Google to introduce PC operating system

[vailr]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31...ce-the_new_york_times/

 

[Winterpool]

Ars Technica also had the news a couple of hours ago. Dunno how I missed this. Google OS lives!

Edited: the filthy capitalist in me wonders if the markets will be shorting MSFT or GOOG tomorrow. And perhaps after the smoke clears, the winner will be AAPL (they'll keep making their sweet profit margins on their lovely, distinctive kit).

Direct link to the referenced NY Times story (I'd rather they get the ad hits, since it's their report MSNBC is copying -- and Sulzberger needs the $!)

 

[Sylvanas]

From Google themselves I hope it works out...

 

[xSauronx]

you guys suck, this is on the front page!
http://www.anandtech.com/weblog/showpost.aspx?i=613

not really sure why they wouldnt just want to develop/push android with chrome as a platform but, whatever.

 

[Gamingphreek]

I'm trying to think how an OS that only runs Chrome is going to take a year to develop and, with what purpose, you would release a single function OS.

 

[Winterpool]

Ars Technica listed some reasons why Android might not be such a good fit for a PC (specifically netbook) operating system. I tend to share this scepticism -- what is Android's critical advantage over some other (more PC-ish) Linux derivative other than the Google brand? And now we're getting a Google-branded computer OS.

I'm not sure that Google's official announcement means that Chrome OS will merely be a Chrome browser wrapper (well, foundation is probably a more accurate term). Though perhaps it's not strictly inaccurate to say it's 'an OS designed to do one thing and one thing only: run Google Chrome'. That is its official role, and perhaps Google will do little else than enable that. But as a Linux (and an open-source project), it certainly won't remain the only thing it can do.

I agree with Ryan Smith, however, that it's intended to be a desktop 'cloud OS' (even more so than gOS) and part of Google's ultimate strategy to shift computing from Microsoft's territory to theirs.

 

[Griffinhart]

So, what will the OS offer me that Ubuntu, OSX or Windows doesn't? It sounds like Linux with a Super Simplified UI to run web apps and not much else. I'll grant you that the Google name may give it a better share than Ubuntu alone, but, I'm not sure this news is all that earth shattering.

 

[Chiropteran]

One thing from the original linked article seemed kinda silly:

As an example of how difficult it is to topple a long-established market leader, Google estimates about 30 million people are now using its Chrome browser ? a fraction of those that rely on Microsoft's market-leading Internet Explorer. And there have been various attempts to develop open-source software to undermine Microsoft with relatively little effect.

Uh hello, Firefox?


But as far as the OS itself... personally I would rather run a real Linux distro than a stripped-down browser only system. I just hope that due to Google's efforts things like flash will become better supported on Linux.

 

[StinkyPinky]

Sounds dumb. It's an insult to call that thing an OS.

 

[Winterpool]

I think it's premature to judge the OS -- I for one have my doubts that it will just be a boot screen and Chrome (the browser). In that case, how different would it be from the instant-on 'splash' mini-operating systems an increasing number of vendors are installing on computers to permit quick access to browser and media players without the bloat of Windows?

 

[sportage]

People, even Google, love to hate windows (as they use windows).
If not for MS windows, Google would not exist.
I have tried the Google browser and it sucked.

MS has YEARS of experience behind it, user input and meeting challenges.
I suppose the Google OS will have some users, mostly at the Google HQ.

 

[Nothinman]

People, even Google, love to hate windows (as they use windows).

That doesn't mean their hatred isn't valid. I've accumulated many reasons to hate Windows over the years.

If not for MS windows, Google would not exist.

Pure conjecture, there's no way you can prove that. Things would obviously be different without Windows but unless you've got yourself a flux capacitor you can't say anything about Google, especially since they've got no ties to MS or Windows at all.

MS has YEARS of experience behind it, user input and meeting challenges.

And many more years of experience sitting around complacently.

 

[Sylvanas]

Having read a few more articles on this I am not so sure it's going to work. I'd much rather have a full fledged Linux OS on my Netbook than just a Browser, that seems retarded. I've always said Linux is the best OS for netbooks as you lack the Windows bloat but you still have decent things like FF, Openoffice, a Skype Client and other random stuff which is all you really need- you can do all Google wants you to do FF.

 

[clarkey01]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

People, even Google, love to hate windows (as they use windows).

That doesn't mean their hatred isn't valid. I've accumulated many reasons to hate Windows over the years.

If not for MS windows, Google would not exist.

Pure conjecture, there's no way you can prove that. Things would obviously be different without Windows but unless you've got yourself a flux capacitor you can't say anything about Google, especially since they've got no ties to MS or Windows at all.

MS has YEARS of experience behind it, user input and meeting challenges.

And many more years of experience sitting around complacently.

Hate is a strong world and I would question why you would hate a company who has given so much to the IT industry, sure they have been headaches but they pretty much pioneered modern computing , there are going to be hitches of course..

It's basic physiology that when someone becomes so big, people want to see you fail, be sports, personal life or business.

 

[Nothinman]

Hate is a strong world and I would question why you would hate a company who has given so much to the IT industry,

Yea, hate is a strong word but with all of the grief they've caused me over the years I'm definitely close to it. Some of their products aren't bad like MS SQL (probably because they bought it instead of writing it from scratch themselves) but the majority are a PITA and I cringe when I've got to use them.

 

[tatteredpotato]

Originally posted by: Winterpool
And perhaps after the smoke clears, the winner will be AAPL (they'll keep making their sweet profit margins on their lovely, distinctive kit).

I think Apple stands to lose more market share over this than Microsoft. People who buy Apple computers are the people who are willing to deal with a non-windows environment (something a lot of people aren't willing to do atm).

