A litte further down after watching the full demo, I've changed my mind a bit.
If this plays out right, as in, terminal mode, I don't see any reason you could work on a full music project with samples, virtual instruments, audioe files, FX and so on, hope on a plane, fly somewhere, then RENT 4 mac pros, insert a dongle, and poof, your terminal now has 64 cores to work with, plug-ins and all, at your command. And that's just one example.
Peace.
All you really need is a app with a web interface hosted on a powerful computer(s) somewhere. With a fast connection, of course.
My mistake on ranting a bit too far about the lack of local cache. But there has been some previous points about raising legitimate points about, for example, Javascript where you expose all the source code.
Web tablet: 10" OLED screen, ARM processor, 24-hour battery. Chrome OS.
Price: $200
Available: Holiday season 2010
Not interested. ... By December 2010 my normal 1-year warranty (it can't be extended anymore in my country) on my iPhone 3GS runs out. So, a possible switch to the iPhone 4G.
That and/or an Arrandale/ post-Arrandale (Sandy Bridge(?)) MacBook Pro antiglare 15".
Who knows though, anything can happen in 12 months. No netbook for me, and in general I think it's a fad that will fade somewhat over the next year. Since netbooks will start to compete with smartphones in general.
Ah, the crazy "IT" world. That I've resisted (so far) buying too many gadgets is a bl**dy miracle.
Will people really want to load this on a computer?
On anything other than a $100 netbook? (when one arrives.)
I mean I dislike Microsoft as much as the next guy, but really?
It seems that everything that attaches to your TV these days is internet connected -- BluRay player, TiVo, PS3, etc. These can all offer the internet using Google Chrome OS.
Not interested. ... By December 2010 my normal 1-year warranty (it can't be extended anymore in my country) on my iPhone 3GS runs out. So, a possible switch to the iPhone 4G.
That and/or an Arrandale/ post-Arrandale (Sandy Bridge(?)) MacBook Pro antiglare 15".
Who knows though, anything can happen in 12 months. No netbook for me, and in general I think it's a fad that will fade somewhat over the next year. Since netbooks will start to compete with smartphones in general.
I think that eventually, though, the price of these devices is going to come down into "impulse buy" territory for anyone who has any interest in gadgets. Quite a bit cheaper than even netbooks are now. That's going to have some interesting ramifications on the computer industry.
It seems that everything that attaches to your TV these days is internet connected -- BluRay player, TiVo, PS3, etc. These can all offer the internet using Google Chrome OS.
Even TVs have internet connectivity in them. No need for any auxiliary device if you don?t want one. I think these appliances will be the biggest hit with Chrome OS. There is no reason why any and all of these home entertainment companies won?t have an option to jump into Chrome OS as a feature.
I think emerging markets is where Google is really trying to push for here. Get in on the ground floor with Google being the center of everything you do with the internet. I see this as being the first OS to take a huge chunk out of Windows? marketshare, though expect Windows to continue to grow in unit share and profit despite this. Linux will finally make a mark and Mac OS X will technically drop to the third most popular OS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FuturePastNow
I think that eventually, though, the price of these devices is going to come down into "impulse buy" territory for anyone who has any interest in gadgets. Quite a bit cheaper than even netbooks are now. That's going to have some interesting ramifications on the computer industry.
Besides netbooks being able to drop in price up to $50 if they get rid of Windows 7 Starter Edition, there is a chance that even full-sized cheap notebooks?which offer a lot more for only a little more money?could potentially get Chrome OS. I certainly know people that don?t need ?full? OS but want a full-sized machine.
The current lack of support for HDDs is a caveat, but I believe that is only for the drive the OS is on. It?s possible to have a very small flash drive internally with the OS on it. The OS is less than 1GB at this point.
Besides netbooks being able to drop in price up to $50 if they get rid of Windows 7 Starter Edition, there is a chance that even full-sized cheap notebooks?which offer a lot more for only a little more money?could potentially get Chrome OS. I certainly know people that don?t need ?full? OS but want a full-sized machine.
The current lack of support for HDDs is a caveat, but I believe that is only for the drive the OS is on. It?s possible to have a very small flash drive internally with the OS on it. The OS is less than 1GB at this point.
Do you see any reason, besides screen size, to have a full-size notebook running Chrome OS?
