As I point out in a related a article at http://www.mojocode.com/content/google-announces-chrome-operating-system, Google will be defining what it means for Chrome OS to be successful. 32 million netbooks would be a success by anyone else's measure.
Also, while "cloud-centric" (Chrome is built from the ground up for the 'net), Chrome will be gears-enabled (most Google apps will work offline) and will probably have a developer's API and marketplace, just like Android does.
Certain apps will always be a problem, but there will be apps that will be "good enough".

As I point out in a related a href="http:" / article /a , Google will be defining what it means for Chrome OS to be successful. 32 million netbooks would be a success by anyone else's measure.

Also, while "cloud-centric" (Chrome is built from the ground up for the 'net), Chrome will be gears-enabled (most Google apps will work offline) and will probably have a developer's API and marketplace, just like Android does.

Certain apps will always be a problem, but there will be apps that will be "good enough".

Why do people keep on insisting it is an OS? We may as well say KDE OS or Gnome OS etc Enlightenment etc as well. Even then is Google going to do something like KDE?

I seriously doubt it. Sounds like it is going to be a very cut down OS, along with a crap windowing system and with crappy tools included. My money is on this, Chrome shall probably load when the desktop does and everything shall be controlled through Chrome eeeeeek sic. It reminds me of Active Desktop with a Web Page on display eeek and nothing else eeeeeeeeeeek! Runs and hides...

I don't want a netbook running a "cut down" linux ...

... what I can't wait to see is someone getting Chrome OS running on a Crunchpad! (rather than just being a browser, why not make it a Chrome OS "tablet")

I think Google are starting to lose the plot and are letting their egos bypass common sense, a complete opposite of what they were doing a few years ago.

The decision to base Chrome on a Safari engine instead of Mozilla was stupid and short-sighted, why re-invent the wheel anyway when they were having such good success with Firefox? Now they are going to base an OS on the same dodgy Safari-based browser.

Look what happened to Microsoft when they started listening to the marketing people instead of the people with brains and common sense.

First these things are underpowered -- few if any even have dual processors (so Im not sure whay people keep thinking they will be 'gaming' machines)

They still have too limited battery life to be used as true stand alone portables.

So what is left for them to be? Convienent portable data access (possibly via McCloud if you have consistant access to a WIFI link).

Browsing, playing web games, things like that between the times you have access to a real PC (if you need one) for more demanding uses.

Media feeds??? maybe (most cant play CDs, but if your WIFI bandwidth is high enough (AND consistant) video can work.

How much (OS) will the user ever deal with outside the 'Browser' wont matter much if the primary uses dont need such.

Security of data (a primary issue for Cloud procssing ) might not concern alot of people if all they do is check ball scores and watch TV shows and play gambling games.

Actually, Microsoft got it wrong as the Unix slash came first.

Just like driving on the right is all wrong.

Driving on the left side of the road is best, accidents are less frequent and driving on the left came first.

So the forward slash is just how it should be.

I do find it quite interesting how the Microsoft fanbois comment hit that "linux is failing".

Perhaps they should drop their trousers so we can hear them more clearly.

If you want a true demonstration of "failure" just look at Vista.

The ONLY way Linux will ever succeed is if the programmers and current Linux users take on a drastic change in thinking on how it should work. Something has to happen that is unthinkably horrifying for these people.

The directory slash has to go the opposite direction.

By the same logic OSX is just another BSD with a bit of icing.
The fact remains that nobody has seen what chrome OS looks and handles like, therefore such early speculations, and criticisms, are pointless.

I agree with one point in the article, computer games are absolutely necessary. MS has done very well on the back of DirectX. Linux has found it hard to keep up. Microsoft works directly with the GFX card manufacturers to help specify new versions of DirectX. For Chrome OS to succeed on the games front it needs two things:

1. An awesome and high-performance Graphics interface

2. Support from Game Devs

If google interfaces with the graphics card manufacturers and pushes new technology into OpenGL it may have item 1. For item 2 its about convincing the game dev houses they can make lots of money from supporting the new platform, and cut out the publishers (who game dev houses often hate!). I think if google run an app store model and handle that side of things, it could be a real success.

