But any smart enterprise manager is not going to turn all of his data over to Google. So the target market is cheap, uninformed IT managers of large corporations who don't care about data privacy.
Doesn't sound like a very large market.
You're Paranoid. The issue for you is NOT the price, it's not the tech (browser only) it's the fact that Google is providing it.
So this will be my last post to your astroturfing.
1-Google had HUNDREDS of companies (large and small) test out the ChromeOS model with the Cr48.
2-over 75% of them said they could move all their work to them today.
3-other THREE MILLION companies use Google Apps for business, including some rather large ones in privacy sensitive fields (Biotech, News, Consulting, etc)
So 3 million companies isn't a large market? Let's say that they only get an average of 10 chromebooks per company, that is still over 30 million devices, and there are some huge names on that list.
The crapbook, OTOH, has no advantages over a real laptop.
- It's the same price (or more)
- It's the same size
- It has the same keyboard
- it has the same screen size as many laptops (and many sub-400 laptops even have much larger screens)
A veteran industry blogger over at Engadget has a pretty fair editorial on why Google's Chromebook subscription model might appeal to educators and enterprises. Read thru the entire article (only takes 2 minutes or less) and some of your questions might get answered.
I tried to run Parallels so I could download Chrome under Windows -- to see if it included more than just the Chrome Browser available on native OS X.
I hadn't used Parallels for over a year. About a month ago I wanted to try a specialty program that was Windows only. I tried to load Parallels, but it won't run on the latest Mac/OS X combination.
I was able to download and install a trial and all went well.
Now, the trial has expired and it will cost me $80 to upgrade.
Not worth it to me.
So, can someone tell me: If you install Chrome on Windows -- do you get anything but a browser?
If so, I may decide to go through a painful reinstall of Parallels Trial Windows (NT-->XP Upgrade--Service Packs) on another Mac.
The Windows installs are several hours of frustration and I won't do it just to run a Chrome browser,
Finally, Chrome seems OK as a browser -- but I would not use it because of Flash. I am comfortable with Safari -- but periodically run FF,
Though, I can see that coming at this from the perspective of a Windows user, that Chrome would be attractive for its integration, consistency, and efficiency -- the UX!
I still don't know if there is enough capability with Chrome OS only (no underlying Windows OS) to attract enough people to sustain the platform.
I suspect that, after Chrome OS matures a little and gets some basic app categories satisfied (for offline use) -- it will need a run rate of 20 million per year to compete with the personal computer and tablet market,
HP and WebOS could be a real competitor to Chrome OS -- and could offer a comparable device with a Windows underpinning. I can envision an HP Thick-Client or tablet that primarily runs WebOS -- but runs an App that runs a few needed Windows apps when necessary.
Then, of course, there is Microsoft -- they could still get it right!
I'm not convinced though that most enterprise and education is ready to move into purely browser-based apps.
Enterprise is already moving. Probably the majority of enterprise users today regularly use at least one browser based app.
I don't think ChromeOS is for everyone. Right now it probably isn't even for the majority of enterprise users. But there are a significant number of users who are already mostly or completely working in the browser who could easily switch and I think that number is only going to go up.
Browser based apps make sense for enterprise as they are much easier to manage. You don't need to push software to people's machines and worry what versions they are using. Everyone always has the latest data. You don't need to worry about company data being lost/stolen when someone leaves their laptop on the train, especially running your own servers. So if you are already moving people to the browser, going that final step and eliminating Windows also makes a lot of sense.
You're Paranoid. The issue for you is NOT the price, it's not the tech (browser only) it's the fact that Google is providing it.
So this will be my last post to your astroturfing.
1-Google had HUNDREDS of companies (large and small) test out the ChromeOS model with the Cr48.
2-over 75% of them said they could move all their work to them today.
3-other THREE MILLION companies use Google Apps for business, including some rather large ones in privacy sensitive fields (Biotech, News, Consulting, etc)
So 3 million companies isn't a large market? Let's say that they only get an average of 10 chromebooks per company, that is still over 30 million devices, and there are some huge names on that list.
I looked at the list -- 140 entries with about 20-30 big names.
Even if these 140 companies bought 1,000 ChromeBooks each -- thats only 140,000.
