or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Steve Ballmer laughs off Google's Chrome OS threat
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Steve Ballmer laughs off Google's Chrome OS threat - Page 2

post #41 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh View Post


I wonder how long it will take MS to create a browser based OS themselves...

I don't think they have the vision or the skills to do that, otherwise, they might have already.

Then again, they are now led by a marketer who knows a bit about software, not a software person who knows how to market
post #42 of 143
Web standards take ages to finalize. Do people really think if Google wants to add a new feature to one of their web apps, and HTML5 doesn't support it, they won't just add a proprietary extension to Chrome/Chrome OS? Of course they will. In which case, if these units get too popular, Google could be the next IE/Microsoft.
post #43 of 143
Google may be more successful than Apple in being a serious threat to Microsoft. Although MacBooks are selling very well in USA, Apple still has a very small share in most non-US markets. For some strange reason, people want Microsoft products, even when they crash and don't work as expected. For example, people want Outlook even though they don't understand it (Outlook is very complicated and most people only use a very small part of it). It's a strange thing. I'd rather use OS X than Ubuntu, but a Google branded Linux may be a success. Microsoft, with Ballmer, is tired and nearing its end.
post #44 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by xwiredtva View Post

Their copied office suite seems to do well too. 5 points to anyone who can name where all 5 legs of the Office suite originally came from.

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

From what I remember, Apple paid MS to write Word, Excel, and some other programs as well as Basic. Later MS wrote Powerpoint for Apple.

Well, offhand I know I can get one point. :-)

MS didn't write the original PowerPoint. It was originally a Mac-only piece of software written by a company called Forethought. I remember it from the very earliest Mac days. Microsoft liked the software, bought the company and morphed it into PowerPoint. I remember being quite irked at the time.
No Matte == No Sale :-(
Reply
No Matte == No Sale :-(
Reply
post #45 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by str1f3 View Post

I agree on some things but disagree on others. I also question the viability of something like Google Docs considering that very few people actually use it. The reason Star Office never took off is because Office was always an alternative if you used Windows. The netbook craze proved that people would be willing to move away from Windows and Office. The reason people returned netbooks running Linux was because the OS was lack of driver support and the instability of the OS. Google could alleviate both of those problems because they are Google.

I disagree about the notebooks. Can you show the reason most people returned them was because of drivers? That's not the reason being given. The reason is software compatibility.

And as far as Star Office is concerned, it's, to all purposes, ann exact duplicate of Office, as is Open Office. So no excuse there. Star Office cost $75 a seat. Office is much more for the same number of seats. Open Office is free. This should have made a difference, but it didn't. People don't want alien software. They want what they feel safe with.

Linux is normally credited as being MORE stable than Windows.

Quote:
A Google netbook could cost anywhere from $50-$100 less than a Windows counterpart and wouldn't have to deal with the crippling of features by Microsoft. In a bad economy people will always give that a second look especially if it has the Google brand on it. This is not even considering the savings from the $150 Office student version. That alone is the price of two netbooks.

Maybe. People want those crippling features. If they didn't, Windows wouldn't have over a 90% worldwide marketshare still.

I think you've got hopeful thoughts about the power of the Google brand. I don't. Google isn't known for having its name associated with computers. That will make it a very UNfamilliar brand.

And again, people could save $150 by getting Open Office for freeā€”but they don't.

Quote:
I admit I made a mistake about Chrome. I was talking about the browser and not the OS. Microsoft would have to make Silverlight for Chrome OS for OWC to work.

I doubt they'll do anything that will make the browser any more successful. It isn't in MS's interest to do so.
post #46 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blah64 View Post

Well, offhand I know I can get one point. :-)

MS didn't write the original PowerPoint. It was originally a Mac-only piece of software written by a company called Forethought. I remember it from the very earliest Mac days. Microsoft liked the software, bought the company and morphed it into PowerPoint. I remember being quite irked at the time.

Yeah, well my point was that MS had it for Apple before themselves.
post #47 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Lets look at Star Office from Sun. Completely compatible with Office, and far cheaper. It's free alternative, OpenOffice is also available.

Both are more than viable, they're complete replacements, one is free.

But how much marketshare have they taken? Almost 0%. Why? Because they're really NOT viable, because people don't want them. They want the real thing, even if it costs far more. And if not that, then they can get Student/Teacher edition for much less.

