or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Google sets sights on enterprise, education with subscription 'Chromebooks'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google sets sights on enterprise, education with subscription 'Chromebooks' - Page 9

post #321 of 372
In an effort to be objective, I have done some further experimenting with Chrome Browser on Macs.

Here are some results:

1) I was able to get Angry Birds to run, kinda' -- the default is "HD" and after a delay, the music starts playing, but the light blue screen remains. If you switch to SD, the AB startup screen appears and the app loads and plays in a very small window within the Chrome browser window. Play feels sluggish, though. It feels like something is dampening my gestures and taps -- don't know if this the Chrome UI layer or if the app is downsized for the expected Chrome hardware.

I have the AB Mac app (57 MB size) -- it runs full-screen and performs as expected.

2) I also installed Plants and Zombies. It loaded and ran, in a larger window within the Chrome window. It too, seemed sluggish when compared to the app running on the iPad.

3) On the Mac, the Chrome browser app is 100.7 MB vs Safari at 57.1 MB -- That's almost double, and it's just a browser. I wonder why?

4) Angry Birds, once loaded, worked with the Internet unavailable. Plants and Zombies would not!

5) After reconnecting to the Internet, Plants and Zombies still would not run, even after refreshing Chrome, I could not resume P&Z until I accessed the Internet through another tab. This appears to be a miscommunication between Chrome and the app -- how to determine if the Internet is available.

6) I also installed the BBC Good Food Recipes app -- When disconnected from the Internet:
-- sometimes it would run fine
-- other times it would bring up a "page not available" message within the app
-- still other times it would open a new tab with a 404 error - apparently linking to another web page

7) I played around with the apps at docs.google.com -- some pleasant surprises and disappointments

8) GoogleDocs help docs are sketchy at best -- or non-existant when the Internet is unavailable.

9) I tried to open a blank Document file and drag and drop a local .doc file in to it. This did not work. I had to Open the file with Pages, Word, etc. and copy/paste from it to the Google Document file -- 2 extra steps.

10) Oddly, I was able to drag and drop an image file directly into a Google Document file.

11) I could not drag that same image into a Google Drawing file -- it opened a new Google Browser tab and displayed the URL of the local file, e.g. file://... In the Drawing file, I clicked the Image icon and was presented with several options. One way was to select an already uploaded image. Another way was to open an image URL. I tried the file:// URL, but it would only accept http or https URLS. Obviously the Internet had to be connected to include images in the Drawing file.

12) Each time I tried something that the Google browser didn't like or a specific Google Docs app couldn't handle -- it would open another browser tab to display, say, the local image that it couldn't drag and drop.

13) Sometimes, in some Google Docs apps, you could copy from the new tab into the Google Docs app -- other times you couodn't.

14) Very quickly the Google browser's tab bar became loaded with tiny tabs containing these things that it couldn't handle -- to the point that you couldn't tell what was in the tab without mousig over it or opening it.

15) I was surprised by the robustness of the drawing program -- though it felt sluggish compared to a local app.

16) I didn't check it but there appears to be an humongous amount of packet request/responses as well as an humongous amount of data exchange going on between the local device and the Internet using Google apps. They appear to be neither fish nor fowl -- rather, they attempt to bridge the gap between local and online. I don't believe they have succeeded.



All-in-all it was a very mixed bag best described as: some are some, and some are not!


I found that if you wanted to do anything worthwhile -- you pretty much were expected to be connected to the Internet.

Google claims that, paraphrased: "Many apps will work offline".

But they don't quantify "many" nor do they attempt to define the types of things you can do offline.

It is very interesting, to me, that Google's Flagship apps do not perform consistently, or at all -- when offline.


I found the entire experience unsettling and confusing -- and I am not technically challenged.


As it stands in today's world, I suspect that a Chrome OS-ChromeBook solution would work in a very limited set of use patterns, with very specific apps and activities -- if the Internet is available.

But, anyone who has any rudimentary experience would be put off by the lack (or inconsistency) of features such as copy/paste and drag and drop. They would be fighting the system!

For an enterprise or education IT department there may be some value to embracing the Chrome OS solution for some tasks and activities -- but I don't believe it is robust enough to wholesale replace PCs within an establishment with Chrome OS and Chrome Computers.

If the latter is true, then the individual establishment must evaluate if there's enough benefit in add another, incompatibility to the mix of IT offerings, training and support,

It is not "The Devil We Know" vs "The Devil We Don't Know" -- rather it is "The Devil We Know" vs "The Devil We Don't Know" plus "The Devil We Know".
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #322 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Chrome or Chrome OS?

For Chrome OS they have multiple avenues for revenue. First is when you do connect to the internet (as most users tend to do on a regular basis) they want you to connect with Google Docs, Google Search, Gmail and so on. They’ll get their revenue in that regard just as they would through Chrome browser or any other browser that connects to those services.

Other ways are by getting contracts for subscriptions of Chrome-based notebooks and desktops and embedded appliances. There primary goal is to simply take a small chunk from MS’ Windows marketshare for overpriced machines that do very basic tasks. If they can achieve this then Windows dominance could dwindle farther and there are many avenues that could open up for everyone is Windows loses its hold on the majority.

I think you're over-thinking it, and giving Google undue credit for being an MS competitor in the way we normally think of competition in the tech industry.

Google is an advertising company. First, foremost and always. So when a business considers buying into the Chromebook business model, they must also consider exactly how Google is monetizing the proposition.

That is to say, all of your information is going to be moving across Google's servers, where your data will harvested and parsed with an eye towards selling information. Because that's what Google does.

As frustrated as you've been in this thread with people misunderstanding the nature of the Chrome OS, I get frustrated with how Google has managed to misdirect people's attention away from what they're actually about. They're not about open, they're not about empowering people, they're not about creating the best possible technological future. They're about tying as many users as possible to Google servers so they can get more information about those users to sell to the highest bidder.

Now, maybe some or most people are perfectly OK with that, and don't see any downside. Even welcome targeted ads that align with one's interests.

But as we live more and more in a digital world, the curation of what you see becomes a rather significant factor in how one apprehends the world.