Certainly, If Google could knock off a few industry leader "flagship" accounts, that would attract a lot of other 2nd and 3rd tier companies.
P.S. I would have thought that Google would have salted CR48s at Stanford University -- considering that Larry and Sergey...
So, can someone tell me: If you install Chrome on Windows -- do you get anything but a browser?
Chrome on windows is still a browser. What you would need to do to test the OS is to fine the full OS and boot it up in the VM by itself.
I will say that Chrome tends to run much better on windows than OSX, just like Safari runs a LOT better on OSX compared to Windows. Since this thing would be native though, those performance bugs shouldn't be an issue.
Quote:
Finally, Chrome seems OK as a browser -- but I would not use it because of Flash. I am comfortable with Safari -- but periodically run FF,
I can understand your desire not to run flash. but at the same time, Chrome most likely has the better implementation of it since it's a sandboxed apps, and will update automatically since it's considered part of the browser. I know a lot of people who use FF/Safari as their main browser, but keep Chrome around for if they have to see flash content (since click to flash still registers your device as flash enabled)
Quote:
HP and WebOS could be a real competitor to Chrome OS -- and could offer a comparable device with a Windows underpinning. I can envision an HP Thick-Client or tablet that primarily runs WebOS -- but runs an App that runs a few needed Windows apps when necessary.
Then, of course, there is Microsoft -- they could still get it right!
The problem is that windows (or OSX) suck on bargin machines. you can get them to run, but they're slow. It's a different matter entirely if you're using an OS designed for lower power devices. That's why the ipad2 can have the specs it does and perform so well.
I'm really excited to see what HP does with WebOS as well. That's just a fun OS (though it has memory management issues still) but I don't think that having any basis in windows will help it (unless they get a VM environment)
I think where it will really take off is Native Client. Chrome devs at google (and I'm assuming other companies) are working to try and build native client support into HTML5, which would allow for you to write a program using C++ and have it run like a native app even though it's running in the browser. No VM, no plugins, etc. That would make porting traditional desktop applications to a browser based os (Chrome, WebOS) a lot easier
I'm not convinced though that most enterprise and education is ready to move into purely browser-based apps.
I’m not understand why there is this end-all-be-all all-or-nothing mindset with many of the regular posters here who i usually find to very objective and fair.
There is no most as it’s an unproven design. It’s not like most have moved to the iPad even though it’s surely a hit. Even a great idea can be hindered by some poor decisions so there is no proof the Chromebook will work.
There is also no claim that they will move to a purely browser-based system. There is, however, a great deal of computing doing solely with the browser for certain tasks. How many employees only use the browser for accessing a company’s backend? It’s a lot and it’s not a new concept.
No one is saying that students will be playing Crysis on a chrome book or that a CEO will want use one as his personal computer. That’s simply not what they’re tasked for. But there is a market for which they do fit.
PS: Why hasn’t WebOS been stated as not being a competent OS simply because the UI is based on WebKit? it was a market failure because of Palm’s ineptitude against’s Apple’s success and had some issues with the design, but the OS itself was never belittled simply because it was a WebKit-based UI.
I looked at the list -- 140 entries with about 20-30 big names.
Even if these 140 companies bought 1,000 ChromeBooks each -- thats only 140,000.
Certainly, If Google could knock off a few industry leader "flagship" accounts, that would attract a lot of other 2nd and 3rd tier companies.
P.S. I would have thought that Google would have salted CR48s at Stanford University -- considering that Larry and Sergey...
... gotta' understand how to play the game!
... or, maybe they did salt Stanford...
There are over 3 million companies, those were just 140 of the bigger ones. Remember, most business is small business. Also, those are just companies that are ok with Google using them to advertise the business.
That's also the business listing only.. hundreds of schools use Google Apps:
Note one of them will boot in 8 seconds. I bet they take at least 4 minutes for the initial boot and will take 2 minutes from logging in just to get your web browser started.
Did you ever hear of 'sleep' rather than 'shut down'?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno
You're Paranoid. The issue for you is NOT the price, it's not the tech (browser only) it's the fact that Google is providing it.
And you know what I'm thinking now? I guess the moron trolls are delusional.