And it does support USB drives, which includes removable media like SD cards.
Do you see any reason, besides screen size, to have a full-size notebook running Chrome OS?
And it does support USB drives, which includes removable media like SD cards.
Several reasons.
1) Some users will find it simpler and easier while suiting their needs.
2) Potential power savings, especially over Windows. If I?m on battery and on a long flight with internet I may want to boot into Chrome OS to maximize my usage time.
I already have my Snow Leopard Install Disc on an 8GB SD card which I can boot into any time for repairs/issues. There is enough room to put Chrome OS on there, too. I have tested Chrome OS as a VM image but I?ll soon be testing it on the SD card to see if it can access the HDD files in case I wanted to play any media or documents I have stored on the machine and if there are any power gains to be had, even with this newly launched OS.
I think that eventually, though, the price of these devices is going to come down into "impulse buy" territory for anyone who has any interest in gadgets. Quite a bit cheaper than even netbooks are now. That's going to have some interesting ramifications on the computer industry.
Fair enough. For me personally though my next impulse buy is the ATI Radeon HD 5850 1GB ... But since I've been thinking of it, that's not very impulsive, is it.
1) Some users will find it simpler and easier while suiting their needs.
2) Potential power savings, especially over Windows. If I’m on battery and on a long flight with internet I may want to boot into Chrome OS to maximize my usage time...
Can anyone share which airlines are best for flights to Europe with regards to Internet access? From the US or other places... Curious.
BTW on the topic of power savings, if you could run everything of a 8GB SD card and the laptop was smart enough to "shut down" the HDD, that could be big.
Probably regular laptop manufacturers may offer this feature of an SD card slot that will take an SD card that runs Chrome OS while shutting off the HDD. Sort of a hybrid netbook/ laptop depending on your battery life needs.
The only thing is how robust is SD for frequent read/writes if you used it as the primary "drive" for Chrome OS?
Can anyone share which airlines are best for flights to Europe with regards to Internet access? From the US or other places... Curious.
BTW on the topic of power savings, if you could run everything of a 8GB SD card and the laptop was smart enough to "shut down" the HDD, that could be big.
Probably regular laptop manufacturers may offer this feature of an SD card slot that will take an SD card that runs Chrome OS while shutting off the HDD. Sort of a hybrid netbook/ laptop depending on your battery life needs.
The only thing is how robust is SD for frequent read/writes if you used it as the primary "drive" for Chrome OS?
There aren’t many and the only ones I’ve used are through Aircell, but this is certainly a trend I expect to grow exponentially. I won’t even take a flight over 3 hours unless it has WiFi available.
SD is more than adequate for what Chrome OS currently has in mind. As for power, I think Chrome OS’ biggest issue is power optimization. Mac OS X is considerably better than Windows and Linux distros at power management. A result of tighter controls and better understanding of the HW and OS. That said, SL is not as good as Leopard in this regard. Even with a simple webcode-based UI in Chrome OS it could be worse than Mac OS X in power savings mode. We’ll have to see once it gets more evolved.
Intel has already introduced Turbo Memory, though it looked promising it was pretty much pointless. The theoretical claims didn’t seem to work out at all in the real world. On top of that, Apple never supported it, which I felt at the time was necessary for it to gain momentum as “must have” feature thereby pushing others to make it more viable. It could still work out with Chrome OS int he future and possibly use less power and be faster than an SD or USB lash since it’s on the logic board.
I can see this becoming quite popular. Provided it's marketed well and the hardware has a clear advantage over that of regular PCs that is. Most people merely consume content rather than create it, and the plan is (initially) being rolled out to Netbooks.
Although I do have to wonder if the assumption that people are idiots is going to take off now, because it didn't the first time. The idea that it's computing "for them, and not for us" is dubious to me. However, I can see myself using this on a Netbook, and it's simple enough for my mum to use too.
Google - "As you can see, Microsoft have made a killer app for our OS"
Most people merely consume content rather than create it
That is an excellent distinction.
Quote:
Google - "As you can see, Microsoft have made a killer app for our OS"
*logs into the Office web app*
MS and Apple both have browser-based apps in works. This is the future of computing. This does not mean you have to have internet access to use these apps, but they will be built with that distinction in mind.