But does the average person know that Star Office and OpenOffice even exist? I'm not so sure.
post #48 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by kzbk81 View Post

Microshit should either accept and move on with Chrome OS or Chrome OS will take Microshit by storm. All it takes is a stable distribution with the applications necessary to run the day to day work. Those things do exist in Linux community for a long time - but people are just used to the Windows and the enterprise and sales guys like to pay money for the services and solutions. A desktop with a Linux distribution and an office suite can be easily realized with $0 in software cost. But if it were a Microshit solution - it would cost the enterprise a per seat cost of anywhere between $300~$500. The sharepoint and outlook and Windows Servers take away money in big quantum when a equivalent MacOS server or a Linux server will be a bargain. (CALs cost big money)

Google being a leader in search and online advertisement - can easily educate and encourage the users. It can create additional pull factors for the people to move on to the Linux world.

Linux has typically failed in past because of obscurity. It's a geeky operating system that hardly anyone in general public knows much about & most don't really care.

Chrome OS would be much different as Google has the perfect PR platform from which to launch their product & they are a very trusted name so people would associate it with quality.

If they can somehow package a demo of chrome OS that would run all self contained inside Windows they could really hit MS hard. Do a whole "If this is how it runs inside of Windows, imagine how it performs without the bloat." Oh man, now that would really hit home.
post #49 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by hezekiahb View Post

Linux has typically failed in past because of obscurity. It's a geeky operating system that hardly anyone in general public knows much about & most don't really care.

Chrome OS would be much different as Google has the perfect PR platform from which to launch their product & they are a very trusted name so people would associate it with quality.

If they can somehow package a demo of chrome OS that would run all self contained inside Windows they could really hit MS hard. Do a whole "If this is how it runs inside of Windows, imagine how it performs without the bloat." Oh man, now that would really hit home.

Linux can already do this. There are plenty of distros which run off a live CD without installing anything on your disk. There are also versions that run under Windows to give you a look and feel.

Prejudices and habits die hard. Microsoft is not in the primary business of selling computers or browsers. Silverlight is their vision of what should be done on the web.
Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
Reply
Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
Reply
post #50 of 143
Ballmer is a joke, really. Look what happens when you put the sales guy in charge.

Whatever Ballmy laughs off today, becomes wildly popular or game-changing tomorrow.

MS hasn't released a remotely compelling or game-changing product since 2001 (and XP was nothing to be proud of.) MS does successive versions (when they get around to it) of the worst mass-market OS in history and an Office suite. It all comes down to their licensing scheme. That's it.

Oh wait, the Xbox. Yes, that worked out well. One wonders where the rest of the R&D money is going.

A prefect metaphor for MS:

post #51 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by aplnub View Post

When Steve Ballmer laughs something off, it bites him in the ass every time! Way to go Steve, now Google is destined to succeed.

I was going to say this.

I just don't know why Ballmer isn't seen as a liability to Microsoft.
post #52 of 143
I think OS X will probably suffer more to Chrome OS than MS will. People will still be force fed MS at work but at home they can by a cheap PC with Chrome OS with Google goodness integrated or splash out more for a MS PC or even more for a Mac. Most consumers want value rather than the best.
post #53 of 143
I think OS X will probably suffer more to Chrome OS than MS will. People will still be force fed MS at work but at home they can by a cheap PC with Chrome OS with Google goodness integrated or splash out more for a MS PC or even more for a Mac. Most consumers want cheap rather than the best.
post #54 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by xwiredtva View Post

5 points to anyone who can name where all 5 legs of the Office suite originally came from.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blah64 View Post

MS didn't write the original PowerPoint. It was originally a Mac-only piece of software written by a company called Forethought. I remember it from the very earliest Mac days. Microsoft liked the software, bought the company and morphed it into PowerPoint. I remember being quite irked at the time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Yeah, well my point was that MS had it for Apple before themselves.

While that may be a true statement, the challenge was to name where it originally came from. But I agree that AjitMD was mistaken.

xwiredtva, I formally request my one point!

A bit more:
- Microsoft's first spreadsheet was Multiplan, which was released in 1982, prior to Mac, however the first release named "Excel" was on the Mac in 1985, and not for Windows until 1987.
- Word, on the other hand, was first released as Microsoft Word for the IBM PC in 1983, prior to the public release of the first Mac. So unless Word existed for the Lisa, PCs had it first.
No Matte == No Sale :-(
Reply
No Matte == No Sale :-(
Reply
post #55 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by hezekiahb View Post

Linux has typically failed in past because of obscurity. It's a geeky operating system that hardly anyone in general public knows much about & most don't really care.