I don't trust Google. They've proven beyond any doubt that they have no respect for anyone's privacy or intellectual property and all your data belongs to them. But it's not just about Google, either. I wouldn't advocate putting my company's important documents on iDisk, either (although Apple doesn't have the history of mining your personal data like Google does).
But that doesn't change the fact that I gave plenty of other reasons why the crapbook is not a good deal. You can buy a far more capable system for less money which doesn't suffer from the same limitations and privacy concerns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno
So this will be my last post to your astroturfing.
Yeah, I'd imagine you're getting tired of having me prove how silly your arguments are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno
1-Google had HUNDREDS of companies (large and small) test out the ChromeOS model with the Cr48.
2-over 75% of them said they could move all their work to them today.
3-other THREE MILLION companies use Google Apps for business, including some rather large ones in privacy sensitive fields (Biotech, News, Consulting, etc)
So 3 million companies isn't a large market? Let's say that they only get an average of 10 chromebooks per company, that is still over 30 million devices, and there are some huge names on that list.
So that's how you do market research? Remind me to never hire you for a market research job.
Apple had no companies testing the iPad and no one committed to buying it before release. Ergo (by your logic), the iPad is a massive failure.
It's also funny how you make the leap from "we've tried Google Appe" to "We're going to buy at least 10 crapbooks for our company". Since you don't seem to care about logic or intelligent argument, why not simply say "there are a billion people using Google search, so Google will sell a billion crapbooks"? That makes every bit as much sense as your silly claim that the far that they use Google Apps means they're going to buy a crapbook.
Furthermore, you're woefully uninformed about how IT works in enterprises. Remember - the entire argument presented here was about how great this would be for enterprises to use. But a responsible Enterprise manager is not going to allow or disallow something without testing. So a company could well be included in your list of companies who had looked at the crapbook, but not a potential customer because they already rejected it.
Feel free to give us a list of major enterprise customers who have committed to wide scale deployment of crapbooks. Oh, wait - you can't since there are none.
I don't know why you're playing with Parallels. I don't think you can download Chrome OS yet (somebody correct me if I'm wrong). But you can download Chrome for OS X. And Chrome OS works exactly like the Chrome browser.
I don't know why you're have problems with it. I switched over to Chrome from Safari a year ago and never looked back. And this is after prodding from several Mac equipped family members who had switched to Chrome. I was the last person in the family to give up Safari. In fact, one of my cousins, outright, uninstalled Safari from his iMac after figuring out he hadn't touched Safari in months.
It's the world's third most popular browser behind IE and Firefox (and has double the marketshare of Safari), and it's rapidly gaining on those two. So I don't think it's a stretch to say, a lot of people will already be familiar with this platform.
As for your predictions of 20 million a year...umm, no. They are trying to compete with the personal or tablet markets....yet. This will be a part solution. In universities for example, I could see every student getting one of these. But there will still be general purpose computer labs with Windows machines for running apps that most students need, or UNIX labs for engineering students, or Mac Pro labs for media students. That general purpose Windows lab though, can be cut down a lot. Same for some enterprise users. Give one of these out to every employee as their general purpose machine. Use the money you save to give every member of your creative staff a fully spec'd MacBook Pro. Give your engineers Windows or UNIX or Linux or whatever machines they want.
Support and IT management costs would be reduced. Saving the salary and benefits of ust one IT guy could allow a school to equip 150 students with Chromebooks. I hope this paints a picture of how these would be used.
You're not going to be editing video on this. You'll be writing essays, checking email, surfing the web. When you need more, you go use a more powerful machine. This platform gives you the option to right size your IT.
Did you ever hear of 'sleep' rather than 'shut down'?
What a fucking stupid rebuttal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz
I don't know why you're playing with Parallels. I don't think you can download Chrome OS yet (somebody correct me if I'm wrong).
You sure can but it?s missing some stuff and doesn?t run that well in a VM since it?s not optimized for the device and have HW acceleration. Meaning: You won?t get close to the same experience as with a Chromebook or Chrombox device.
And I notice that you have no intelligent response - just a silly ad hominem attack --- which seems to be about all you do.
Someone said that the time taken to start the crapbook is a huge advantage over the couple of minutes to start a Windows laptop. Other than the fact that they exaggerated the time it takes, you can get around that problem if it bothers you by simply putting the system to sleep. Why is that a stupid response?
