Google pushes Chrome OS
GOOGLE has been trying to impress the world plus dog with its Chrome operating system, which it says boots up in only seven seconds.
The Android based operating system, which is called Chrome OS, is being championed as a seven second wonder. In other words it only takes seven second to boot up. Then the user appears to be afflicted with shedloads of Googlish web based applications.
True, it has not even made a beta yet, but it is designed to show the great unwashed how clever the search engine outfit is.
Basically the idea is to put more users onto the cloud systems where their data and software are stored at Google.
Not surprisingly, many have seen the new Chrome OS as a potential attacker on Microsoft's glorious empire and certainly there is some indication that that Vole is a little uneasy.
Rather than ignoring the announcement like a self-confident little Vole, Microsoft actually went onto the attack, saying its customers are already voicing their approval of the way Windows 7 just works - across the Web and on the desktop. In other words people are too conservative to want to change.
Other rivals have said that Google needs to get that boot time up to "instant on" before it has anything that people will care about.
Woody Hobbs, President and CEO of Phoenix Technologies, the maker of HyperSpace which is "instant on" told us that "Seven seconds is too long. There is no such thing as 'cold boot' for today's mobile PCs such as netbooks and smartbooks. You should be able to use your netbook like you use your smartphone - a press of a button and you are 'on.'"
The Chrome desktop looked similar to the Chrome browser. It includes a handful of smaller tabs that Google calls application tabs, which are meant to run the programs people use most often, like e-mail or calendar software.
To be fair to Google, the outfit said it was working to make the start-up time even faster. It is in talks with hardware makers planning to build machines that used the operating system. Google said it had been pushing them to make netbooks that were slightly larger than today's models and included full-size keyboards.
Although the desktop OS is not even in Beta, Google does not appear to be gunning for Microsoft yet, despite what the IT press seems to be saying. Chrome does not appear to be aiming for games, or serious business software. In fact it looks exactly like a mobile OS for netbooks. µ
Share this:
ShareBusiness Intelligence Software
Customer Relationship Management (CRM)
Enterprise Accounting Software
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
Enterprise Systems Management
Chrome OS should do well on Smartbooks, that is, little computers that run the ARM processor.
Microsoft's Desktop Windows doesn't work on an ARM processor. Leaving Google with the market to itself.
Smartbooks with ARM processors have lots of advantages. They should be low cost. And they will consume very little battery power (netbooks with Intel's Atom processor use more juice than ARM smartbooks).
If you're traveling (or flying on long-haul flights), you don't want a power guzzling laptop. A smartbook with a long battery life (and Chrome OS) will be great.
This article is so "hip" that I can totally get down with what I am seeing written here! Chrome is the new pink! In the world of push-me-pull-you technotastic browser proliferation, dynamic writing stylz on the topic are bound to get this columnist an award from NSNC.
smart phones - "instant on", in what world is this guy living? show me any phone which loads it gui, reads the sim, and is ready for interaction instantly. erm..... thought not
Chrome OS isn't based on Android.
"Google Chrome OS is a new project, separate from Android..." - (Official Google Chrome OS blog: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/introducing-google-chrome-os.html)
Why have I not heard the term 'Thin Client' yet when it comes to Google OS ?
Clearly this OS is no more than an enhanced webbrowser. "the net is the computer".
So ask yourself, are you ready for Utility computing ? Paying monthly subscriptions so you can have access to your precious data living on a Cloud? Make sure you have a way to get your data off that cloud before you jump on it.
claiming the world would soon be using web based applications and that was over a decade ago. I use online backup, that I pay for, and it works fairly well but the three or four times I have had to do a complete system recovery there has always been data missing.
I'm not ready yet to use cloud applications for any business necessities....not for now.
Its just another variant of Linux end off
A first world, middle class, city dwellers OS!
I have downloaded, compiled and running in a VM. It seems fast and stable with a simple user interface and intuitive user operation. It’s not a threat to present day OS’s as it’s obviously not an OS for general computer operations. It’s an OS for online operations and turns an internet capable device into a screen and keyboard dumb terminal linking directly into Google as the mainframe. The concept relates to the evolution of modern computer use with many people only using their computers for browsing.
The problem is for those who want to work offline, don’t want to be tied to Google (what if they start charging or fail), and where internet access is patchy or costly (download limits or dial up anyone).
Chrome OS is not "Android-based".
Google freely admit it's basically the Chrome browser plus drivers - and that's no bad thing - unless you're Dell.
What's the point of an ultraportable that requires internet access to do anything?
Maybe it's because I live in Canada and I go places even a cellular usb stick doesn't have internet, but I'm guessing a $250 netbook (presumably these will be super cheap) that requires a $40/month internet connection isn't a winner. Sounds to me like a facebook terminal to give to your teenager or something. Except without iTunes, I doubt they'd want it.
Instead of Microsoft sticking to it's "fat client" model, just imagine if a corporation decided to transition to the thin-client Chrome-OS for all its users:
- A huge reduction in system administration costs, licencing fees and headaches, not having to constantly patch and maintain thousands of complex and vulnerable PC's.
- A huge reduction in hardware costs, as all you would need would be tiny, Atom-powered thin clients running Chrome-OS from flash memory.
- This in exchange for paying Google a flat (and probably, very reasonable) fee to safeguard and guarantee the integrity of your corporate data.
The IT budgets of large corporations are tens of millions of dollars per year, so quickly transitioning to a thin-client, cloud-based model for most users makes a lot of sense (and provides a huge competitive advantage).
However, there will still be a few users that require fat clients (engineers, CAD, accountants). But many of them could also use Linux (no more Microsoft taxes!).
