with setting up your network printer with Ubuntu you can find dozens of avenues where you can get that answer (you could email me for instance, I'd be happy to help you ;) ), also, last time I did this myself the process was completely painless. I realize that you are speaking tongue in cheek but it is a less than fortunate example. Oh, and the offer to help is serious in case you really have that problem.
- eli 17y ago
  Hey, every OS has support forums (and Ubuntu's are above average), but "I can just email the kernel developer" is not a rational way to deal with set up and support issues. Support isn't the real issue anyway. You can always buy support (it's not like the support you get with Windows is anything special anyway). Ubuntu (and Linux generally) is great as a server. I gave up on Ubuntu on the desktop. It was very hard to set up and configure. Sleep/resume was flaky on my Thinkpad. On my desktop it took several days of trying different drivers and hacking xorg.conf to get my second monitor to work properly, and my cheapo webcam is flat-out not supported by any driver I could find (and I really looked). Yeah, these are mostly driver issues that aren't really Linux's "fault" -- but who cares. In Windows everything just worked out of the box. I think Google will have the same problems. People aren't going to be happy if they buy a Google PC and nothing happens when they plug in their ancient, oddball plotter printer.

eleitl 17y ago

> The growing dominance of Ubuntu (at least on the desktop, the server room seems to have been won by Red Hat) Not my server room, for certain. Debian is doing very nicely there. Desktop yes (along with Win XP and OS X), but I could go to Debian there, if I wanted to.

jacoblyles 17y ago

If google sees a need that isn't being met by the community, then it doesn't make sense to partner with an existing effort that already has its own people, mission, biases, and agenda. Ubuntu is very different from the Chrome OS. It sounds like the author is angry at Google for competing with a product that he is emotionally invested in. While I can understand his emotional investment, I think it is foolish to get angry at companies for innovating and providing the world with new technologies.

known 17y ago

Users do not run OS. They run Applications. Hence it is rational to compare Usability, Performance and Functionality of GNOME/KDE/FOSS/Google Applications with Microsoft Applications.