And what Google wants to do is fine tune the mechanics of that curation so that you're every move online is tracked and calibrated to sell you back yourself as a digital shadow. People bitch about Apple's "walled garden", but at least you know exactly where you stand. Google shouts "Open!" while crafting a much more insidious garden-- one that pretends to be the world itself.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #323 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I think you're over-thinking it, and giving Google undue credit for being an MS competitor in the way we normally think of competition in the tech industry.

Google is an advertising company. First, foremost and always. So when a business considers buying into the Chromebook business model, they must also consider exactly how Google is monetizing the proposition.

That is to say, all of your information is going to be moving across Google's servers, where your data will harvested and parsed with an eye towards selling information. Because that's what Google does.

As frustrated as you've been in this thread with people misunderstanding the nature of the Chrome OS, I get frustrated with how Google has managed to misdirect people's attention away from what they're actually about. They're not about open, they're not about empowering people, they're not about creating the best possible technological future. They're about tying as many users as possible to Google servers so they can get more information about those users to sell to the highest bidder.

Now, maybe some or most people are perfectly OK with that, and don't see any downside. Even welcome targeted ads that align with one's interests.

But as we live more and more in a digital world, the curation of what you see becomes a rather significant factor in how one apprehends the world.

And what Google wants to do is fine tune the mechanics of that curation so that you're every move online is tracked and calibrated to sell you back yourself as a digital shadow. People bitch about Apple's "walled garden", but at least you know exactly where you stand. Google shouts "Open!" while crafting a much more insidious garden-- one that pretends to be the world itself.

Mmmm...

If Google really were open and altruistic they would offer the Chrome package with the backend server components -- so that an enterprise could utilize the entire package within it's own servers -- without any connection to the Google infrastructure necessary, except for searches and app purchases.

If the system were robust enough (on and offline), Google could sell the package as an alternative to the entrenched, supposedly boated and inferior systems.

Ca'mon Google, we know you can do it -- and even sell Chrome for what it's worth!
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #324 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Mmmm...

If Google really were open and altruistic they would offer the Chrome package with the backend server components -- so that an enterprise could utilize the entire package within it's own servers -- without any connection to the Google infrastructure necessary, except for searches and app purchases.

And you can! Google would rather you be tied to their apps, but its not a requirement. Weve been over this!!!
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #325 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

And you can! Google would rather you be tied to their apps, but it’s not a requirement. We’ve been over this!!!

We, you and I, have not been over this!

Do you have a link where I can download the Google Docs apps and the necessary supporting server components?

I run a local web server on several of my Macs and would like to evaluate the system from both ends totally within a firewall.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #326 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

WHy you people cant get past Chrome OS being usable without an internet connection is beyond my comprehension. How many times does it need to be stated and shown that it can read and write files form USB attached disks and doesnt need any LAN or WAN access to function. Its a UI based on WebKit, not an OS reliant on the web.

This is kind of like saying the iPad is usable without iTunes after the initial setup. Sure, there are stories of folks setting it up and giving it to their parents to use but it's not the design intent.

Here's a Feb 27 review of the OS on the CR-48. The new hardware is better than the CR-48...the OS has until mid-June to get solid offline support that is promised for launch. Google took a hit dropping Gears so they have to refactor their offline support in HTML5.
post #327 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

We, you and I, have not been over this!

Do you have a link where I can download the Google Docs apps and the necessary supporting server components?

I run a local web server on several of my Macs and would like to evaluate the system from both ends totally within a firewall.

We talked about data being local to Enterprise/LAN and how you don’t even need to use any of Google online/offline apps to utilize Chrome OS or Chrome… even though they want you to.

Here is even a Google server they sell to businesses specifically for intranet and intraweb connectivity.

•*

http://www.google.com/enterprise/search/gsa.html There are several videos to the right. Just to be clear, this appliance is LOCALLY placed, not within Google’s data centers.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #328 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

Google took a hit dropping Gears so they have to refactor their offline support in HTML5.

They have been working with HTML5 DB options since at least 2009 and stated decision to halt development of Gears (though not drop support) almost a year and a half ago. HTML5 is plenty capable of deal with offline storage.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #329 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Do you have a link where I can download the Google Docs apps and the necessary supporting server components?

I run a local web server on several of my Macs and would like to evaluate the system from both ends totally within a firewall.

You can't self host google docs. You can self host office 365...that's a major selling point to some enterprise customers.
post #330 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

We talked about data being local to Enterprise/LAN and how you dont even need to use any of Google online/offline apps to utilize Chrome OS or Chrome even though they want you to.

Here is even a Google server they sell to businesses specifically for intranet and intraweb connectivity.

*

http://www.google.com/enterprise/search/gsa.html There are several videos to the right. Just to be clear, this appliance is LOCALLY placed, not within Googles data centers.

This is their search appliance. You can not buy the equivalent gGpps appliance.
post #331 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

We talked about data being local to Enterprise/LAN and how you don’t even need to use any of Google online/offline apps to utilize Chrome OS or Chrome… even though they want you to.

Here is even a Google server they sell to businesses specifically for intranet and intraweb connectivity.

•*

http://www.google.com/enterprise/search/gsa.html There are several videos to the right. Just to be clear, this appliance is LOCALLY placed, not within Google’s data centers.

The link you provided is for search!

I was asking about being able to buy the server backend to support Chrome OS and Google Docs and the Google Docs apps themselves.

You keep saying that Google OS doesn't need the internet connection to perform useful work.

You appear to think that having access to local data provides this capability.

Where can I buy Chrome OS apps to process this data local only -- at a minimum:

-- compose emails
-- write a WP document
-- create a spresdsheet
-- create a presentation
-- maintain a contacts list
-- maintain a calendar
-- do basic file manipulation

A likely response is that these are not available... yet!

But, they will be available... later!

When?

If Google were close to having these, they. would have demoed them and given a firm availability month.

So, without someone writing apps (HTML5 or whatever) all the local data is of no use -- without apps to process them.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #332 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

They have been working with HTML5 DB options since at least 2009 and stated decision to halt development of Gears (though not drop support) almost a year and a half ago. HTML5 is plenty capable of deal with offline storage.