Funny how Chrome OS was announced roughly the same time as Gaikai (service to stream games over internet).
If MS's dominance is down to 1) Office Apps 2) Games then by the time Chrome OS is launched there may well be online equivalents for both (if Google give Docs the polish it needs - and add good offline support).
I prefer the idea of having apps that run on my machine rather than rely on the tinternet, but that's because I'm old - will the new wikipedia generation have the same prejudices, perhaps not?

Hello!
I think the problem is cloud computing.
Cloud computing is based on the assumption of a high quality and cheap network.

So, is it true?

hmmm....

Even if GCOS hasn an underlying Linux OS, the expectations being setup are just opposite to those of another Open Source distro. They are talking about an Apple-like "it just works" mantra for what it's essentially a web browser appliance, period, no DIY, no configs, no chance of getting lost in a Linux world.

So it being Linux is the least important factor, customer-wise, as users don't want to see its Linux innards ever.

If The Goog bought BeOS from Palm, and released it anew, oh the ironic poetry.

Apple, having passed over Be for NeXt could be cut with the weapon it dropped.

Microsoft, being oblivious to everything in the 90s, having missed the chance to pay attention to the coming parallism that gives us multiple cores today that sit idle.

BeOS is the solution to today's hardware problems, but no one will think beyond NIH.

I hope Google Chrome OS takes off. And for for the Linux haters out there, make sure your anti-virus is up to date before surfing the web with your swiss chees OS using a registry system and needing to be defraged because the base file system is so f*cked up.

Saying that it's just another linux distro except IT HAS GOOGLE backing it is asinine. YES, happens to be a pretty big diffference. Not having a backer that could, in any way, match the might and money of MS, is the real reason why linux has not gained traction. IT certainly isn't, as we all know, because of MS great and satisfying products!

So, yes, glossing over that key point, and then, concluding "it MIGHT fail"....wow, thanks for the insight Einstein.

1. google's backing is they key difference
2.past linux failures mean nothing, and you failed to point out how they are relevent in any way
3.it might fail, sure, it might. But simply speculating that it MIGHT, it pretty vacuous without any actual rational....

Why?

Because Chrome is a quasi "always on" OS. I'll be like Kitchen Aid. Switch it on an use it.

Instant on: That is a killer feature in my eyes.

Devices with Google's Chrome OS won't be as flexible as Windows machines, but those device will just do what they are supposed to do.

People will find, that for the first time in their career as buyers of electronics gadgets they will be able to use the features that are printed on the box the gadget came in.

Just look at a Symbian driven Nokia phones. Comes with a lot of stuff, but most of it is rarely used by the average consumer because using those features just consumes too much of one's attention and concentration. Just have a look at Nokia's users manual. The first impulse of consumers is the urge to throw it in a dust bin because it is made in a shitty way. One wonders whether anyone at Nokia actually reads those manuals. So Chrome OS is doing something similar like Apple, but in a different way.

Chrome OS will not replace W7 on notebooks or desktops but Chrome OS will find its way into many gadgets including SmartPhones, (TV-integrated) set-top-boxes and other stuff.

Google is giving internet users a positive experience every time they use the internet. People trust Google.

So Google is big enough to make it happen, I think.

And at the end of the day, the whole Linux community will benefit from Google OSes popularity.

In a couple or more years high speed internet access will be as standard as warm water off the tap and everything will be connected to the Internet, including white goods, door bells and light switches. And Chrome OS also will be a good and cheap (free) user interface for those as well.

did anyone think they might not be going directly after Microsoft?? They have started looking at developing software for netbooks, there not exactly game playing machines, or high end workstations. there almost a closed platform remember.

so firstly, all the google os software already can be used in all windows desktops. so its not completely incomparable.

I wouldn't be surprised if google use a very different business model to what people expect. think less desktop and more mobile phone e.g. app store.

i am skeptical, but i think if anyone has a chance of pulling it off its google. i cant see it replacing my desktop for a very long time, but if they get it right, it may well open a door. baby steps first.

