- Status
Even if I don't mind the privacy concerns of having web based apps, I have a very poor internet connection that is intermittent at best. Will I then run into similar problems that prevent me from truly enjoying things like Steam, let alone constant internet connected DRM?
hoofhearted
Distinguished
- Apr 9, 2004
- 423
- 0
- 18,930
Yawn = browser OS. Now if someone were to come up with an OS with DirectX or OpenGL ish type things at the core. Work with AMD and Nvidia to make sure it can run all modern games, then I would be all over it. But, unfortunately, Microsoft owns DirectX and that is what is at the core of PC gaming these days. I think that is the main reason for MSs survival, their control of the gaming sector.
palladin9479
Distinguished
- Jul 26, 2008
- 193
- 0
- 18,640
~IF~ they also release the software to build / run your own cloud and have your devices run off that local "cloud" then this could be big for business or a tech savy home user. Running your apps over the internet is epic fail waiting to happen. If you can instead run your apps from your own local sever (farm) and store your data locally, then it becomes more viable. Kinda like a mashed up version of a thin client.
randomizer
Distinguished
- Jul 24, 2006
- 880
- 0
- 19,260
There is a reason why there are analysts predicting the collapse of the Microsoft desktop OS monopoly in the next year or so. There is a massive free (libre and particularly gratis) movement happening and the shift towards mobile computing is gaining pace. Windows can't compete except on a stationary desktop computer, and Microsoft is going to need to come up with something far better than WinMo.
G-Systems
Distinguished
- Feb 2, 2010
- 4
- 0
- 18,510
[citation][nom]randomizer[/nom]There is a reason why there are analysts predicting the collapse of the Microsoft desktop OS monopoly in the next year or so. [/citation]
I agree with this...to an extent. As Apple loses it's invincibility as it gains market share and more attraction from our malware buds, the security vulnerabilities will put a lot of people searching for a more "secure" browser, and Windows will have the benefit of having dealt with these security concerns for years.
Chrome OS is not competing with Windows nor Apple. I love the concept and am awaiting it's release, but I am not quite sure that there will be a chance that it will directly replace my Windows 7 64-Bit based machine. Why would it? It does too many cloud things and has little to no provisions for native apps. How could it knock Windows off? Linux has promoted free software for decades... Why would somehow this change?
It's one thing to be excited about something new. It's another thing to experience delirium.
With the irrefutable improvements of Windows 7 over XP and Vista, Microsoft has gotten their act together. Is it anything more than media hype that places these companies against eachother?
In the end they're not even vying for the same markets:
MS: PC Total Solutions
Apple: High-end, simple users
Linux: Computer scientists and enthusiasts
Google: Cloud-based computing
All of these are different markets... It's great to see the "competition" since there is a finite amount of consumers, in general... But this overhyped attempt by the media-at-large (and the marketing departments of the respective companies--excluding Linux, of course) to create consumers where there otherwise might not be...
...soapbox exited...
I agree with this...to an extent. As Apple loses it's invincibility as it gains market share and more attraction from our malware buds, the security vulnerabilities will put a lot of people searching for a more "secure" browser, and Windows will have the benefit of having dealt with these security concerns for years.
Chrome OS is not competing with Windows nor Apple. I love the concept and am awaiting it's release, but I am not quite sure that there will be a chance that it will directly replace my Windows 7 64-Bit based machine. Why would it? It does too many cloud things and has little to no provisions for native apps. How could it knock Windows off? Linux has promoted free software for decades... Why would somehow this change?
It's one thing to be excited about something new. It's another thing to experience delirium.
With the irrefutable improvements of Windows 7 over XP and Vista, Microsoft has gotten their act together. Is it anything more than media hype that places these companies against eachother?
In the end they're not even vying for the same markets:
MS: PC Total Solutions
Apple: High-end, simple users
Linux: Computer scientists and enthusiasts
Google: Cloud-based computing
All of these are different markets... It's great to see the "competition" since there is a finite amount of consumers, in general... But this overhyped attempt by the media-at-large (and the marketing departments of the respective companies--excluding Linux, of course) to create consumers where there otherwise might not be...