Yes, they still took a hit doing the refactor. Hence the big gap where offline support for gApps went away and wont reappear until June. People have been bitching a while:

http://www.google.com/support/forum/...fdcf0531&hl=en

You really think they went without offline mode for so long because the refactor was easy? Or do you think their team has lost months which could have been spent evolving the offline capabilities they had under gears which is being spent instead to move to HTML 5?

How late is HTML 5? The expected recommendation date is 2014. They say Last Call by end of this month. 6.6 seems solid but still...it's not totally under Google's control even if they are the 500lb gorilla.
post #333 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

The link you provided is for search!

I was asking about being able to buy the server backend to support Chrome OS and Google Docs and the Google Docs apps themselves.

You keep saying that Google OS doesn't need the internet connection to perform useful work.

You appear to think that having access to local data provides this capability.

Where can I buy Chrome OS apps to process this data local only -- at a minimum:

-- compose emails
-- write a WP document
-- create a spresdsheet
-- create a presentation
-- maintain a contacts list
-- maintain a calendar
-- do basic file manipulation

A likely response is that these are not available... yet!

But, they will be available... later!

When?

If Google were close to having these, they. would have demoed them and given a firm availability month.

So, without someone writing apps (HTML5 or whatever) all the local data is of no use -- without apps to process them.

Forgive me but your queries are all over the place. You know that Google SoCs can be used offline and saved to the device or USB storage. You also know once you have an
Internet connection your data is backed up any update to Docs occur.

Since you already know about that I assumed your odd requet for getting access to their entire proprietary Google Doc library was just a malformed example, but I played along and showed you evidence of Google allowing a server for local enterprise data to be searched. IOW, a service that is not on the Internet.

All those items you list in your last post have been doable since Google Gears, which is the predecessor to all DB options now found in HTML5.

Again, you don't have to like (it certainly doesn't fit my needs) but don't discount the OS and make up excuses against it. If WebOS can work just fine in Airplane Mode for apps that don't require the Internet then you all should be able to understand how another Linux/WebKit OS could work just as well without an Internet connection.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #334 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

How late is HTML 5? The expected recommendation date is 2014. They say Last Call by end of this month. 6.6 seems solid but still...it's not totally under Google's control even if they are the 500lb gorilla.

Are you really arguing that we shouldn't use any parts of HTML5 until it's completely ratified? You better step away from every modern browser until then.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #335 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Forgive me but your queries are all over the place. You know that Google SoCs can be used offline and saved to the device or USB storage. You also know once you have an
Internet connection your data is backed up any update to Docs occur.

Since you already know about that I assumed your odd requet for getting access to their entire proprietary Google Doc library was just a malformed example, but I played along and showed you evidence of Google allowing a server for local enterprise data to be searched. IOW, a service that is not on the Internet.

All those items you list in your last post have been doable since Google Gears, which is the predecessor to all DB options now found in HTML5.

Again, you don't have to like (it certainly doesn't fit my needs) but don't discount the OS and make up excuses against it. If WebOS can work just fine in Airplane Mode for apps that don't require the Internet then you all should be able to understand how another Linux/WebKit OS could work just as well without an Internet connection.

One thing at a time -- what are the "Google SoCs" you refer to above -- it is the first time I have seen that term.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #336 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

One thing at a time -- what are the "Google SoCs" you refer to above -- it is the first time I have seen that term.

That's Google Docs with my iPhone's spellcheck taking over.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #337 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Forgive me but your queries are all over the place. :

Since you already know about that I assumed your odd requet for getting access to their entire proprietary Google Doc library was just a malformed example, but I played along and showed you evidence of Google allowing a server for local enterprise data to be searched. IOW, a service that is not on the Internet.

All those items you list in your last post have been doable since Google Gears, which is the predecessor to all DB options now found in HTML5.

Again, you don't have to like (it certainly doesn't fit my needs) but don't discount the OS and make up excuses against it. If WebOS can work just fine in Airplane Mode for apps that don't require the Internet then you all should be able to understand how another Linux/WebKit OS could work just as well without an Internet connection.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

One thing at a time -- what are the "Google SoCs" you refer to above -- it is the first time I have seen that term.

Since you did not respond. I suspect you think I am deliberately acting obtuse -- I am not! Rather I am trying to assure that we both are talking about the same thing.

My guess that SoCs was a typo for Docs -- as in Google Docs,

Assuming that is correct, help me understand:

"You know that Google SoCs [sic Docs] can be used offline and saved to the device or USB storage. You also know once you have an Internet connection your data is backed up any update to Docs occur."

I do not know that -- in a prior post, I documented just the opposite -- two cases:

The Internet is not available -- I am running the Chrome Browser only -- analogous to running the Chrome OS on a ChromeBook:

1) I have a Word document on a USB drive. How do I get that into Chrome -- remember I have no other Apps available that can read Word .doc files.

2) I have a Drawing Doc open in Chrome. I have an image on an SD card or USB drive. How can I get that image into the Drawing Doc file?
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #338 of 372
Well...

I am going to be away for 1/2 an hour -- I must go BBB (Bathe the Body Beautiful)
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #339 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

We talked about data being local to Enterprise/LAN and how you don’t even need to use any of Google online/offline apps to utilize Chrome OS or Chrome… even though they want you to.

Here is even a Google server they sell to businesses specifically for intranet and intraweb connectivity.

•*

http://www.google.com/enterprise/search/gsa.html There are several videos to the right. Just to be clear, this appliance is LOCALLY placed, not within Google’s data centers.

But what possible motivation does Google have to make this scenario in any way desirable or convenient? In fact, if Chrome OS were used largely with local storage and servers, without Google apps, it would be disastrous for Google-- they would have empowered a paradigm shift that did them absolutely no good.

You don't even have to imagine that Google is particularly sinister or dishonest to understand that they're interested in wedding you to their servers and services-- anything else makes no business sense. None.

Just because certain things are possible doesn't mean they are easy or likely to be well supported. It's not hard to imagine Google getting people to use Chrome OS and if it proves successful starting to withdraw local options (for the betterment of their users, of course).