Chrome OS would be much different as Google has the perfect PR platform from which to launch their product & they are a very trusted name so people would associate it with quality.

If they can somehow package a demo of chrome OS that would run all self contained inside Windows they could really hit MS hard. Do a whole "If this is how it runs inside of Windows, imagine how it performs without the bloat." Oh man, now that would really hit home.


I think you kind of hit the point here. While most people on these forums know about free and proven alternatives to both MS Office and Windows, the end user does not know. And maybe they don't care. Sheep need to be led. And the marketing machine at MS has very deep pockets, and are capable of convincing most people that even the worst product is a must have.
If Linux and Open Office had similar marketing budgets, or even a fraction of them, the awareness could get out there, and result in a higher install base. But it's not going to happen... unless someone with large pockets gets on board. Google is the most likely at this stage, so their entrance to the ring should be welcomed.
The only other alternative would be if all PC manufacturers unanimously agreed to dump MS and support Linux to potentially save money and gain back some control. But this won't happen either, because no one wants to be first, and even when someone does jump the MS ship, it will be alienated, most likely by the MS negative marketing campaign machine. So they all have to jump ship at the same time... wishful thinking.
post #56 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by iVlad View Post

Ya, I will laugh at Microsoft when Chrome OS is gonna be the next popular thing after iPhone. Microsoft has no innovation, the only thing they can do is gaming. So let them have that.

It only took buying Bungie, (maker of Games for the Mac) to gain that success in gaming.
post #57 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Ballmer is a joke, really. Look what happens when you put the sales guy in charge.

Whatever Ballmy laughs off today, becomes wildly popular or game-changing tomorrow.

MS hasn't released a remotely compelling or game-changing product since 2001 (and XP was nothing to be proud of.) MS does successive versions (when they get around to it) of the worst mass-market OS in history and an Office suite. It all comes down to their licensing scheme. That's it.

Oh wait, the Xbox. Yes, that worked out well. One wonders where the rest of the R&D money is going.

A prefect metaphor for MS:



The first xbox didn't make a profit, and barely dented the PS2 dominance. Outside the US the first xbox was pretty insignificant. The 360 was rushed to market to get a head start on the PS3 and was plagued by some of the highest rate of hardware failures ever seen. And while it has gained traction now (moreso in the US than Europe or Asia) the Wii has well and truly trumped it. The 360 still doesn't make much in the way of profits either.
But I get your point about it being a relatively bright light. But really, the developers are the ones to thank for that. Because it started as a dud, developers may well have dumped it not for heavy marketing, being easier to program for, and of course getting to market a year or more before Wii and PS3. Lucky they had that year!

And of course buying Bungie and Halo saved the box from an early death!
post #58 of 143
Ballmer pisses me off. Time for someone new to take his job. Someone with some vision.

This guy is a douche bag plain and simple.
post #59 of 143
Unabashed, unremitting, laughing jackass.
post #60 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

Ballmer pisses me off. Time for someone new to take his job. Someone with some vision.

This guy is a douche bag plain and simple.

Give the whole show to Sinofsky, maybe?

In any case, I'd love to be Ballmer's Dry Cleaning service. Big business.
post #61 of 143
Once upon a time, Apple didn't take a threat too seriously from a couple of guys in Washington who designed their word processing software. Look how that turned out. Chrome plays on your turf Steve,and will grow and evolve over time.
post #62 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

Web standards take ages to finalize. Do people really think if Google wants to add a new feature to one of their web apps, and HTML5 doesn't support it, they won't just add a proprietary extension to Chrome/Chrome OS? Of course they will. In which case, if these units get too popular, Google could be the next IE/Microsoft.

But that requires that a single vendor, in your example Google, has a large enough market share to be able to drive developers to use their proprietary extension. That was why MS having monopoly in web browsers was so bad. They created those proprietary extentions and then convinced developers to use them. They also had the clout to convince major content providers (like CNN) to use the proprietary formats.

If 50% of the browsers use HTML5 (and the other 50% is IE), but that 50% is divided between Apple, Google, Firefox, etc, then it will be much more difficult for a single vendor to bastardize the standard.
post #63 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shookster View Post

But does the average person know that Star Office and OpenOffice even exist? I'm not so sure.