MS and Apple both have browser-based apps in works. This is the future of computing. This does not mean you have to have internet access to use these apps, but they will be built with that distinction in mind.
Indeed it will, and I was quite impressed to hear that Microsoft are finally moving to support HTML5 for Internet Explorer 9. Office web apps rely on documents having been created offline first though IIRC. The fact you have to log in using your google mail address makes me question the whole offline aspect of Chrome OS.
Indeed it will, and I was quite impressed to hear that Microsoft are finally moving to support HTML5 for Internet Explorer 9. Office web apps rely on documents having been created offline first though IIRC. The fact you have to log in using your google mail address makes me question the whole offline aspect of Chrome OS.
When MS changed their position to make standards mode on IE8 the default instead of the exception I saw that times were changing. Now that the iPhone has made smartphones popular for the average consumer and even PMPs are getting full browsers open standards support is simply a must if MS wishes to retain any browser dominance with IE in the future.
There are many things to like about IE8 on Win7, but the engines are not one of them. I use Chrome Frame and have edited the DLLs to make it the default engine. I get HTML5 and V8 for JS. So much faster. I?m not a fan of the simple Chrome browser and don?t care for Firefox as I don?t use plug-ins and because it doesn?t integrate as well as IE on Windows or Safari on OS X.
Seems like it could probably work right now with only minor re-jiggering. The parts of iTunes that aren't straight HTML use WebObjects which is basically Java. I bet they are porting a Chrome version of it as we speak and that there are no technical hurdles in the way.
I would love to see a version of iTunes that is more of a web-based mobile app that could recognize the music on your iphone/iPod and use it as the source for storage; kind of like a read-only player. Then you wouldn't have to carry all your music on your computer for it to get lost, broken or stolen.
Or, even more interesting would be like a streaming database of your music and content from a cloud. If they could dumb down the iPod such that all it stores is a database or a list of your music and you could stream anything from your playlist, then they could make iPods half the thickness and be just streaming players.
All you really need is a app with a web interface hosted on a powerful computer(s) somewhere. With a fast connection, of course.
Yes, but it's still a pain in the ass for the dev. Now you gotta worry about uptime and overage and blahdy blah blah. Great for some sorts of apps that depend on access anyway (social apps) but sucky for many others.
Chrome OS is designed to run on low-powered Atom processors, and internet-based apps which do not need that much horsepower so it should be faster. Better, it will be small. Google is offering great boot time measured in seconds, not minutes, so battery life should also get a boost.
Comments
A litte further down after watching the full demo, I've changed my mind a bit.
If this plays out right, as in, terminal mode, I don't see any reason you could work on a full music project with samples, virtual instruments, audioe files, FX and so on, hope on a plane, fly somewhere, then RENT 4 mac pros, insert a dongle, and poof, your terminal now has 64 cores to work with, plug-ins and all, at your command. And that's just one example.
Peace.
All you really need is a app with a web interface hosted on a powerful computer(s) somewhere. With a fast connection, of course.
Never heard of Google Gears? Try googling it.
My mistake on ranting a bit too far about the lack of local cache. But there has been some previous points about raising legitimate points about, for example, Javascript where you expose all the source code.
Interesting.
Web tablet: 10" OLED screen, ARM processor, 24-hour battery. Chrome OS.
Price: $200
Available: Holiday season 2010
Not interested.
That and/or an Arrandale/ post-Arrandale (Sandy Bridge(?)) MacBook Pro antiglare 15".
Who knows though, anything can happen in 12 months. No netbook for me, and in general I think it's a fad that will fade somewhat over the next year. Since netbooks will start to compete with smartphones in general.
Ah, the crazy "IT" world. That I've resisted (so far) buying too many gadgets is a bl**dy miracle.
Will people really want to load this on a computer?
On anything other than a $100 netbook? (when one arrives.)
I mean I dislike Microsoft as much as the next guy, but really?
It seems that everything that attaches to your TV these days is internet connected -- BluRay player, TiVo, PS3, etc. These can all offer the internet using Google Chrome OS.
Not interested.
That and/or an Arrandale/ post-Arrandale (Sandy Bridge(?)) MacBook Pro antiglare 15".