I'm not quite getting your insistence on the efficacy of offline functionality-- it's true as far as it goes but clearly that's not what Google is gunning for. And Google has shown itself pretty willing to take proactive steps to get what it wants. I mean, surely we're not imagining that Google is just trying to save us all from MS with altruistic technology that we're free to deploy as we see fit?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #340 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

But what possible motivation does Google have to make this scenario in any way desirable or convenient? In fact, if Chrome OS were used largely with local storage and servers, without Google apps, it would be disastrous for Google-- they would have empowered a paradigm shift that did them absolutely no good.

You don't even have to imagine that Google is particularly sinister or dishonest to understand that they're interested in wedding you to their servers and services-- anything else makes no business sense. None.

Just because certain things are possible doesn't mean they are easy or likely to be well supported. It's not hard to imagine Google getting people to use Chrome OS and if it proves successful starting to withdraw local options (for the betterment of their users, of course).

I'm not quite getting your insistence on the efficacy of offline functionality-- it's true as far as it goes but clearly that's not what Google is gunning for. And Google has shown itself pretty willing to take proactive steps to get what it wants. I mean, surely we're not imagining that Google is just trying to save us all from MS with altruistic technology that we're free to deploy as we see fit?

It wouldnt be great for them, which is why they are pushing this as a cheap alternative to companies and schools leasing considerably more expensive HW for mostly simple tasks. Part of the lease fee is to get more access to Google Docs.

Outside of that, the cost of 12 notebook with a full-sized keyboard and oversized multitouch trackpad for $349 that can launch into a browser in 8 seconds is fast and convenient. No 3rd-party browser can even start in that time frame on such an inexpensive device. THIS IS NOT THE MACHINE FOR ANY OF US ON THIS SITE.

But I digress, even if a customer isnt using Google Docs they would still be using Google for search and likely Google for email. Id think this would be more than enough for Google to find it worthwhile.

Now consider their Android system. vendors and carriers can completely trash anything relating to Google on that system. Google gets nothing. Google only profits if their default services are used or if their additional services are purchased. So the same argument permits between the two: What does Google get out of it?

Again, this is not an OS for anyone on this site, nor likely for anyone we know. We just dont fit the demographic. At the same time writing it off as a foolish idea because were now at war with Google (Weve always been at war with Google) or because we cant see how WebKit can be used as a UI despite the clear evidence to the contrary isnt being objective.

Google is leveraging their strengths to do what Apple is oft praised, they are removing all the complex elements that 1) make it difficult to use, and 2) make even powerful HW feel slow.


There is no way to tell if Google plans will succeed. There is just too much uncharted territory with what they are doing* CHROME OS IS NOT THIN CLIENT but the premise is sound.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #341 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Google is leveraging their strengths to do what Apple is oft praised, they are removing all the complex elements that 1) make it difficult to use, and 2) make even powerful HW feel slow.


There is no way to tell if Google plans will succeed. There is just too much uncharted territory with what they are doing*— CHROME OS IS NOT THIN CLIENT — but the premise is sound.

I agree with removing complexity and bloat.

But the Google alternative, however desirable, must co-exist with the Windows/Office megalopoly -- at least for several years. To that end, whatever is on the Chrome [desktop], OS, browser or apps must be able to seamlessly ingest, process and output Office-compatible files -- whether online or offline.

If they can do this from the outset (June- September?) then I believe they have a chance at success.

There also needs to be a capability (if not an SDK) for users (enterprises) to write custom apps to satisfy special requirements -- for both online and offline use... But this can come later.

Without the capability to directly process Office files, I do not see this Google Chrome OS attaining the critical mass necessary for success.

I certainly would not like to be in the shoes of an IT executive who recommended a Chrome OS solution -- and have Google discontinue development 2 or 3 years down the road.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #342 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

I certainly would not like to be in the shoes of an IT executive who recommended a Chrome OS solution -- and have Google discontinue development 2 or 3 years down the road.

Whats youre premise that open standards web code (HTML5/CCS3/JS) could be discontinued in 2-3 years? We are not on the same wave length if you think that is possible.

Remember, this isnt an all or nothing solution. This isnt like having to make the arduous decision to keep using a DEC minicomputer or invest in an AS/400. Chrome OS, like the iPhone before it, will be tested to see if it fits the needs of some users in certain fields. If it works out they will invest more, if not, they wont. If it does work out it wont replace all, or the majority of Windows-based machines. Its just a simple alternative for access that require hardly any client side processing. Basic data entry is one of them.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #343 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Are you really arguing that we shouldn't use any parts of HTML5 until it's completely ratified? You better step away from every modern browser until then.

No i'm simply saying they don't control that critical piece of their ecosystem anymore like they did with gears. Nice avoidance if the main part of the post for this side issue. Do I have to post as if you are a troll?
post #344 of 372
Ya' know...

I've been experimenting with Chrome browser and Google Docs (with both Chrome and Safari browsers).

1) Online works OK, but I am concerned with, bandwidth large file upload times, storage costs, security and availability (no access to the Internet or the Service is down).

2) I don't believe that local processing is robust enough (yet) to satisfy my, or most people's, needs -- Google Docs needs the ability to directly input/output the common file formats in use today.

3) What I really did like was when the [online] service was available -- it was great to login and have all those [currently active] lfiles available and processable in one central place -- as opposed to fiddling with File Sharing or Screen Sharing.

It was real convenient -- even if a little slow due to latency and bandwidth.


Now, what if someone were to package that concept with a local server, instead of( or anlong with) a Cloud server.

Google could do it if they want to get into the hardware business -- or bundle the software with 3rd-party hardware manufacturers,

Apple could do it with slight modifications to their local consumer, prosumer and even Pro apps.

Google has the Cloud component but not the local component.

Apple has (or easily could have) the local network component -- but lacks the Cloud component.

Hmmmm....
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #345 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

No i'm simply saying they don't control that critical piece of their ecosystem anymore like they did with gears. Nice avoidance if the main part of the post for this side issue. Do I have to post as if you are a troll?

Implying that all parts of HTML5 is unreliable because parts are still being worked on is pushing into that area.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #346 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

What’s you’re premise that open standards web code (HTML5/CCS3/JS) could be discontinued in 2-3 years? We are not on the same wave length if you think that is possible.