Lot's of people know it exists. For example, most people here know it exists for the Mac as well. For a while, it's even been as a native OS X app. How many use it as opposed to iWork or Office? Almost none.

Business knows these apps exist. Much software used at home is known and used because business uses it. Yet, businesses almost never do use it, so people at home don't.

Yet it's free.
post #64 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Wordstar, Lotus 123, Harvard Graphics, Mosaic,........

Throw in VisiCalc (which was released with the source code) and we have a winner!
post #65 of 143
To the contrary Gil was brought in to turn the company around, and he did. He settled on NeXT and made sure Steve was part of that package. He had to know that he was hiring his replacement, and said that Apple needed Steve because Steve was a visionary.

MS is in trouble because Ballmer is more like a bean counter, with no vision and when he tries to fake it, it all goes bad. But you can see his strength, he can oversee a big OS project and bring it to market. Bit by bit it gets better, but his management of just about everything else is not good and that more than offsets his accomplishments.

An OS is a very curious thing for Google, I would have thought that they would have milked more from their online apps, and the like before making this departure. Hope they get it right, Apple wasted how many years until they hired NeXT.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mac_dog View Post

Ballmer = Microsoft's Gil Amelio.
Please consider throwing extra cycles at better understanding Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (CJD), ALS, and Parkinson's disease go here <a href="http://folding.stanford.edu/" target="_blank">http://folding....
Reply
Please consider throwing extra cycles at better understanding Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (CJD), ALS, and Parkinson's disease go here <a href="http://folding.stanford.edu/" target="_blank">http://folding....
Reply
post #66 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Lot's of people know it exists. For example, most people here know it exists for the Mac as well. For a while, it's even been as a native OS X app. How many use it as opposed to iWork or Office? Almost none.

Business knows these apps exist. Much software used at home is known and used because business uses it. Yet, businesses almost never do use it, so people at home don't.

Yet it's free.

NeoOffice is Native to Mac. OpenOffice is not and when printing you end up with Double Margins.

It's catching on... Trust me it's Catching on. People like me, companies like mine, will ALWAYS offer up the multi-thousand dollar office suite but also put in the proposal the open-source versions. And in the end the heads of corp get the paid version and the monkeys that do the work get the open-source. For the last 2 years we have been putting in open-office without even asking and then let them call about it. One issue though, you need to change the default "Save-As" to office versions otherwise you get calls.
post #67 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by iansilv View Post

Sergey Brin should just kick his ass. Just walk up to him, and be straight up, "What you sayin' 'bout Chrome OS ****?!? I already heard!" and drop him. Pow- one hit- Sergey's fist- his face- his face- the floor.

Then Sergey be like, "Do no evil? **** And then he rollerblade on out of there.

That is an extremely unlikely string of events, but I do have to admit I would digg it.

EDIT: language

I know this was probably just a joke, but I don't find it funny.

People who do this kind of stuff are the cause of most of the worlds problems. The sooner this kind of "in your face" stuff is bred out of the gene pool the better of we will all be.
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #68 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brendon View Post

MS is in trouble because Ballmer is more like a bean counter, with no vision and when he tries to fake it, it all goes bad. But you can see his strength, he can oversee a big OS project and bring it to market. Bit by bit it gets better, but his management of just about everything else is not good and that more than offsets his accomplishments.

An OS is a very curious thing for Google, I would have thought that they would have milked more from their online apps, and the like before making this departure. Hope they get it right, Apple wasted how many years until they hired NeXT.

You sure about dat? Took 5 years to bring Vista and he was 100% in charge of that. He's a clown who's not well respected in his own company. He's there because a friend got him a job. Would he be re-hired if he applied today? Would any company aside from MS take him? Maybe a Bank.

The browser on an OS has been done. Puppy Linux based with mozilla 3.5. Runs on PII 266mhz, 128mb +. It's fast, light and works. Google can simply copy that...

Good artists copy, great artists steal...
post #69 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blah64 View Post

While that may be a true statement, the challenge was to name where it originally came from. But I agree that AjitMD was mistaken.

xwiredtva, I formally request my one point!

A bit more:
- Microsoft's first spreadsheet was Multiplan, which was released in 1982, prior to Mac, however the first release named "Excel" was on the Mac in 1985, and not for Windows until 1987.
- Word, on the other hand, was first released as Microsoft Word for the IBM PC in 1983, prior to the public release of the first Mac. So unless Word existed for the Lisa, PCs had it first.

