Funny, but when the issue was whether MacBooks were too expensive, people like you were denying numbers like that. Now that it's convenient, you are suddenly sure that the numbers are real.
You're using a bogus imaginary argument. IT costs for a company do not go to zero simply because they use a crapbook. They still need to develop custom apps. Still need to support user problems. Still need to train users. Still need to manage their servers. Still need to support the network infrastructure.
Claiming that IT support costs go to zero is absolute proof that you don't have ANY idea what you're talking about.
I see you're still ignoring the fact that I can buy a REAL laptop for much less than a crapbook. Oh, I get it - you want everyone to accept Google's inane proposition that no one will ever need an IT group again? Sorry, I'm not buying.
I never said that it was for individuals. In fact, all of my arguments were specifically directed at business use.
And I'm not interested in your expectations of price. You can't even get the facts right - why should I pay any attention to your delusions?
Not according to Google (see the quote above). Mail is only offline capable if you're running Outlook or something equivalent - and that won't work on a crapbook. Docs works the same way.
I see. So businesses are support to throw out their entire IT infrastructure and jump into using crapbooks simply because Google promises that some day they'll be useful? :roll eyes:
You Google shills must really think that users are stupid.
Google admitted that they DO mine data from Google Apps. See above.
So who do we believe - a published statement from Google or the whining of a Google shill?
Better in what way?
Security? No way
Are you purposefully obtuse or just a really loud idiot?
It is not that hard to understand but you refuse to even try...
I will waste my time once more and then at your uniquely ridiculous riposte I shall quit while I retain some sanity.
1. TCO - it is what it is - your inane rant about macbooks is irrelevant. If you look up Gartner or other reputable TCO calcs and you will see that desktop support NOT all internal IT is $3900-5300 per PC over 3 years. It is just fact.
2. NONE OF THIS INCLUDES INTERNAL IT DEV. That is all separate $s. (All those apps will work fine on Chrome). I didn't claim that IT support costs went to zero - you just inferred that. I just stated that whatever the Google TCO is, it won't be anything near to the standard cost. Even just using virtual desktop saves 20% over standard TCO and that is with the expensive hardware and fat MS licenses that go away with a Chrome solution. Many of the desktop support activities I mention do go away. You just walk up with another box, plug it in and don't have to do anything else. When one of our PC's breaks or at a client, it is a 2-3 day process to get a replacement, move data, reconfig the machine, etc.
3. Your argument seemed to be that $1008 is basically hardware cost, not what it is - hardware, 3-year warranty, tech support, and several cloud services. Businesses don't buy cheap laptops - they mostly buy $1000 Lenovo's HPs and Dells with expensive 3 year service contracts. The fact that you can find some cheap PCs with decent specs is irrelevant.
4. The Chromebooks cost what a netbook costs $349-429 base. Thus my estimate for a desktop is based on what the same spec nettop costs today - $150-250. Fair assumption. You are an idiot if you can't see what an Atom net-top machine costs today.
5. Google Apps had offline with Gears which they ended last year and has committed to HTML5 based offline capability this year. Yes they are late but we have no reason not to believe that Google will deliver what they have said and delivered in the past via HTML5 soon.
6. Enterprise IT is constantly redesigning its infrastructure. Most of our clients are at some stage of radically moving to cloud based infrastructure, refactoring their enterprise apps to be virtualized and many of them are outsourcing their cloud to hosters. If the cloud backs up all your desktop data, you can ditch that legacy cost of local backup, file shares, etc. Simple really. Chrome has nothing to do with a company's SAP or Siebel, Oracle, Autonomy or any other unrelated enterprise system.
7. I am not a Google shill. I barely use their consumer services for many of the mildly paranoid reasons you espouse. I bleed multi-colored Apple. I just see the massive potential for this approach to enterprise desktop management regardless of whether it is offered by Google, HP, Apple or JRag Industries. You are some kind of massive Google hater which seems to massively impair your cognitive faculties.
"Pierce [Genentech CIO] thinks a lot of CIOs are operating on "urban legends or rumor or misinformation" when they dismiss Google software for security and privacy reasons. That's a mistake, he says, "because this, in my opinion, is a major, major shift in technology and tools and capability. It's meeting a big unmet need. In these times, where people are really trying to figure out how can I control costs, how can I keep up with life-cycle management while managing cost--this is a dream come true. This level of functionality and ease of use at $50 per user per year: What's another example of a tool that has those properties in the enterprise?"
It's not right for everyone but it is right for many. Your opinion is irrelevant to reality.
9. Security - most security failures are from Users, not hackers. Google is fully SAS70 compliant and is less likely to be hacked than all but the most paranoid of enterprises. If users lose data or give away their passwords they will do it regardless of platform except that under Chrome/Cloud people aren't moving files by USB drive and leaving it somewhere. On the flipside - giving away your password could be more dangerous under Chrome.
Speed - Chrome will run better than MS Virtual Desktop on WinXP or 7 on lesser hardware for the basic desktop tasks that this is designed for.
Like all the others, I will end my side of the debate here. You are welcome to rant on like the lunatic you are. Nighty night.