And if for some reason you can't do that, most people are used to that. They come into the office and hit the start button first thing in the morning and then take their coat off, take their work out of their briefcase, go get a cup of coffee, whatever. Seems to me that if you're considering replacing your company's entire workflow system and infrastructure to save a couple of minutes of startup time, then you shouldn't be considered for an IT role, anyway.
I don't trust Google. They've proven beyond any doubt that they have no respect for anyone's privacy or intellectual property and all your data belongs to them.
You're not the only one here with a fear of Google and how they handle your privacy. But today we found out that much of what you may have read about Google privacy concerns might trace back to a purposeful disinformation/smear campaign against them, bought and paid for by FaceBook!
It's sad that truth isn't enough when dealing with competitor's. Paying to spread false information and posting fear-mongering blogs must be the way to go.
I think the subscription price is okay....at least from what I gather talking to friends who are IT nerds. And I'm sure, Google's done their homework here and probably knows what competitors are running for. And they can always adjust the pricing if the thing doesn't sell. They obviously have plenty of pricing room.
The only two things I find strange with the subscription model is the term length and the fact that Google Apps aren't included. Sure, most companies only replace hardware every 3 years. But you'd think Google would try and better that, especially for netbook level hardware. I would have thought 2.5 years max. And then there's not tossing in Google Apps. I guess this is Google being benevolent. By why not amortize the $80 per user per year for Google Apps and include it in the price (say $25 for education users and $35 for business users). It seems quite obvious to me that most of the enterprise users taking up subscriptions will be existing Google App users. Why separate the hardware subscription from the software subscription?
The price of the machines does seem a tad high at this point though. When you can get a cheap laptop for that price, it might well be a tough sales pitch to get consumers to switch (large organizations will be a different story...the motivations are different). They've really got to get the base wifi models down to under $300.
The big question when it comes to price, is how much that Chromebox will cost. It's not the Chromebooks, it's the box that will allow a lot of companies to switch over, by replacing their Windows desktops. I also wonder if Google will offer a cheaper subscription for the Chromeboxes.
I’m not understand why there is this end-all-be-all all-or-nothing mindset with many of the regular posters here who i usually find to very objective and fair.
There is no most as it’s an unproven design. It’s not like most have moved to the iPad even though it’s surely a hit. Even a great idea can be hindered by some poor decisions so there is no proof the Chromebook will work.
There is also no claim that they will move to a purely browser-based system. There is, however, a great deal of computing doing solely with the browser for certain tasks. How many employees only use the browser for accessing a company’s backend? It’s a lot and it’s not a new concept.
No one is saying that students will be playing Crysis on a chrome book or that a CEO will want use one as his personal computer. That’s simply not what they’re tasked for. But there is a market for which they do fit.
PS: Why hasn’t WebOS been stated as not being a competent OS simply because the UI is based on WebKit? it was a market failure because of Palm’s ineptitude against’s Apple’s success and had some issues with the design, but the OS itself was never belittled simply because it was a WebKit-based UI.
As to your last question: WebOS was presented as a Smart Phone OS -- not a replacement for a laptop or desktop OS (for however large a number of users).
Even the initial iPhone supported only web-based third party apps. The big stride that set it apart came when Apple allowed running 3rd party native iOS/ARM apps.
WesOS was not around long enough to make this transition.
If ChromeOS is essentially a Browser running web apps (HTML, CSS, JavaScript, Flash) it, likely, is not close enough to the iron to support meaningful apps when off line.
If a netbook Atom CPU running say a compiled Word (or Word-equivalent) app sucks -- how can an equal or less Atom CPU running an interpreted Word-equivalent be expected to outperform it.
To me the big exposure to the Chrome OS philosophy is that it requires tethering to the backroom or cloud.
To my mind that makes it a specialized solution, great for some use patterns -- not so much for others.
It is very interesting that most of the posters here (me included) say that Chrome OS won't satisfy my needs but it's just great for those other guys (with conforming use pattens and needs).
Why don't we just ask those other guys or wait to see if they choose a tethered solution.