DING! Forgot PP.
post #70 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

People want to run standard i.e. Windows, apps, which is why Linux netbooks were such a failure. People would get them home only to find they couldn't install Office or other apps they used.

Those buying netbooks look at them as smaller, cheaper laptops, when they are not really.

But putting Google's name on what is basically a Linux OS that doesn't run standard apps will still have a lot of resistance.

Apple could get a way with it because it also has those standard apps with many more f its own.

But I'm skeptical about Chrome so far.

I don't think the failure of Linux netbooks is about the apps. Chrome OS is theoretically going to support x86 apps anyway, but even if it didn't and only supported online apps that opened and saved Office files it would be the same thing for the user.

The problem with Linux is it's a confusing mess. It's the elephant in the room that no one wants to talk about. I am in IT and do a lot of techie things. I have in the past been a Windows expert and now I'm a full-time Mac expert but I find Linux to be confusing annoying crap in terms of the UI and actually getting anything done.

The Linux guys (some are friends of mine), will say that it's not that hard and it really isn't if you spend the time to learn it. But the problem is the user just wants to get their email. They don't want to learn how to manage their hardware and software and they don't want to spend all day configuring tricky little things.

It was interesting when computers first came out to get into all the little details and build your own etc. I did it myself for years. But today, people want a computer that they can turn on and use. Like a TV. This evolution has happened with every significant consumer product of the last century. Cars, Radios, TVs etc.

No one wants to (nor should they need to) look at configuration files all day long when they really just want to send an email or look at a video clip.
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #71 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Wordstar, Lotus 123, Harvard Graphics, Mosaic,........

Integrated Suite
-------------------
AppleWorks (for the //e), first integrated package... Amazing product.



Individual Applications:
---------------------------
VisaCalc (first spreadsheet.... yes Lotus123 was a COMPLETE ripoff of VisaCalc)
AppleWriter, Wordstar (dedicated processor), ScreenWriter (nasty copy protection)
Hardard Graphics (good one!)
File Cabinet (for Apple ][ integer basic..even before MS wrote FP Basic for apple ii)
post #72 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwm72 View Post

I think you kind of hit the point here. While most people on these forums know about free and proven alternatives to both MS Office and Windows, the end user does not know. And maybe they don't care. Sheep need to be led. And the marketing machine at MS has very deep pockets, and are capable of convincing most people that even the worst product is a must have.
If Linux and Open Office had similar marketing budgets, or even a fraction of them, the awareness could get out there, and result in a higher install base. But it's not going to happen... unless someone with large pockets gets on board. Google is the most likely at this stage, so their entrance to the ring should be welcomed.
The only other alternative would be if all PC manufacturers unanimously agreed to dump MS and support Linux to potentially save money and gain back some control. But this won't happen either, because no one wants to be first, and even when someone does jump the MS ship, it will be alienated, most likely by the MS negative marketing campaign machine. So they all have to jump ship at the same time... wishful thinking.

You're giving too much credit to consumers.

Most consumers use Windows and its associated software because they use it at work, and are familiar with it, in addition to the fact that they can often get it free from their employer.

That's almost the only reason other than the fact that PC's are made at cheaper levels.

When I did much work for the school system in past years, parents were almost violent against having Macs in school because they used PC's at work. They tried to insist that their kids needed to use PC's in school, even elementary school, so that they would be able to use them at work when they got older. That diminished greatly over the past few years as Mac sales have prospered and have shown up at work as well.

There is no interest in using Linux in schools, or, for the most part, in business. Linux desktop use has hovered from below 1% to about 1% and back in the US for years now, while the Mac has grown considerably. I know that Linux users like to think differently, but as far as OS's on the internet goes, Linux is still around 1%.

Almost everyone has heard about Linux, but as soon as they buy a computer with Linux on it, such as netbooks, which should be the easiest way to get on Linux because netbooks have the least computing demands, what do they do? They return the machines.

Many of these machines already have had OpenOffice installed, along with other open source software that is perfectly usable. But they want their own apps, and they can't have them. So, back to the store.

It's been mentioned that it's driver problems. Well, that's just another nail in the coffin.

This is about as much a closed environment as you could ever hope to get for a Linux foothold, but it didn't work.