Remember, this isn’t an all or nothing solution. This isn’t like having to make the arduous decision to keep using a DEC minicomputer or invest in an AS/400. Chrome OS, like the iPhone before it, will be tested to see if it fits the needs of some users in certain fields. If it works out they will invest more, if not, they won’t. If it does work out it won’t replace all, or the majority of Windows-based machines. It’s just a simple alternative for access that require hardly any client side processing. Basic data entry is one of them.

No, No -- nothing to do with open standards or HTML5.

Rather, it is: does Google have the commitment to follow through.

So far Google is using words like "many" and "soon" and "stay tuned" to define what the Google Chrome OS package "can" be -- not what is.
,
Apple fans tend to be a little spoiled --Usually Apple announces a finished product, with [mostly *] complete specs, hands-on demos and/or imminent availability. I think that we must be careful not to assume that competitive announcements are as realistic as Apple announcements -- if for only the reason that Apple controls the hardware, the software, the marketing and the ecosystem

* For Wizard69


If I were an IT director, I'd have difficulty committing resources, of any significance, to such a system as Google has presented -- too many unanswered questions. Sure, I'd evaluate it for its potential -- but would not, likely, deploy based on what has been shown and promised so far.

You and I SWAGGED ChromeBook unit sales for Calendar Year 2011:

I estimated < 300,000

You estimated 4-5 million

If Google can deliver a robust-enough system to install 2 million by Dec 31, 2011 -- I believe they have a chance going forward -- that's ~= 300,000 per month.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #347 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

It wouldnt be great for them, which is why they are pushing this as a cheap alternative to companies and schools leasing considerably more expensive HW for mostly simple tasks. Part of the lease fee is to get more access to Google Docs.

Outside of that, the cost of 12 notebook with a full-sized keyboard and oversized multitouch trackpad for $349 that can launch into a browser in 8 seconds is fast and convenient. No 3rd-party browser can even start in that time frame on such an inexpensive device. THIS IS NOT THE MACHINE FOR ANY OF US ON THIS SITE.

But I digress, even if a customer isnt using Google Docs they would still be using Google for search and likely Google for email. Id think this would be more than enough for Google to find it worthwhile.

I don't disagree on the value proposition for certain users. I'm just pretty sure Google is mainly focused on extending use of their services and servers. I don't think they get that much out of Google being the default search, since they pretty much already get that on most machines.

Quote:
Now consider their Android system. vendors and carriers can completely trash anything relating to Google on that system. Google gets nothing. Google only profits if their default services are used or if their additional services are purchased. So the same argument permits between the two: What does Google get out of it?

Well, given the recent revelations arising out of the Skyhook case, I don't think we can say anymore that vendors and carriers are actually free to trash the system-- at least not in a way that deprecates Google services. We now know that Google has the power to prevent handsets from shipping if the manufacturer changes things up in a way that materially affects Google's revenue streams. That pretty much supports the idea that Google isn't content to just hope folks will use some of their stuff-- they're willing to play hardball to make sure they do.

I'll wager we can expect the same thing from anyone bringing a Chromebook to market-- any effort to decouple from the mothership will be dealt with harshly.

Quote:
Again, this is not an OS for anyone on this site, nor likely for anyone we know. We just dont fit the demographic. At the same time writing it off as a foolish idea because were now at war with Google (Weve always been at war with Google) or because we cant see how WebKit can be used as a UI despite the clear evidence to the contrary isnt being objective.

Again, I'm not arguing against the use case to be made for certain users, or the technical feasibility of using Chrome OS offline. I'm arguing that Google isn't going to leave it to chance when it comes to leveraging their OS to steer people to their servers. Again, that's how they make their money, there is absolutely no reason for them not to.

Quote:
Google is leveraging their strengths to do what Apple is oft praised, they are removing all the complex elements that 1) make it difficult to use, and 2) make even powerful HW feel slow.

But the reason they're doing that is what I'm talking about. Apple works to make simple hardware and easy to use software because they believe that provides the best user experience and gives them a competitive advantage. Google does that because it removes barriers between the user and Google's servers. So they can get more info about you. To sell.

Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but the motivation matters to me. I think it has long term results in terms of how the hardware and software actually work. I would prefer to give my business to the company that is invested in making the best possible experience for me in order to gain competitive advantage, not the company that is interested in getting the most information possible out of me, and for whom making good software is simply a means to that end. Because I can't be sure about what "good" ultimately means, to Google. I know exactly what it means to Apple.

Quote:
There is no way to tell if Google plans will succeed. There is just too much uncharted territory with what they are doing* CHROME OS IS NOT THIN CLIENT but the premise is sound.

For its intended purpose, sure.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #348 of 372
@ Addabox,

I don't disagree with any one point so there is no point in me quoting your reply. Although I do think I'm looking at this lightweight OS much differently than most others on this site. To me this feels very circa 2009 when I was getting demure for saying that an Apple tablet wouldn't work with Mac OS.

I guess I have years vested in this concept. Not in Chrome OS, but the idea that a lightweight OS that is designed to access the web brilliantly and will work on inexpensive PCs and appliances the world round would finally rise to take a chunk of Windows marketshare. Around here it's oft believed that Mac OS will ruse up and crush Windows, but that means Apple has to license their OS or that Apple has to outsell in units every other Windows-based PC vendor. That's unrealistic.

Note that Chrome OS can be compiled for ARM or Atom and their apps will run the same on each. Note the AppleTV is only $99. Now imagine all those impoverished countries and people in the world that would love to have some basic connection to the inherent and world at large in the privacy of gher home thy we were okay with dial up and layer slow DSL/Cable years ago. That $99 box coupled with a cheap CRT is more affordable than anything else that run as fast with Windows. Stepping stones. Millions of stepping stones that don't affect MS' short term bottom line but eat away at the bottom end of their market share.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #349 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

@ Addabox,

I don't disagree with any one point so there is no point in me quoting your reply. Although I do think I'm looking at this lightweight OS much differently than most others on this site. To me this feels very circa 2009 when I was getting demure for saying that an Apple tablet wouldn't work with Mac OS.

I guess I have years vested in this concept. Not in Chrome OS, but the idea that a lightweight OS that is designed to access the web brilliantly and will work on inexpensive PCs and appliances the world round would finally rise to take a chunk of Windows marketshare. Around here it's oft believed that Mac OS will ruse up and crush Windows, but that means Apple has to license their OS or that Apple has to outsell in units every other Windows-based PC vendor. That's unrealistic.