Just like Microsoft and several others who tried to compete with Google search engine and failed, Google and others who try to compete with Microsoft will also fail. The simple fact is that when a company produces a successful product before any other will dominate the market and will have the loyalty of its customers. Additionally, XP has most of the bugs out and supports a multitude of hardware and software. Google OS Chrome need years to iron out most of its bugs.

a decent version of flash for linux (for youtube vids and games) . Also they may lience the H624 codec for Linux platform to?
This would cover a large percentage of what most people would use the internet for.

I'm happy with using online docs so I wouldn't care about office.

(The nearest I've used to this so far is the xpud distro)

All this hype about an OS that few people have seen! The source code hasn't been released yet!

How about we wait before we make ridiculous judgments and guesses, eh?

#1 It will fail because it's "cloud" computing. Has been tried over and over and over ... and over again by many companies and it never really catches on.

#2 Runs on crappy netbooks. Nobody wants to use a netbook full time. This means the OS won't be used to do much anyway even if it were successful. Heavy usage of Netbooks would stress eyes and hands :(

#3 Linux kernel only. This is great, getting rid of all the crap that Linux distro's plop down on top. Maybe someone will make proper use of the kernel and build a desktop OS that doesn't have to be fixed everytime I want to install something that is'nt prepackaged specifically for that distro version. No X rejoice in glee.

The Wintel monopoly did not truly own everything (in the home) until a sound card and joystick were added to the PC. Give consumers a LINUX distro were they can put the CD or DVD in and their game plays, and then you can start talking about the death of Windows. You guys seem to forget the principle of "good enough."

Details are too sparse, but from the sounds of it, it will only be based on the Linux kernel. Every other "Linux" distribution uses GNU as the operating system. Of course, they could also be using GNU.

Personally, I think GNU is absolutely useless for desktops. Its great as a server OS, but when it comes to a personal user experience, its built to be compatible with a 40 year old operating system. Hell the command line is still built to work at 80x60!

Be interesting to see where they take it.

There's probably less than 20 windows apps that are absolute must haves for the majority of the population. If you really want to loosen the windows stranglehold these need to be addressed in one of two ways, make an alternative that's honestly just as good, or convince the company making the windows version to make a linux version. I favor the second option actually. Linux users need to get used to the idea that not all software is free and how many pathetic open source wannabe apps have we all used before deciding photoshop really is the best, microsoft office isn't going anywhere etc.

Instead of everybody and their dog making their own OS maybe they should pick an area of serious linux deficiency and address that. Google could make a directx layer or directx alternative with easy migration tools for game developers. Huge project... yes, but probably necessary. Pay adobe some money, offer some help, whatever .. and get photoshop on linux or work with companies to make sure their app's work with wine. It could be done with some financial persuasion. That's the only way Linux will succeed, get the major everyday apps working on it and supported by the vendors. Otherwise people will just pay the small premium for windows so they can use their computer for what they bought it for - to run their programs :-)

There is one target feature of the Chrome O/S that everyone seems overlook: Google is aiming for it to boot up and have you surfing the net in seconds. That's exactly what's needed for netbooks, but would also be very nice on any PC.

Think about it for a second. It's nearly 2010 and we still have to wait 5 minutes for our computers to boot up, even if all we want to do is quickly check the flippin news headlines. There must be a better solution!

If Google can provide an operating system that is small, fast, free and boots in seconds, then surely it will be successful?

I'm dreaming of another OS option. I'm more than tired of the endless parade of "upgrades" from MS that do nothing more than rearrange the icons on my desktop and make my life harder. Oh, and rob me blind. I have 20 PCs with MS on them because... I have to. No choices. The software I need for my business does not support other OS's. And now MS is on my phone, and that really sucks.
Please Google, take me away...

Its too early to comment something like this on upcoming Google Chrome OS.

Have a look at Ubuntu, it almost has all the features supported by Windows & much user friendly than windows.

If Chrome is build over a linux kernel, doesn't suggest that it is a new OS, it is been in developed & improvised since 1970.

