3 ms·
Neither would it be safe to to assume anything about the OS before it has been released. Yes article, I am looking at you: "it should be faster", "Google is pr
by trezor 17y ago
Neither would it be safe to to assume anything about the OS before it has been released.
Yes article, I am looking at you: "it should be faster", "Google is promising boot times measured in seconds", "If Google can come up", "we might just have the ultimate", "Google may use these"
That is: should, promising, if, might, may. Not a single bit of concrete data at all, just pure speculation.
I know Google has released quite a few solid products, but aren't we giving them too much credit on something yet to be delivered? Google may know how to run servers and write web-apps, but why are we assuming they know anything about how to build a decent client OS?
If Microsoft was to release anything like this, with just as little data, the entire tech press would be up in arms about how this was going to fail.
I guess I'm getting about as tired about the Google-hype as the iPhone-hype. I use both, but that doesn't mean I believe in magic before I see it.
- edw519 17y ago"If Microsoft was to release anything like this, with just as little data, the entire tech press would be up in arms about how this was going to fail." For good reason. They have ample precedent of huge Microsoft failures. Google, not so much (yet).
- costan 17y agoUbuntu is already pretty fast on a Dell mini 910n & a Dell mini 10v. I believe they have a goal of 8-second boot times on netbooks in 2010. And they usually achieve their goals. I believe Google will pull this off, because it entails repackaging and refining software that's already well on its way. I wouldn't believe Microsoft will pull this off, for 2 reasons: (1) they don't want to threaten their Windows cash cow. (2) business partners (Intel) don't want netbooks to become an acceptable replacement for full-fledged laptops. None of the reasons is technical.