Note that Chrome OS can be compiled for ARM or Atom and their apps will run the same on each. Note the AppleTV is only $99. Now imagine all those impoverished countries and people in the world that would love to have some basic connection to the inherent and world at large in the privacy of gher home thy we were okay with dial up and layer slow DSL/Cable years ago. That $99 box coupled with a cheap CRT is more affordable than anything else that run as fast with Windows. Stepping stones. Millions of stepping stones that don't affect MS' short term bottom line but eat away at the bottom end of their market share.


Nothing wrong with what you say.

Though, idealistically why do you need the web. The lightweight OS and apps can run on the same $99 box.

Take that $99 box and activate the USB port add iWork apps $30 and less than 200 MB SDD space and you've got a standalone powerhouse that can read and process Office files.

You can do the internet thing at your option.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #350 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Implying that all parts of HTML5 is unreliable because parts are still being worked on is pushing into that area.

The point of that comment was that the standard is slow moving and about to enter a period of even slower evolution as they try to get the spec ready for recommendation in 2014.

This is a key aspect for the success of ChromeOS and Google will either stick with the spec and not be able to tailor caching to its specific needs or introduce non-compliant extensions to their version app caching and catch heat for it and not be assured that those extension end up in the next iteration of the spec.

The other point is that by adopting HTML5 over gears is that they cost themselves a good year in terms of evolving their offline capabilities. Wherever they are in June 2011 they probably could have reached sometime in 2010. This isn't too critical as long as caching works better than it did with gears.
post #351 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Whats youre premise that open standards web code (HTML5/CCS3/JS) could be discontinued in 2-3 years? We are not on the same wave length if you think that is possible.

You didn't waste a few months of your work life in Google Wave. This isn't about HTML5/CSS3/JS being discontinued but a Google product line that is largely duplicative with Android.

Quote:
Remember, this isnt an all or nothing solution. This isnt like having to make the arduous decision to keep using a DEC minicomputer or invest in an AS/400. Chrome OS, like the iPhone before it, will be tested to see if it fits the needs of some users in certain fields. If it works out they will invest more, if not, they wont. If it does work out it wont replace all, or the majority of Windows-based machines. Its just a simple alternative for access that require hardly any client side processing. Basic data entry is one of them.

That cloud based apps will be part of the enterprise is a given. That there will be more lightweight clients in the future is a given.

That enterprise or even education will massively adopt ChromeOS is a completely different question and being skeptical of that claim doesn't imply we don't get it. It just means we're not too sure about either Google's execution of the concept or it's long term commitment to the platform should it encounter the same sorts of issue as Wave.

On the enterprise front at most you'll see is a few scattered small scale trials here and there this year. Google is missing too many capabilities to warrant anything more...just like iOS was missing lots of enterprise capabilities in the beginning.

The key difference is that success of iOS in the enterprise is far more important to Apple (despite claims to the contrary) than the success of ChomeOS is to Google at all unless you feel that Android is in danger of collapse. Unless Oracle is going to pull a rabbit out of its hat that is highly unlikely.
post #352 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

It wouldnt be great for them, which is why they are pushing this as a cheap alternative to companies and schools leasing considerably more expensive HW for mostly simple tasks. Part of the lease fee is to get more access to Google Docs.

I dunno...watching kids with their laptops I don't believe that the use cases are as limited as Chromebook proponents claim. Or let me rephrase that better...if all you have are chromebooks in the classroom you've just hobbled your best and brightest with the lowest common denominator.

Quote:
Outside of that, the cost of 12 notebook with a full-sized keyboard and oversized multitouch trackpad for $349 that can launch into a browser in 8 seconds is fast and convenient. No 3rd-party browser can even start in that time frame on such an inexpensive device. THIS IS NOT THE MACHINE FOR ANY OF US ON THIS SITE.

Because we don't want instant on? Please. However, this user requirement can be met with something like Splashtop or deep sleep modes like on the MBA that lasts 30 days.

Not sure why folks keep touting boot time as that key a metric as opposed to how quickly you can resume work when you flip open the lid.

Quote:
But I digress, even if a customer isnt using Google Docs they would still be using Google for search and likely Google for email. Id think this would be more than enough for Google to find it worthwhile.

Now consider their Android system. vendors and carriers can completely trash anything relating to Google on that system. Google gets nothing. Google only profits if their default services are used or if their additional services are purchased. So the same argument permits between the two: What does Google get out of it?

Given the Skyhook fiasco this is a questionable assertion.

Quote:
Again, this is not an OS for anyone on this site, nor likely for anyone we know. We just dont fit the demographic. At the same time writing it off as a foolish idea because were now at war with Google (Weve always been at war with Google) or because we cant see how WebKit can be used as a UI despite the clear evidence to the contrary isnt being objective.

That whole "this isn't an OS for anyone here" thing has always struck me as a questionable assertion even when I say it. Name one thing in that category that actually had widespread appeal?

No, iOS isn't a candidate...it's useful for many folks or it wouldn't be successful. Folks that said iOS wasn't for them were wrong.

You keep claiming objectivity while being hugely defensive and accusing folks of lying or shortsightedness. Coupled with ignoring inconvenient limitations of ChomeOS you're not being objective at all.

Quote:
Google is leveraging their strengths to do what Apple is oft praised, they are removing all the complex elements that 1) make it difficult to use, and 2) make even powerful HW feel slow.

I wouldn't call win7 on a netbook teh snappy but it's not slow either. Nor would I call win7 all that hard to use. Meh, this whole thing strikes me as a lot of latent microsoft bashing more than anything to do with Apple.
post #353 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

Because we don't want instant on? Please.

Something not achievable with any Windows netbook or cheap notebook you keep touting as a superior option for any and all needs. The quick boot and instant on go right to the heart of the OS being optimized for the HW (but since you have disallowed iOS as a prime example of such a feat I guess I can mention that again of how this is a goo thing over Windows).

Quote:
You keep claiming objectivity while being hugely defensive and accusing folks of lying or shortsightedness. Coupled with ignoring inconvenient limitations of ChomeOS you're not being objective at all.