I read articles in OSnews about how Linux netbooks were going to be the gateway to the consumers heart, and lead to the big breakthrough that Linux people have been predicting for almost a decade now.

But it was a major flop. Now there are some articles about what went wrong.

It's simple, you can't force an OS, or software, on people who don't want it.

Most people want Windows and its software. An increasing number want OS X and its software.

It's also interesting that over the past few years, and increasingly so after the Intel move by Apple, that some of the best known writers on the Linux scene publicly moved to OS X.

I really don't see Chrome, which won't be out for at least a year as being any different. And we all know Google. Will this ever get out of beta?
post #73 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

You're giving too much credit to consumers.

Most consumers use Windows and its associated software because they use it at work, and are familiar with it, in addition to the fact that they can often get it free from their employer.

That's almost the only reason other than the fact that PC's are made at cheaper levels.

When I did much work for the school system in past years, parents were almost violent against having Macs in school because they used PC's at work. They tried to insist that their kids needed to use PC's in school, even elementary school, so that they would be able to use them at work when they got older. That diminished greatly over the past few years as Mac sales have prospered and have shown up at work as well.

There is no interest in using Linux in schools, or, for the most part, in business. Linux desktop use has hovered from below 1% to about 1% and back in the US for years now, while the Mac has grown considerably. I know that Linux users like to think differently, but as far as OS's on the internet goes, Linux is still around 1%.

Almost everyone has heard about Linux, but as soon as they buy a computer with Linux on it, such as netbooks, which should be the easiest way to get on Linux because netbooks have the least computing demands, what do they do? They return the machines.

Many of these machines already have had OpenOffice installed, along with other open source software that is perfectly usable. But they want their own apps, and they can't have them. So, back to the store.

It's been mentioned that it's driver problems. Well, that's just another nail in the coffin.

This is about as much a closed environment as you could ever hope to get for a Linux foothold, but it didn't work.

I read articles in OSnews about how Linux netbooks were going to be the gateway to the consumers heart, and lead to the big breakthrough that Linux people have been predicting for almost a decade now.

But it was a major flop. Now there are some articles about what went wrong.

It's simple, you can't force an OS, or software, on people who don't want it.

Most people want Windows and its software. An increasing number want OS X and its software.

It's also interesting that over the past few years, and increasingly so after the Intel move by Apple, that some of the best known writers on the Linux scene publicly moved to OS X.

I really don't see Chrome, which won't be out for at least a year as being any different. And we all know Google. Will this ever get out of beta?

Ed Zachry.

Since 1996 I've been preaching the power of linux (since I did some lo-lever driver work and found it to be fun) but without a commercial name behind it, it will never move and I preached that too. When it comes to Linux the geeks are in charge, and we don't want "people" messing it up. In a business environment it had it's hay day but with too few intelligent IT people it never took off (you can fight me on this one but that's the truth! Ask any business why they won't use linux and it's the IT personnel issue, Those crap tech schools can turn out cert-monkey's all day long for MS but you can't do that with a real OS - OS X or Linux for that matter).

The original argument for Linux in a business was that it was free. But after you add in IT costs to setup and maintain it got even with MS. Then you add in the cost to develop a software system for your business and it went over the top. Then you had to add in maintain costs and fee's. Over the top again and it's out. For a web, email, file server it works great. As a remote desktop client to a Terminal Server it works great too, even provides the user with email and office productivity suite and eliminates the need to massive security repairs. However it's the lack of support, end all be all, that keeps it off the desk at work.

Oh, and what went wrong in the Netbook Linux? It was restricted to the manufactures desktop which was large buttons. You had to hack it to get a real desktop and then packages and the os got broken all to easily. What's wrong with throwing the regular grade Ubuntu on it? Wifi drivers for the cheap wireless chips was beyond horrible. Asus 2g original had to be within 30' of the base station. Cloudbook, 10' line of sight. Swap in a Dell 1400/1450 wifi card and it worked up to 150' on either. XP drivers worked on the cheap hardware in the same way WinModem's worked under windows and not linux, the software was the key.

Drivers, crappy hardware, whatever. It should have been tested prior to release. But in the ways of MS they rushed it out.

Drivers and restricted OS. That's the end.
post #74 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

Once upon a time, Apple didn't take a threat too seriously from a couple of guys in Washington who designed their word processing software. Look how that turned out. Chrome plays on your turf Steve,and will grow and evolve over time.

