Mozilla Labs Showcases a Browser Desktop

Status
Not open for further replies.

livebriand

Distinguished
Apr 18, 2011
282
0
18,930
Don't take the same wrong path that Google did. Seriously, these browser-only systems suck. They are incapable. Why would I buy one when I can get a far more capable Windows machine for the same price (or less)?
 

agnickolov

Distinguished
Aug 10, 2006
147
0
18,630
This is not an OS - this is a shell. So this is not like Google's Chrome OS at all. Think of it as Windows 3.x running on top of DOS, whereas Chrome OS is more like Windows 95 or OS/2.
 

Silmarunya

Distinguished
Nov 3, 2009
390
0
18,930
No. No. No. *facepalm*.

1) Don't try to make a knock-off of someone else's idea unless it's truly superior or you got the marketing muscle to sweep the competition off its feet. As much as I like Mozilla, they lack both compared to Google.

2) Why would you want such a browser based OS? As the reviewer said, Mac and Windows (and Linux!) are learning to play nice with web apps, but offer so much more on top of that. And lightweight? There are plenty of Linux distro's designed specifically for being light. They make Chrome OS look bloated, yet offer full desktop functionality.
 

sykozis

Distinguished
Dec 17, 2008
338
0
18,930
[citation][nom]agnickolov[/nom]This is not an OS - this is a shell. So this is not like Google's Chrome OS at all. Think of it as Windows 3.x running on top of DOS, whereas Chrome OS is more like Windows 95 or OS/2.[/citation]
Win9x ran on top of Dos6.x....as opposed to Dos5.x as Win1-3.x needed. ChromeOS would be more like WinNT.... which, even that would be wrong as ChromeOS is little more than a modified version of the Chrome browser running on top of Linux.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.