I called you a liar for making a statement as fact despite knowing (or ignoring) that it was a false claim. Maybe it was unintentional and you just aren't following the thread closely because I've clearly mentioned the limitations of Chrome OS many, many, many times in this thread.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #354 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I guess I have years vested in this concept.

This hardly leaves you as an unbiased and objective observer.

Quote:
Not in Chrome OS, but the idea that a lightweight OS that is designed to access the web brilliantly and will work on inexpensive PCs and appliances the world round would finally rise to take a chunk of Windows marketshare.

Who the cares about taking a chunk of Windows marketshare? Zealots.

Quote:
Around here it's oft believed that Mac OS will ruse up and crush Windows,

Really? Who the hell believes that?

Quote:
but that means Apple has to license their OS or that Apple has to outsell in units every other Windows-based PC vendor. That's unrealistic.

Which is why most sane mac fans don't give a shit about Windows market share. So long as OSX maintains a healthy share to support the developer base it is completely immaterial.

Quote:
Note that Chrome OS can be compiled for ARM or Atom and their apps will run the same on each. Note the AppleTV is only $99. Now imagine all those impoverished countries and people in the world that would love to have some basic connection to the inherent and world at large in the privacy of gher home thy we were okay with dial up and layer slow DSL/Cable years ago. That $99 box coupled with a cheap CRT is more affordable than anything else that run as fast with Windows. Stepping stones. Millions of stepping stones that don't affect MS' short term bottom line but eat away at the bottom end of their market share.

1) $99 + CRT is too expensive for impoverished countries.
2) No one really gives a shit about MS market share except MS haters and MS fanbois.
3) You're treating folks who disagree with the ChomeOS jihad against MS marketshare as heretics who are either lying or blind.

Hello...AppleInsider and not WeHateMSInsider. Wrong crusade. Being FOR Apple doesn't always imply being AGAINST Microsoft. If anything Google is Microsoft's spiritual successor so why anyone here cares that Google is eating Microsoft's lunch is beyond me.

After WebM, Flash and Skyhook trading MS dominance for Google dominance strikes me as a zero or even negative trade and frankly I hope WP7 takes a big assed chunk from Android. Microsoft screwed OEMs. Google far more likely to screw you.
post #355 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Something not achievable with any Windows netbook or cheap notebook you keep touting as a superior option for any and all needs.

Should I call you a liar here for ignoring the Win7 netbooks with Instant On? I DID mention Splashtop right? Samsung has one too. Is it a requirement that it boots into Win7 if all you wanted was email and a browser?

Should I call you a liar for ignoring waking from sleep?

Quote:
The quick boot and instant on go right to the heart of the OS being optimized for the HW (but since you have disallowed iOS as a prime example of such a feat I guess I can mention that again of how this is a goo thing over Windows).

iOS doesn't have a quick boot. Reboot your iPhone and see. I'll wait...it takes a while.

Again, who gives a shit about boot time? OSX boots faster than Win7 but it's the instant on from sleep and 30 day standby time that's the killer capability on the MBA.

If you can do that it's a completely solved problem that Win7 will get around to copying.

Quote:
I called you a liar for making a statement as fact despite knowing (or ignoring) that it was a false claim. Maybe it was unintentional and you just aren't following the thread closely because I've clearly mentioned the limitations of Chrome OS many, many, many times in this thread.

You called me a liar for making a statement that I later supported and you ignored the support. My point wasn't that offline apps was impossible but that the design strategy for app development differs. Why design your ChromeOS app to run natively if the expectation is that the platform is centered around ubiquitous high-speed net access?

If you code to the platforms natural strengths then for complex apps you will get high performance at the expense of bandwidth. The downside is poor offline behavior that appcache cannot solve. I gave you examples and you STILL persist in claiming I'm lying about something even after I clarified and gave examples. Unless you refute (or even acknowledge) those examples you can't call it a "false claim". Even then I'm not a "liar" unless I already knew those examples are wrong. I'm simply wrong.

Whatever. You want to call me a liar, I'll simply think you're an asshat. Fair trade I guess.
post #356 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Ya' know...

I've been experimenting with Chrome browser and Google Docs (with both Chrome and Safari browsers).

1) Online works OK, but I am concerned with, bandwidth large file upload times, storage costs, security and availability (no access to the Internet or the Service is down).

2) I don't believe that local processing is robust enough (yet) to satisfy my, or most people's, needs -- Google Docs needs the ability to directly input/output the common file formats in use today.

3) What I really did like was when the [online] service was available -- it was great to login and have all those [currently active] lfiles available and processable in one central place -- as opposed to fiddling with File Sharing or Screen Sharing.

I've done some experimenting myself. My basic conclusion is that this thing isn't fully baked yet.



See my posts here, here and here.
post #357 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post

I've done some experimenting myself. My basic conclusion is that this thing isn't fully baked yet.



See my posts here, here and here.


I agree!

Oddly, I meant to comment on a couple of these posts -- but got distracted because my temperature was rising at the response by others to some of my posts.

The Angry Birds example in your first (above) is brilliant -- it is concise and easy to understand.

If the OS/Apps cannot save the scores and status (maintain the state) of your usage for a simple game -- how can one assume that it will do so across critical applications -- especially those involving collaboration of several users.

I remember seeing in the slides of Google's Chrome OS preso -- that they touted it was "stateless" -- and thinking at the time that this was an odd thing to tout as an advantage. How could the system maintain sync of a single user's offline and online updates to a file if it didn't maintain some sort of "state" -- let alone the case of several users collaborating.

When I posted questions related to this, I got responses that iOS or OS X don't do this and therefore it was unreasonable to expect Chrome OS to do it -- or somesuch.

In your other posts, I was (and still am) unsure of your reference to "indexed DB". I am new to Chrome and Google Docs and not familiar with its structure/implementation. I made a mental note to research "indexed DB" in Google's usage.

But, at that time, my dander was up. and I went back to fiddling with the Chrome browser and Google Docks to more succinctly document my concerns at what I saw as deficiencies.

I don't believe anyone responded directly or refuted these deficiencies.

For sake of readability the post is shown below.

And I still need to research Googles use of "indexed DB" and "Stateless: operation.