...soapbox exited...
i dont think it would displace win7, in fact with the advent of multi-core computing i think there is a real prospect of virtualizing a chrome server inside win7 to serve up content to a chrome os device..... imagine the iPad without apple's control.......
orionantares
Distinguished
- Jan 30, 2010
- 119
- 0
- 18,630
[citation][nom]Smochina[/nom]Can you stop calling it an OS? It's not an OS, it's just a browser running programs on a server. No company will ever use a third party server to store and run it's applications/documents on, google is daydreaming here. And at home we don't do much working, that's why it's called home morons.[/citation]
If they build it properly it could actually end up being adopted by businesses for use connecting to their own first-person private servers. I know our company has been moving more and more toward server applications over local installs on client machines and right now RDP is pretty big. If they do a good job with this Chrome OS it could move into business clients and push out Windows.
It's not going to replace Windows for desktops and power-user laptops but I could certainly see it taking over netbooks and possible business client machines if setup correctly and securely.
If they build it properly it could actually end up being adopted by businesses for use connecting to their own first-person private servers. I know our company has been moving more and more toward server applications over local installs on client machines and right now RDP is pretty big. If they do a good job with this Chrome OS it could move into business clients and push out Windows.
It's not going to replace Windows for desktops and power-user laptops but I could certainly see it taking over netbooks and possible business client machines if setup correctly and securely.
randomizer
Distinguished
- Jul 24, 2006
- 880
- 0
- 19,260
[citation][nom]G-Systems[/nom]MS: PC Total SolutionsApple: High-end, simple usersLinux: Computer scientists and enthusiastsGoogle: Cloud-based computingAll of these are different markets... [/citation]
The question remains: which of these markets are going to survive long-term? Cloud computing has been the "next big thing" for decades but until now hasn't really had much hope due to a lack of decent mobile devices. It's now feasible, and people are already using it for many things even without mobile devices. Look at what people already rely on Google for: Google Docs, Maps, Calendar, Mail, Search, Talk, News, Finance, etc. All of this is cloud-based, whether it is access via mobile or stationary computing devices.
As much as people like to talk about how much they don't like Google's business of selling us as products to advertisers, they are quite happy to surrender their business to the Google cloud. Then their personal information goes up on Facebook to top it off.
Now given the choice between a free OS by a company that has its name in the Macquarie Dictionary and an expensive OS that has previously caused problems, what will people choose? If Chrome OS satisfies the user's application requirements and works smoothly, there is no way they would pick Windows unless, of course, they are so stuck in their way of doing things that they can't accept the lack of a button that pops up a tooltip that says "Start" when you mouse over it. There will be people like this, there always are. But some of these people are from pre-Windows days as well, and therefore learning something new is not something they haven't done before, it's just something they haven't done in a long time.
The question remains: which of these markets are going to survive long-term? Cloud computing has been the "next big thing" for decades but until now hasn't really had much hope due to a lack of decent mobile devices. It's now feasible, and people are already using it for many things even without mobile devices. Look at what people already rely on Google for: Google Docs, Maps, Calendar, Mail, Search, Talk, News, Finance, etc. All of this is cloud-based, whether it is access via mobile or stationary computing devices.
As much as people like to talk about how much they don't like Google's business of selling us as products to advertisers, they are quite happy to surrender their business to the Google cloud. Then their personal information goes up on Facebook to top it off.