Who knows though, anything can happen in 12 months. No netbook for me, and in general I think it's a fad that will fade somewhat over the next year. Since netbooks will start to compete with smartphones in general.
I think that eventually, though, the price of these devices is going to come down into "impulse buy" territory for anyone who has any interest in gadgets. Quite a bit cheaper than even netbooks are now. That's going to have some interesting ramifications on the computer industry.
It seems that everything that attaches to your TV these days is internet connected -- BluRay player, TiVo, PS3, etc. These can all offer the internet using Google Chrome OS.
Even TVs have internet connectivity in them. No need for any auxiliary device if you don?t want one. I think these appliances will be the biggest hit with Chrome OS. There is no reason why any and all of these home entertainment companies won?t have an option to jump into Chrome OS as a feature.
I think emerging markets is where Google is really trying to push for here. Get in on the ground floor with Google being the center of everything you do with the internet. I see this as being the first OS to take a huge chunk out of Windows? marketshare, though expect Windows to continue to grow in unit share and profit despite this. Linux will finally make a mark and Mac OS X will technically drop to the third most popular OS.
I think that eventually, though, the price of these devices is going to come down into "impulse buy" territory for anyone who has any interest in gadgets. Quite a bit cheaper than even netbooks are now. That's going to have some interesting ramifications on the computer industry.
Besides netbooks being able to drop in price up to $50 if they get rid of Windows 7 Starter Edition, there is a chance that even full-sized cheap notebooks?which offer a lot more for only a little more money?could potentially get Chrome OS. I certainly know people that don?t need ?full? OS but want a full-sized machine.
The current lack of support for HDDs is a caveat, but I believe that is only for the drive the OS is on. It?s possible to have a very small flash drive internally with the OS on it. The OS is less than 1GB at this point.
Besides netbooks being able to drop in price up to $50 if they get rid of Windows 7 Starter Edition, there is a chance that even full-sized cheap notebooks?which offer a lot more for only a little more money?could potentially get Chrome OS. I certainly know people that don?t need ?full? OS but want a full-sized machine.
The current lack of support for HDDs is a caveat, but I believe that is only for the drive the OS is on. It?s possible to have a very small flash drive internally with the OS on it. The OS is less than 1GB at this point.
Do you see any reason, besides screen size, to have a full-size notebook running Chrome OS?
And it does support USB drives, which includes removable media like SD cards.
Do you see any reason, besides screen size, to have a full-size notebook running Chrome OS?
And it does support USB drives, which includes removable media like SD cards.
Several reasons.
1) Some users will find it simpler and easier while suiting their needs.
2) Potential power savings, especially over Windows. If I?m on battery and on a long flight with internet I may want to boot into Chrome OS to maximize my usage time.
I already have my Snow Leopard Install Disc on an 8GB SD card which I can boot into any time for repairs/issues. There is enough room to put Chrome OS on there, too. I have tested Chrome OS as a VM image but I?ll soon be testing it on the SD card to see if it can access the HDD files in case I wanted to play any media or documents I have stored on the machine and if there are any power gains to be had, even with this newly launched OS.
I think that eventually, though, the price of these devices is going to come down into "impulse buy" territory for anyone who has any interest in gadgets. Quite a bit cheaper than even netbooks are now. That's going to have some interesting ramifications on the computer industry.
Fair enough. For me personally though my next impulse buy is the ATI Radeon HD 5850 1GB
Several reasons.
1) Some users will find it simpler and easier while suiting their needs.
2) Potential power savings, especially over Windows. If I’m on battery and on a long flight with internet I may want to boot into Chrome OS to maximize my usage time...
Can anyone share which airlines are best for flights to Europe with regards to Internet access? From the US or other places... Curious.
BTW on the topic of power savings, if you could run everything of a 8GB SD card and the laptop was smart enough to "shut down" the HDD, that could be big.
Probably regular laptop manufacturers may offer this feature of an SD card slot that will take an SD card that runs Chrome OS while shutting off the HDD. Sort of a hybrid netbook/ laptop depending on your battery life needs.
The only thing is how robust is SD for frequent read/writes if you used it as the primary "drive" for Chrome OS?
Can anyone share which airlines are best for flights to Europe with regards to Internet access? From the US or other places... Curious.
BTW on the topic of power savings, if you could run everything of a 8GB SD card and the laptop was smart enough to "shut down" the HDD, that could be big.