Best,

Dick


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

In an effort to be objective, I have done some further experimenting with Chrome Browser on Macs.

Here are some results:

1) I was able to get Angry Birds to run, kinda' -- the default is "HD" and after a delay, the music starts playing, but the light blue screen remains. If you switch to SD, the AB startup screen appears and the app loads and plays in a very small window within the Chrome browser window. Play feels sluggish, though. It feels like something is dampening my gestures and taps -- don't know if this the Chrome UI layer or if the app is downsized for the expected Chrome hardware.

I have the AB Mac app (57 MB size) -- it runs full-screen and performs as expected.

2) I also installed Plants and Zombies. It loaded and ran, in a larger window within the Chrome window. It too, seemed sluggish when compared to the app running on the iPad.

3) On the Mac, the Chrome browser app is 100.7 MB vs Safari at 57.1 MB -- That's almost double, and it's just a browser. I wonder why?

4) Angry Birds, once loaded, worked with the Internet unavailable. Plants and Zombies would not!

5) After reconnecting to the Internet, Plants and Zombies still would not run, even after refreshing Chrome, I could not resume P&Z until I accessed the Internet through another tab. This appears to be a miscommunication between Chrome and the app -- how to determine if the Internet is available.

6) I also installed the BBC Good Food Recipes app -- When disconnected from the Internet:
-- sometimes it would run fine
-- other times it would bring up a "page not available" message within the app
-- still other times it would open a new tab with a 404 error - apparently linking to another web page

7) I played around with the apps at docs.google.com -- some pleasant surprises and disappointments

8) GoogleDocs help docs are sketchy at best -- or non-existant when the Internet is unavailable.

9) I tried to open a blank Document file and drag and drop a local .doc file in to it. This did not work. I had to Open the file with Pages, Word, etc. and copy/paste from it to the Google Document file -- 2 extra steps.

10) Oddly, I was able to drag and drop an image file directly into a Google Document file.

11) I could not drag that same image into a Google Drawing file -- it opened a new Google Browser tab and displayed the URL of the local file, e.g. file://... In the Drawing file, I clicked the Image icon and was presented with several options. One way was to select an already uploaded image. Another way was to open an image URL. I tried the file:// URL, but it would only accept http or https URLS. Obviously the Internet had to be connected to include images in the Drawing file.

12) Each time I tried something that the Google browser didn't like or a specific Google Docs app couldn't handle -- it would open another browser tab to display, say, the local image that it couldn't drag and drop.

13) Sometimes, in some Google Docs apps, you could copy from the new tab into the Google Docs app -- other times you couodn't.

14) Very quickly the Google browser's tab bar became loaded with tiny tabs containing these things that it couldn't handle -- to the point that you couldn't tell what was in the tab without mousig over it or opening it.

15) I was surprised by the robustness of the drawing program -- though it felt sluggish compared to a local app.

16) I didn't check it but there appears to be an humongous amount of packet request/responses as well as an humongous amount of data exchange going on between the local device and the Internet using Google apps. They appear to be neither fish nor fowl -- rather, they attempt to bridge the gap between local and online. I don't believe they have succeeded.



All-in-all it was a very mixed bag best described as: some are some, and some are not!


I found that if you wanted to do anything worthwhile -- you pretty much were expected to be connected to the Internet.

Google claims that, paraphrased: "Many apps will work offline".

But they don't quantify "many" nor do they attempt to define the types of things you can do offline.

It is very interesting, to me, that Google's Flagship apps do not perform consistently, or at all -- when offline.


I found the entire experience unsettling and confusing -- and I am not technically challenged.


As it stands in today's world, I suspect that a Chrome OS-ChromeBook solution would work in a very limited set of use patterns, with very specific apps and activities -- if the Internet is available.

But, anyone who has any rudimentary experience would be put off by the lack (or inconsistency) of features such as copy/paste and drag and drop. They would be fighting the system!

For an enterprise or education IT department there may be some value to embracing the Chrome OS solution for some tasks and activities -- but I don't believe it is robust enough to wholesale replace PCs within an establishment with Chrome OS and Chrome Computers.

If the latter is true, then the individual establishment must evaluate if there's enough benefit in add another, incompatibility to the mix of IT offerings, training and support,

It is not "The Devil We Know" vs "The Devil We Don't Know" -- rather it is "The Devil We Know" vs "The Devil We Don't Know" plus "The Devil We Know".
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #358 of 372
JC Almighty are you all still on about this?
post #359 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

JC Almighty are you all still on about this?

And amazingly no one has throw out the iggy gauntlet yet. Impressive!
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #360 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

If the OS/Apps cannot save the scores and status (maintain the state) of your usage for a simple game -- how can one assume that it will do so across critical applications -- especially those involving collaboration of several users.

I remember seeing in the slides of Google's Chrome OS preso -- that they touted it was "stateless" -- and thinking at the time that this was an odd thing to tout as an advantage. How could the system maintain sync of a single user's offline and online updates to a file if it didn't maintain some sort of "state" -- let alone the case of several users collaborating.

When I posted questions related to this, I got responses that iOS or OS X don't do this and therefore it was unreasonable to expect Chrome OS to do it -- or somesuch.

Actually, iOS and OS X do it quite well. If you enable iDisk and set it to mirror on your device, you have access to your files when you're not connected to the Internet. You can open, read, print, modify, and save your files without an internet connection. If you modify them, they're automatically synced as soon as you connect.

It's not perfect. For example, if you have two computers linked to the same iDisk and both of them are disconnected and you make changes to both files, then you will lose one set of changes. But that's understandable - and something you just have to keep in mind.

For the majority of users, it's seamless and transparent. You work on the files exactly as you do with your desktop computer and everything is automatic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post

I've done some experimenting myself. My basic conclusion is that this thing isn't fully baked yet.

Exactly. It might conceivably grow into something useful (if Google doesn't get bored with it and drop it in favor of some other way to steal your data first), but all these people bragging about how they're going to sell so many million of them are missing the point. It's nowhere near ready for corporate IT people (who are, by and large, very conservative because their duties require it) to start buying them by the millions.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Google sets sights on enterprise, education with subscription 'Chromebooks'