Now given the choice between a free OS by a company that has its name in the Macquarie Dictionary and an expensive OS that has previously caused problems, what will people choose? If Chrome OS satisfies the user's application requirements and works smoothly, there is no way they would pick Windows unless, of course, they are so stuck in their way of doing things that they can't accept the lack of a button that pops up a tooltip that says "Start" when you mouse over it. There will be people like this, there always are. But some of these people are from pre-Windows days as well, and therefore learning something new is not something they haven't done before, it's just something they haven't done in a long time.
randomizer
Distinguished
- Jul 24, 2006
- 880
- 0
- 19,260
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]Can it install your previously purchased and very expensive software?[/citation]
If you require software that runs on Windows then why would you use anything other than Windows? That's as stupid as trying to run it on OSX. I can see a new article being written titled "Chrome OS is not Windows"
If you require software that runs on Windows then why would you use anything other than Windows? That's as stupid as trying to run it on OSX. I can see a new article being written titled "Chrome OS is not Windows"
randomizer
Distinguished
- Jul 24, 2006
- 880
- 0
- 19,260
It would be better to find an alternative. Compatibility layers just add bloat and security risks. If you're using Chrome OS then chances are you'll be using Google's cloud applications as well. If not then you are probably running the wrong OS, because this thing is little more than a web browser with a customised Linux kernel at the heart, not a try-to-be-everything patchwork like Windows.
G-Systems
Distinguished
- Feb 2, 2010
- 4
- 0
- 18,510
[citation][nom]randomizer[/nom]The question remains: which of these markets are going to survive long-term? [/citation]
This is my point exactly, randomizer: All of these markets have survived in the long term. Even in your post, you concede that all of these things have existed in some way or form since networking became a household utility.
What I think is most disconcerting is that there is a push to limit choices and make one think that there is only one market that is superior. All of these approaches have positive and negatives.
For MS, trying to do everything moderately well puts them in a position where they do nothing great. This opens up the opportunity for other companies to do one thing well and have Microsoft threatened (READ: Google)
For Apple, falsely promoting their machines as problem free might bring about serious backlash once they achieve the market share that they crave. In addition, marketing to specifically high-end (READ: eccentric) individuals may improve their bottom-line (as an article here on Tom's declared a short time ago), but it limits their long-term growth. This is one reason they may be seeking alternative methods of production with AMD. This is disgusting to me in the end because their products are artificially inflated to give the allure of quality...they could just lower the price of the products they have now and open up their profits...
Linux, because of it's free, dynamic community, they haven't a real chance of competing for any market since the drive to have Linux on mass produced computers hasn't the capital to really do it... I'm sure there are more factors, but this is one evident one...
Google's entrance resembles Linux', but they have a market and a unique direction. We don't know how the OS actually functions, but we do know that it is primarily cloud-based. Will they expand into allowing native apps? Maybe... But that will be told in time (this Fall--Yay!)
In the end, all that I'm saying is that this is a situation that will, happily, continue into the future. No one is going anywhere...they'll all dabble a little in eachother's markets while retaining supremacy in their respective fields...
This is my point exactly, randomizer: All of these markets have survived in the long term. Even in your post, you concede that all of these things have existed in some way or form since networking became a household utility.
What I think is most disconcerting is that there is a push to limit choices and make one think that there is only one market that is superior. All of these approaches have positive and negatives.
For MS, trying to do everything moderately well puts them in a position where they do nothing great. This opens up the opportunity for other companies to do one thing well and have Microsoft threatened (READ: Google)
For Apple, falsely promoting their machines as problem free might bring about serious backlash once they achieve the market share that they crave. In addition, marketing to specifically high-end (READ: eccentric) individuals may improve their bottom-line (as an article here on Tom's declared a short time ago), but it limits their long-term growth. This is one reason they may be seeking alternative methods of production with AMD. This is disgusting to me in the end because their products are artificially inflated to give the allure of quality...they could just lower the price of the products they have now and open up their profits...
Linux, because of it's free, dynamic community, they haven't a real chance of competing for any market since the drive to have Linux on mass produced computers hasn't the capital to really do it... I'm sure there are more factors, but this is one evident one...
Google's entrance resembles Linux', but they have a market and a unique direction. We don't know how the OS actually functions, but we do know that it is primarily cloud-based. Will they expand into allowing native apps? Maybe... But that will be told in time (this Fall--Yay!)
