3 ms·

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

by 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...
- trezor 17y ago
  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. My laptop (Windows) and Netbook (Ubuntu) is ready to surf the net within seconds from I bring it back from suspended/hibernated state. I can't recall last time I powered any of them down. So for me, while you are technically correct, it still fails to have any real world impact as far as I am concerned. Variety is a good thing. This I would have to agree with.
  - zimbabwe 17y ago
    There's no real world impact from an OS where the entire focus is online applications? That's news to me. If not from that, there'll be real world impact from the fact that it's by Google.
  - ptomato 17y ago
    But this isn't about you, precisely... it's going to end up enabling the same thing on (hopefully) cheaper, lower resource hardware resulting in broader adoption.
htsh 17y ago
My view is that Ubuntu has a long way to go in terms of brand recognition before non-tech folks will jump in. But I agree with your positive view of this news. I think more people would be likely to jump into a Linux-based os with the Google brand behind it. People have heard of Windows & Mac and they are still mostly afraid of the unfamiliar Ubuntu, but selling people on "google" is easy, if not already done.
brfox 17y ago
Apple also decided to make a linux distro which happens to be very good. If it wasn't for OSX, then Ubuntu would be far more popular than it is today. The author is thinking that perhaps Chrome OS will do more of the same thing (take away market share from Ubuntu). I personally think that there is a lot more to a computer than a web browser, so maybe Chrome OS will be mostly competing with Windows in the Netbooks market - since linux has mostly lost a lot of ground in that area.

by greyman 17y ago

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...
trezor 17y ago
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. My laptop (Windows) and Netbook (Ubuntu) is ready to surf the net within seconds from I bring it back from suspended/hibernated state. I can't recall last time I powered any of them down. So for me, while you are technically correct, it still fails to have any real world impact as far as I am concerned. Variety is a good thing. This I would have to agree with.
- zimbabwe 17y ago
  There's no real world impact from an OS where the entire focus is online applications? That's news to me. If not from that, there'll be real world impact from the fact that it's by Google.
- ptomato 17y ago
  But this isn't about you, precisely... it's going to end up enabling the same thing on (hopefully) cheaper, lower resource hardware resulting in broader adoption.

htsh 17y ago

My view is that Ubuntu has a long way to go in terms of brand recognition before non-tech folks will jump in. But I agree with your positive view of this news. I think more people would be likely to jump into a Linux-based os with the Google brand behind it. People have heard of Windows & Mac and they are still mostly afraid of the unfamiliar Ubuntu, but selling people on "google" is easy, if not already done.

brfox 17y ago

Apple also decided to make a linux distro which happens to be very good. If it wasn't for OSX, then Ubuntu would be far more popular than it is today. The author is thinking that perhaps Chrome OS will do more of the same thing (take away market share from Ubuntu). I personally think that there is a lot more to a computer than a web browser, so maybe Chrome OS will be mostly competing with Windows in the Netbooks market - since linux has mostly lost a lot of ground in that area.