As some have mentioned, there may well be times when travellers cannot access the Internet, and having their computers non-functional during these times would really limit the uptake of a completely web-based Chrome-OS. So why not incorporate a web server into the local machine which could store a copy of the user's most recent data (flagging the user that Chrome-OS is in offline mode)? If users could have some control over which data was sent to the cloud, and what was stored on this local (private) server, that could help address any concerns over privacy, and provide users with more confidence over their ability to control the new OS.
This has parallels to those people who think electrical cars are more eco-friendly when it just moves the pollution to the the power generators. Seven seconds boot, zero seconds to come out of sleep mode. Many seconds to download, depending on the state of the connection. Pay an extra monthy fee for a mobile data connection, or try to find free Wifi wherever you go. No thanks. Maybe if Google buys a mobile service company and provides free connections like Amazon does with its Kindle it'll take off.
the power plants have strick enviromental codes. instead of igniting gas or deassle in an engine. electric cars do help slow polution.
"Google does not appear to be gunning for Microsoft yet" .....
It's right, not yet. We all know now that Canonical is working with Google for this project. How far will this cooperation will go? This is my point: very much. Indeed I bet that Google will end buying Canonical. Let's note: First, Google said Chrome would not target the desktop in the earlier stage, but later it could. Second, Google said they will not go to reinvent as far as they can embrace already existing projects. Third, Mark is an entrepreneur that has made his fortune piking tech companies, improving and later selling them. Last big sale financed his walk to the space. He may well now be wishing to try Mars :)
Who boots a computer today? I personally only sleep mine, when revives in 2 seconds. And, boot only when security updates are needed. Even then my machine is up in less than 30 seconds. Besides, so I really need to be so anal to be tied to my machine that waiting 30 seconds is a bad thing?
I already thought the thin client desktop was a reality. It's called SunRay.
Better still, you're not tied down to one OS: You can run what you like on a server hooked up for SunRay services - Windows, Solaris, Linux, BSD, pretty much anything that will run under VMware - and you have complete session portability: Pull out your smart card, run down a couple of flights of stairs to the meeting room, stick it in there, and your desktop follows you, with everything open as you left it. Voilá!
One OS doesn't fit all. Engineers like UNIX. Marketing wonks and PowerPoint-addicted managers like Windows. With a SunRay, the OS you get is determined by your card, not the device that's sitting on your desk. Why pay for Windows licences for everyone? Why try to subject managers and Marketing to the vagaries of UNIX? Both are equally repugnant. Have both worlds - and a simple desktop support policy, at the same time.
That's one system you can REALLY use the line "Have you tried turning it off and on again?" on, with your users. If a SunRay is broken, simply come along with a new one, plug it in, and the user carries on from where they left off - no need to save their work´, or anything silly like that. It just works.
Mobile phones are becoming very common, and Google realise that if you have a phone then you already have an internet mobile account (sort of).
The Mobile operators will love it. No doubt they are already working out plans for "Phone and Computer".
Hardware manufacturers are probably looking at ways to have a mobile slot for sims/aerial etc.
The mobile data age is here. Google are structuring themselves to make a decent attack and be the first at providing it all. Currently they are setting up all the other stuff like applications, email, etc and then the OS.
Google are being clever.
Google OS will likely run on my mobile phone, HTC Touch HD currently running Windows Mobile 6.1.
Competition means we win.
Dear Oliver
Not meaning this to be a technical run-around but the Sunray's you mention are very similar in principle to Chrome OS running on say a netbook.
Chrome OS boots a lean linux kernel and attaches the hardware (screen, keyboard mouse) and then launches a primary Application, a Web-browser, that in turn gives the user all his/her applications hosted elsewhere, while ...
Sunray imbedded firmware boots and attaches the hardware (screen, keyboard mouse) and then launches what is best described as a remote X session on your Solaris or Linux based workstation manager server that then runs a primary Application, either a RDP client or VMWare Viewer etc, that in turn gives the user all his applications hosted elsewhere, either on a RDP server running windows, or a Virtual PC hosted on some server.
You could indeed have the SunRay server merely launch a Browser (currently possible with Firefox) but Google Chrome browser could possible work in future (assuming it would launch on Solaris) and your Sunray would be a Chrome OS replacement - Even easier actually as you won't need the VMWare hosts or RDP Terminal servers ...
(By the way, Aquaconnect to an RDP server for Mac OS Server, so you can even run Apple OS on Sunray)
The major difference between Sunray and Chrome is simply that Sunray's are managed from a server - The primary App can be managed / changed, etc. All your Sunray card does is attach to the X session that's hosted on the server, in turn running whatever APP you desired.
Noted the benefits are hotdesk, quick on/off, etc. but see how quickly your users on/off when all your Sunray Workstation Servers are down / Same argument of usefulness for a Chrome OS netbook without internet connection.
However, having said all that, I personally doubt "Thin Client" is what Google had in mind when they dreamed up Chrome OS - I still believe Google at it's core makes money from search ... To get people to click the links that pay the bills while using search, Google needs them on the internet, so it's likely whatever Google does will drive people there - Chrome OS as I see it is merely trying to get folks onto the 'net an into search faster and with less intermediary (A bulky OS that might distract them with local applications or blue screens of death, etc.). Folks aren't "clicking" on Adwords while using Microsoft Word on their Windows 7 netbooks that are not connected to the internet, however have a link in a small 20% column of the screen related to what people are reading in their Gmail in the other 80% after booting up in 7 seconds and you're paying the bills for Google ... (Something Sunrays do very rarely)