In the end, all that I'm saying is that this is a situation that will, happily, continue into the future. No one is going anywhere...they'll all dabble a little in eachother's markets while retaining supremacy in their respective fields...
randomizer
Distinguished
- Jul 24, 2006
- 880
- 0
- 19,260
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]People have made serious investment in applications and using an alternate application, even if it is free will be viewed as wasting money.[/citation]
Well who's fault is that? People can think what they want, nobody is forcing them to "waste" money.
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]So thanks again for answering the query, if you want to run your own software, then Chrome OS is the wrong OS.[/citation]
It is not about running your own software so much as running the wrong software and hardware. If you're running Adobe Photoshop then you're not using a low-powered laptop. This is what Chrome OS is initially being targeted at (and anyone who can stick with cloud apps). If you need more flexibility or you plan to use a proper desktop then you'll need Windows or Linux, because Chrome OS is not meant to be everything like Windows, or anything like Linux. It has a specific market that complements Android's mobile device market.
Well who's fault is that? People can think what they want, nobody is forcing them to "waste" money.
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]So thanks again for answering the query, if you want to run your own software, then Chrome OS is the wrong OS.[/citation]
It is not about running your own software so much as running the wrong software and hardware. If you're running Adobe Photoshop then you're not using a low-powered laptop. This is what Chrome OS is initially being targeted at (and anyone who can stick with cloud apps). If you need more flexibility or you plan to use a proper desktop then you'll need Windows or Linux, because Chrome OS is not meant to be everything like Windows, or anything like Linux. It has a specific market that complements Android's mobile device market.
randomizer
Distinguished
- Jul 24, 2006
- 880
- 0
- 19,260
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]as long as I can take my software with me.[/citation]
Then you better start bitching to the developers because nobody else is going to make it work on another OS 😉 (ah, the MS lock-in)
Then you better start bitching to the developers because nobody else is going to make it work on another OS 😉 (ah, the MS lock-in)
orionantares
Distinguished
- Jan 30, 2010
- 119
- 0
- 18,630
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]That's not how Google want's it to appear, they are trying to spin a "Steve Jobs" style "reality distortion field".The story basically says that over at Google they are kicking Windows to the curb. It is initially for netbooks but will also be released for desktops, tablets, etc.This tells me that they intend to use it for all computing tasks, certainly not just simple web browsing or playing games on Candystand.By all means, I have no issues with a competing OS and would be glad to have it on a future machine - as long as I can take my software with me.[/citation]
And they could very well do that. The cloud design isn't limited to just data storage but also includes server side program hosting. I know plenty of IT people that would love being able to buy a server license for software and just service the server instead of having to go out to all the clients to service them. The market segments that Google is targeting for the Chrome OS seems to be netbooks/tablets and thin business clients. It's not going to be something that can replace power applications, you'll still need linux or windows for those but it is something that could end up in certain business applications if it can be used with internal servers and isn't just limited to Google cloud servers.
And they could very well do that. The cloud design isn't limited to just data storage but also includes server side program hosting. I know plenty of IT people that would love being able to buy a server license for software and just service the server instead of having to go out to all the clients to service them. The market segments that Google is targeting for the Chrome OS seems to be netbooks/tablets and thin business clients. It's not going to be something that can replace power applications, you'll still need linux or windows for those but it is something that could end up in certain business applications if it can be used with internal servers and isn't just limited to Google cloud servers.
- Sep 6, 2008
- 3,485
- 0
- 20,730
randomizer
Distinguished
- Jul 24, 2006
- 880
- 0
- 19,260
[citation][nom]eddieroolz[/nom]I like having my locally-installed applications, thank you.[/citation]
Same. I could not bring myself to use Google Docs or anything but their search because I simply don't like Google. I trust them almost as little as my Government.
Same. I could not bring myself to use Google Docs or anything but their search because I simply don't like Google. I trust them almost as little as my Government.
- Status
Similar threads
Facebook
Twitter