Google’s Chrome will see 2010 release

Seriously, I hate the idea of having some corporation have access to my personal files, more when their cloud services are being attacked on a regular basis.

I find it too comfortable to just have my files stored locally and secure them as I see fit. With a cloud service all I've got is a corporation's word and wishful thinking. I think people should never trust sensitive information to this model... I mean, what's wrong with an OS stored locally that takes advantage of your hardware?

Seriously, Google should get their crap together if they're going to take on MS on this area.

A lame linux knock off isn't gonna cut it. You people are getting caught in the hype.

If Chrome can Game then it's Game Over for Microsoft.

Microsoft's last stranglehold is PC gaming. Can Chrome crack it?

Microsoft's last stranglehold is PC Gaming. Can Chrome do gaming? If so then it's "game over" for Microsoft ;-)

having enough function and local storage to do some *editing* off-line, but surely not *every* task. ... And how is this different, let alone better, from what I've been able to do with a portable for the last fifteen years, EXCEPT that Google now has access to my data?

You don't really answer Mike, just try to sell us on a new way of doing same old things, only in public.

I would probably still rather have something with x86_64 running windows than arm running chrome.

I'd be happy for them to prove me wrong, but if the past is an indicator of the future, the price difference for one running windows will be almost nothing because ms heavily discounts it for ultraportable devices like netbooks and tablets.

I doubt I'm the only person who doesn't need to run apps that only have windows versions sometimes. Just like the whole flash vs html5 argument, there are websites that use flash that I want to work. And html 5 may be able to replace the bulk of flash eventually but it sure doesn't today.

"You don't need to redesign Gmail for it to work on Chrome. Facebook does not need to write a new app for Chrome."

These are web based applications that are supported in the browser, what have they got to do with the creation of a new os?

Mike, you need to catch up on the technology. You have to step out of the 1980s PC application model to understand how this stuff really works.

HTML5 supports local data stores -- standardizing the concept that Google originally demonstrated with Google Gears.

That means a Web application can work offline. Google Docs has had this capability for years now. I've written documents and worked on spreadsheets while on airliners. You sync with the cloud when you land.

As for "the task manager or its equivalent" -- that would be the Chrome Task Manager. Try it and see.

Chrome (the browser) manages multiple processes that are carefully protected from one another. You can call them "pages" if you want, but they really are applications, written in HTML5 and Javascript. Is Gmail a "Web page?" Is Google Docs a "Web page?"

You can get a USB image and try out Chromium OS (the open build) here: http://chromeos.hexxeh.net/

If it likes your hardware, you'll discover that it's blazingly fast to boot, takes you straight into a browser (after you log in with your Google account), and includes links to Web-based apps.

That's the extent of it. There is no desktop. It's not for running Photoshop or even the GIMP. Keep in mind that it's targeted at very specific low-end hardware configurations.

Here's the thing, there are still places where there is no wi-fi, so how can these 'apps' work in a place like that if they are all web-based?

Oh, and check task manager or it's equivalent. The web browser is an app, most everything else is a web page. Facebook is not an app, the browser is the app.

My kid has an iPod touch, it takes forever to load anything web-based in the front yard, and it's impossible in the car. Why would I go with a web-based "OS" to save money if it forces me into a 3G plan?

Only being able to use a computer at a hot-spot is little better than only being able to use it when it's plugged into the wall. The only thing it saves is that people won't be tripping over wires.

Who said Chrome OS was meant to substitute Windows in your workstation? It doesn't need to run Photoshop, It gets Google Docs for office aplications.
The target here are netbooks and tablets. Can you run photoshop in an iPad?
What I'm skeptical is about storage. If the damn thing needs a net connection for everything, storing data and running apps, yeah, it'll be pretty useless.

MS Office, Photoshop for the user who barely affors a £200 laptop??? You must be kidding guys. Nobody says Chrome OS is going to replace a regular workstation, but it's more than enough for all upcomming slates/pads/netbooks/smartphones/TVs/granny laptops, etc.

And the first thing the customer will ask to use on there £200 laptop running Chrome is "how do I run Itunes?". At which point the shop at hand will sell a copy of Windows. Yes these machines will sell quiet well, but simply as a cheap machine to whack Windows on. Customers don't care what operating system it uses, they just want the applications they are used to. Word? Excel? Powerpoint? Itunes? Photoshop...give them those options and yes, they will use it. Without, and it's only going to get formatted over.

I keep thinking that "Chrome" is a sly oblique reference to distracting people with something shiny while actually slipping them the first version of the operating system for Orwell's telescreens.

Sorry, but the time of a web-only OS hasn't come yet. At least 5 more years are necessary for this.

Very soon the Chrome OS will allow "Apps" the way Steve Jobs did while initially hoping that the world would use "web apps". And so the ChromeOS will become another Linux distro...probably the best one though.

"It's no wonder that Google let it be known earlier this week that it is banning its employees from using Windows. µ"

And will come round their home and delete/trash any kiddies PC that dare run the VoleWare.