I suppose you may be browsing this page on Chrome!!

Google's search engine - Its the key to surf on internet for millions. Many amateurs search for 'yahoo' or 'gmail' at Google search to their mail. It has made internet that easy

GOOglE SmoOGLE, i lIke to OOgle. OS bloSES, HoW dO THEse dANG cumputERS wORkes? i TYPE, I schmipe, i wEAr DIAP. aLCOhol GOOd, druGS BEstEst.

CHRomE is scMOme, aRM is LEg, wheRE doEs it EveR enD.

dravonhek

Wine is quite good at running a lot of Win32 apps now
- particularly the sort of apps likely to run on a netbook (i.e. basic apps)
- so if google implemented Wine well this could get over some of the Linux limitations

- and Google already have a lot of wine experience...

back in the dark ages of internets...(2000) i used the Googgle search for the 1st time... fantastic....

...9 years later... getting worse but still better than others.

If someone offered me Chrome OS then in exchange for WinME (after 2k forget it) I would have jumped at the chance.... do-no-evil et al.

Now I would not in a million years give all my data to Google, hence why I use Iron (SRware's , no ET phone home Chome)... and what ppl are missing .... in the cloud you don't own your data, u can't touch it... u can't delete it...it will be there until G (not God) decides it needs it no more.

Your ISP's tube up the spout and your $1B proposal is stuck in a cloud? Try explaining to your boss why you had to VPN from a net cafe just so you can file that report.

What about saving stuff? I click the disk icon and I know my stuff is saved.... G.Docs? lose conn mid way and your data is fuked!

The biggest deal braker? Games.

Right now I trust MS 100% more than Goog. They have been slapped around for 20 years... goog is on their honeymoon.

I think the most people are about sick of the windows domination, it will not overtake microsoft this round, but if they keep at it and create a full pledged OS i'd put my money on it...in 5-8 years of course. Gaming does push the OS sales as i'm a victim of it myself and because Google to me as marketed itself as like a sly cat i believe this is one small step for them but the stairway as yet to be climbed....But they will! Congrads Google, you have my support!

No matter what Google does/adds to the Linux kernel, unless problems like
- the lack of interoperability with an AD like directory service,
- the lack of a good spreadsheet editor/word processor (yeah OOo is OK feature set wise, but come on, who in an office has the time to wait 20 secs. for the opening of every stupid document?),
- in general the lack of integrated, centrally manageable enterprise level applications are ironed out, well Chrome OS has as many chances of battling Windows as any other Linux distro.
Don't get me wrong, I like Linux a lot. In fact if it were after me they'd only run Linux in the world :-). But the sad truth is the OSes are not ready for enterprise desktops. And that is where things are decided these days.

It will fail for the same reasons that Linux is failing. The minute the suckers, oops- buyers, find out they can't run their favorite games and apps on it, back it goes.
The second reason, is that web based apps come with costs and problems of their own, and they are very well known. Not the least of which is that they require a broadband internet connection to function. You can start a Windows machine loaded with apps anywhere in the world and it will work just like it does at home. No net needed. That's the standard people expect. That's the reason they go back to the store, and expensive process for the seller, when they don't meet the standard.

Cloud Computing = Bollocks

But that doesn't necessarily mean your apps can't be run locally. From what I've read, nothing's been specifically said beyond using the browser as the primary UI.

I agree that some day cloud-based OSes (Chrome and others) will gain traction. But since you mentioned recession: these OSes need a constant connection not only to browse the web or to keep in touch, but also to run apps.... so basically one has to pay for wireless connectivity (GPRS, HSDPA or whatever) AND (I guess) also for a wired home connectivity (ADSL, cable...). I don't know about you lucky guys who live outside of this stinking place (hint: G8 is here) (2nd hint: don't flame me for the stinking part... i'm a native), but over here that means forking out around 20 € for each. So, my free os, that enables me to run free apps if I agree to be flooded by ads, will cost me 240 € a year (to get wireless connectivity, i'm already paying for ADSL). Otherwise, no spreadsheet, no word-processor.... Wow.... nice way to fight recession!