And how is it going to do that? An OS that won't be available for over a year, if ever. It may be in beta when it does arrive for what, another year or more as is Google's want?

And then what? If you've read about this, you would see that it doesn't allow apps as sophisticated as WebOS for the Palm Pre. So what will if offer most people?

It's nor really clear that this "cloud computing" thing will really be successful. It may, and it may not. If it is, then Chrome will have a place in it, possibly challenging some very low end netbooks, maybe in the $200 range.

But if it doesn't, then Chrome will flop.

The word isn't out one way or the other yet. We may not know for years.

And what does this have to do with Apple? Almost nothing.

The only products that Apple has that might be thought of as being challenged by this is the iPhone/Touch combo.

But by the time this arrives, on very weak netbooks, the iPhone/Touch will be ahead by another generation, and will be able to do far more, though they already do far more.

Then, to make this popular, they will need programs. A lot of programs. Not just those floating in the cloud. and they will need games. And they will have to be free or cheap.

But Apple already has all this. In another year, there will be over 100 thousand apps in their store. Most not great, but with thousands of really good ones, maybe tens of thousands.

It could take Chrome several years to mature, but does it have that much time? No one else will be sitting still waiting.
post #75 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by xwiredtva View Post

NeoOffice is Native to Mac. OpenOffice is not and when printing you end up with Double Margins.

It's catching on... Trust me it's Catching on. People like me, companies like mine, will ALWAYS offer up the multi-thousand dollar office suite but also put in the proposal the open-source versions. And in the end the heads of corp get the paid version and the monkeys that do the work get the open-source. For the last 2 years we have been putting in open-office without even asking and then let them call about it. One issue though, you need to change the default "Save-As" to office versions otherwise you get calls.

It is native to the Mac. All software has bugs, including Apple's own.
post #76 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh

I wonder how long it will take MS to create a browser based OS themselves...

Quote:
Originally Posted by pmoeser View Post

I don't think they have the vision or the skills to do that, otherwise, they might have already.

Windows PE. Would be a perfect foundation for such an endeavor. If Google is successful with this strategy, MS could easily match them.

And probably with better driver support...

Put me firmly in the "meh" camp with the whole Chrome OS thing. Once again the tech press is doing the equivalent of "ooh, shiny!"

EDIT: I should also point out that for $70 Symantec Ghost comes with a full copy of Widows PE 2 - you can add drivers to it and generally customize it with a little tweaking - I was pleasantly surprised. It's great to have Windows PE boot CD's (or flash drives) for troubleshooting and recovery (google Bart's PE)
post #77 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

ballmer pisses me off. Time for someone new to take his job. Someone with some vision.

noooooooooooooooooo!
post #78 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Oh wait, the Xbox. Yes, that worked out well.

Actually, the Xbox is now working out very well. If you look at their last quarterly results, the entertainment division with the Xbox bolstered their bottom line nicely.

Their recent quarterly loss (what was it, first in like 20 years?) would have been much worse without the Xbox. Quite a role reversal...
post #79 of 143




I just think its funny how this guy takes shots at apple and google to cover up his lack of innovation. I have worked in the mobile industry for years and I can tell you that Windows based phones are not the greatest. Functionality is not good and at some times they can be confusing to the average joe. Apple makes everything really easy as far as their os goes. Sorry microsoft, the only microsoft item that i have in the house is the xbox 360
Apple macbook, Iphone 3G and Iphone 3GS
Reply
Apple macbook, Iphone 3G and Iphone 3GS
Reply
post #80 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

But that requires that a single vendor, in your example Google, has a large enough market share to be able to drive developers to use their proprietary extension.

Really? What's the motivation for me to run a netbook limited to just web apps (even if they are from Google) when for maybe $50 more (if that even) I can have Windows and "have it all"?

Has no one learned anything from the iPhone and the Appstore? It's all about the Apps! Why do you think people want Windows on netbooks?

If anything, I could see Apple extending the Appstore into the netbook space and being far more successful then Google doing anything but unleashing yet another beta product.

How many people are on Hotmail vs. Gmail? People aren't going to run to Google just because of their name. That's about as stupid as the people that like to claim Apples products are doing well strictly because of superficial marketing - what a load of crap!

Really, let's get some perspective here
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Steve Ballmer laughs off Google's Chrome OS threat