 

[clarkey01]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Hate is a strong world and I would question why you would hate a company who has given so much to the IT industry,

Yea, hate is a strong word but with all of the grief they've caused me over the years I'm definitely close to it. Some of their products aren't bad like MS SQL (probably because they bought it instead of writing it from scratch themselves) but the majority are a PITA and I cringe when I've got to use them.

Well good job your using something that suits you and it's a good job Vista works just fine for me.

 

[Nothinman]

Well good job your using something that suits you and it's a good job Vista works just fine for me.

At home, yes. I haven't run Windows for years there. But everywhere else I'm subjected to it because so many people are locked into MS' stuff.

 

[frostedflakes]

Originally posted by: StinkyPinky
Sounds dumb. It's an insult to call that thing an OS.

Yeah, color me unimpressed. I guess I should reserve judgment until more information is available, though. Says it will be available on netbooks by 2H 2010, hopefully that means we'll get to see beta versions and such before then. Sounds like the code should be available to build later this fall.

I wouldn't really call this a challenge to Windows either, this product is obviously only intended for a very specific market. Cloud computing makes a lot of sense for netbooks and other low-end platforms, but people are still going to use a full-fledged Windows or Linux OS for their desktops and laptops. Then again netbooks are becoming a pretty big market, so it's smart of Google try and grab a piece of the pie.

 

[imported_Tryckee]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Well good job your using something that suits you and it's a good job Vista works just fine for me.

At home, yes. I haven't run Windows for years there. But everywhere else I'm subjected to it because so many people are locked into MS' stuff.

Following that logic then you probably wouldn't have your job if it weren't for Microsoft. Most of the IT industry owes its existence to Microsoft products and domination. Now I can't quantify that by breaking out spreadsheets and charts, etc., but I have a mighty strong suspicion that is indeed the truth. Oh well...

 

[Nothinman]

Following that logic then you probably wouldn't have your job if it weren't for Microsoft.

I actually got the job because of my Linux knowledge, the Windows stuff came later after I was already working here.

Most of the IT industry owes its existence to Microsoft products and domination.

Yes, but who's to say that what we have now is the best that could've been? If MS had actually had some competition and had to follow open standards to compete consumers would be in a much better position with regards to choise, data exchange, etc.

 

[imported_Tryckee]

Yes, but who's to say that what we have now is the best that could've been? If MS had actually had some competition and had to follow open standards to compete consumers would be in a much better position with regards to choise, data exchange, etc.

True, but at that time MS and a few others were setting/creating the standards given the incompatibility that was rampant then. They cobbled together a working standard and perfected it over time. Remember that most users and corporations were looking for one standard that would make their disparate hardware work together thereby increasing productivity.

Here's another article discussing the Chrome vs Windows OS wars to come.

 

[clarkey01]

Originally posted by: Tryckee

Yes, but who's to say that what we have now is the best that could've been? If MS had actually had some competition and had to follow open standards to compete consumers would be in a much better position with regards to choise, data exchange, etc.

True, but at that time MS and a few others were setting/creating the standards given the incompatibility that was rampant then. They cobbled together a working standard and perfected it over time. Remember that most users and corporations were looking for one standard that would make their disparate hardware work together thereby increasing productivity.

Here's another article discussing the Chrome vs Windows OS wars to come.

I agree with Tryckee

 

[sportage]

In a way MS has competition. A large number of business, once dependant on mainframe computers (non windows), have switched over to ms windows based systems. Or integrated windows based pc's into their IBM, Unisys mainframe systems.

I've always admired MS desire to make the pc experience more pleasurable
to the end user. Old Bill Gates had a dream, and wanted everyone else to
take part in it. Media, communication, internet, you name it.
Yeah, maybe it doesn?t go as smoothly as they (MS) would like, but they do
seem to share the desire to make computing fun.

If Google can actually do what they dream of, then great, but they have some really
huge shoes to fill. It?s not like their OS will be immune to the virus, outdated drivers,
and incompatible hardware issues. But let them go for it...

 

[Nothinman]

True, but at that time MS and a few others were setting/creating the standards given the incompatibility that was rampant then.

The only standards MS set at that time are the ones that became defacto once they became dominant.

They cobbled together a working standard and perfected it over time.

Perfected? I wouldn't even go so far as to say they made it "good", let alone perfect.

In a way MS has competition. A large number of business, once dependant on mainframe computers (non windows), have switched over to ms windows based systems. Or integrated windows based pc's into their IBM, Unisys mainframe systems.

Sure, the POS and mainframe areas are niches that MS hasn't completely taken over yet, just like the mobile market since WinMo sucks. But those are much smaller markets that only the few businesses in those areas care about, most people are concerned with their desktops which MS has effective control over.

I've always admired MS desire to make the pc experience more pleasurable
to the end user. Old Bill Gates had a dream, and wanted everyone else to
take part in it. Media, communication, internet, you name it.
Yeah, maybe it doesn?t go as smoothly as they (MS) would like, but they do
seem to share the desire to make computing fun.

That's the party line now and may have been true originally but I don't know how true it is now. Hell, it's impossible to say anything about the motivations of any company with as many employees as MS.

And enjoy is debatable, I don't know if I actually know anyone who enjoys using Windows. When it works they don't pay attention to it and when it doesn't they're frustrated with it.

If Google can actually do what they dream of, then great, but they have some really
huge shoes to fill. It?s not like their OS will be immune to the virus, outdated drivers,
and incompatible hardware issues. But let them go for it...

No, not immune, but if they play nice with the Linux community it'll be a lot better off.