Probably regular laptop manufacturers may offer this feature of an SD card slot that will take an SD card that runs Chrome OS while shutting off the HDD. Sort of a hybrid netbook/ laptop depending on your battery life needs.
The only thing is how robust is SD for frequent read/writes if you used it as the primary "drive" for Chrome OS?
There aren’t many and the only ones I’ve used are through Aircell, but this is certainly a trend I expect to grow exponentially. I won’t even take a flight over 3 hours unless it has WiFi available. SD is more than adequate for what Chrome OS currently has in mind. As for power, I think Chrome OS’ biggest issue is power optimization. Mac OS X is considerably better than Windows and Linux distros at power management. A result of tighter controls and better understanding of the HW and OS. That said, SL is not as good as Leopard in this regard. Even with a simple webcode-based UI in Chrome OS it could be worse than Mac OS X in power savings mode. We’ll have to see once it gets more evolved.
Intel has already introduced Turbo Memory, though it looked promising it was pretty much pointless. The theoretical claims didn’t seem to work out at all in the real world. On top of that, Apple never supported it, which I felt at the time was necessary for it to gain momentum as “must have” feature thereby pushing others to make it more viable. It could still work out with Chrome OS int he future and possibly use less power and be faster than an SD or USB lash since it’s on the logic board.
Although I do have to wonder if the assumption that people are idiots is going to take off now, because it didn't the first time. The idea that it's computing "for them, and not for us" is dubious to me. However, I can see myself using this on a Netbook, and it's simple enough for my mum to use too.
Google - "As you can see, Microsoft have made a killer app for our OS"
*logs into the Office web app*
Most people merely consume content rather than create it
That is an excellent distinction.
Google - "As you can see, Microsoft have made a killer app for our OS"
*logs into the Office web app*
MS and Apple both have browser-based apps in works. This is the future of computing. This does not mean you have to have internet access to use these apps, but they will be built with that distinction in mind.
That is an excellent distinction.
MS and Apple both have browser-based apps in works. This is the future of computing. This does not mean you have to have internet access to use these apps, but they will be built with that distinction in mind.
Indeed it will, and I was quite impressed to hear that Microsoft are finally moving to support HTML5 for Internet Explorer 9. Office web apps rely on documents having been created offline first though IIRC. The fact you have to log in using your google mail address makes me question the whole offline aspect of Chrome OS.
Indeed it will, and I was quite impressed to hear that Microsoft are finally moving to support HTML5 for Internet Explorer 9. Office web apps rely on documents having been created offline first though IIRC. The fact you have to log in using your google mail address makes me question the whole offline aspect of Chrome OS.
When MS changed their position to make standards mode on IE8 the default instead of the exception I saw that times were changing. Now that the iPhone has made smartphones popular for the average consumer and even PMPs are getting full browsers open standards support is simply a must if MS wishes to retain any browser dominance with IE in the future.
There are many things to like about IE8 on Win7, but the engines are not one of them. I use Chrome Frame and have edited the DLLs to make it the default engine. I get HTML5 and V8 for JS. So much faster. I?m not a fan of the simple Chrome browser and don?t care for Firefox as I don?t use plug-ins and because it doesn?t integrate as well as IE on Windows or Safari on OS X.
Seems like it could probably work right now with only minor re-jiggering. The parts of iTunes that aren't straight HTML use WebObjects which is basically Java. I bet they are porting a Chrome version of it as we speak and that there are no technical hurdles in the way.
I would love to see a version of iTunes that is more of a web-based mobile app that could recognize the music on your iphone/iPod and use it as the source for storage; kind of like a read-only player. Then you wouldn't have to carry all your music on your computer for it to get lost, broken or stolen.
Or, even more interesting would be like a streaming database of your music and content from a cloud. If they could dumb down the iPod such that all it stores is a database or a list of your music and you could stream anything from your playlist, then they could make iPods half the thickness and be just streaming players.
All you really need is a app with a web interface hosted on a powerful computer(s) somewhere. With a fast connection, of course.
Yes, but it's still a pain in the ass for the dev. Now you gotta worry about uptime and overage and blahdy blah blah. Great for some sorts of apps that depend on access anyway (social apps) but sucky for many others.