As to your last question: WebOS was presented as a Smart Phone OS -- not a replacement for a laptop or desktop OS (for however large a number of users).
IT NOT A REPLACEMENT FOR A TRADITIONAL COMPUTER FOR THE TRADITIONAL USER!!!
Don’t me drive up there and beat you with a chromebook on June 15th. I’m not that far away!
Quote:
If a netbook Atom CPU running say a compiled Word (or Word-equivalent) app sucks -- how can you expect an equal or less Atom CPU running an interpreted Word-equivalent be expected to outperform it.
I have no idea what this means? It’s like your saying legs are bad concept because you found one person with a twisted ankle. Why are you assuming that apps will suck? Are all apps great on the iPad or do some stand out as brilliant and others aren’t worth trying again? Why assume that because it’s Atom it will suck when Atom is much faster than ARM and I doubt you’d claim the iPad sucks.
You're not the only one here with a fear of Google and how they handle your privacy. But today we found out that much of what you may have read about Google privacy concerns might trace back to a purposeful disinformation/smear campaign against them, bought and paid for by FaceBook!
It's sad that truth isn't enough when dealing with competitor's. Paying to spread false information and posting fear-mongering blogs must be the way to go.
That may be true - but I've seen plenty of confirmed evidence of Google's BS behavior that I don't trust them. I don't need Facebook's shills to convince me of that.
At the same time, the people who are obviously paid Google shills here aren't going to convince me otherwise.
To me the big exposure to the Chrome OS philosophy is that it requires tethering to the backroom or cloud.
Good point. In addition to all the other issues I cited, the crapbook is useless if you temporarily lose access to the Internet. For example, we have regular power failures here. With a laptop, of course, you could continue to run on battery and run your local apps (obviously, you wouldn't have access to corporate data). But with this 'solution', you're going to temporarily lose Internet access - making the system useless. Or your ISP could have an outage. Or, for the remote users, you could be outside the range of Internet access.
One more reason to add to the list as to why this is a lousy solution.
-the entire OS is sandboxed, this means that if something infects one tab, it cannot access the information on your device OR in the other active tabs.
-the OS checks itself on boot for corruption, and will fix automatically
-everything is encrypted as a default.
It uses Flash and executes various things like displaying images, scripting languages, playing media, etc. Eventually, the sandbox will be broken. That's not even necessary for nefarious things to happen as malware-like scripts, who knows what can be done with cookies, and plane jane social engineering will continue unabated.
For most big orgs, a lot of the bad stuff is stopped at the org's firewall. I doubt ChromeOS will eliminate the firewall. For the bad stuff that leak through, you need tech support. I currently fail to see how it eliminates tech support. Any sufficiently complex system will be taken advantage of.
Tech support and MS licensing fees is the disruption here. I don't know what the costs of MS licensing fees are so it's hard to judge the cost-benefits. For tech support, which is basically a fraction of the TCO, we'll see. Maybe it will only take half the personnel to support a typical population of ChromeOS machines.
Quote:
builds have to be sighed off by Google before they're allowed to use the Chrome name. It's not commoditized netbook parts.
It's commoditized netbook parts. Atom architecture. Plastic construction. TN panels. Heck, basically all of computing from $200 specials to $4000 gaming rigs are basically commoditized parts.
Hardware still hardware. A population of 1000 of them will have quite of few of them fail like trackpads, screens, keyboards, ports, hard drives, RAM. Since these are commoditized parts driven to the lowest cost possible - ChromeOS systems have to do this to make as much money as possible - I'd be suspicious of their quality. This type of scenario is basically the same as it today.
The cheaper-ness is supposed to happen because the device can simply be replaced without some tech coming to transfer one's data to the new machine or loaner machine, because all the user's data is in the cloud.
Quote:
this is assuming bandwidth will stay the same price or increase the opposite is true. And again, this is NOT meant to replace your full computer if you use the computer a lot. IT's meant to add to it, or for those users who do almost everything on the web.
If it's just an add-on, second computer device, what's the point of this thread? We're discussing its game changing capabilities.
Aggregate bandwidth is cheaper sure. But our usage of it has been growing faster. So much faster that all of the network companies are capping us. So for us to continue on this path of virtual drives with all of our media on it, it represents an even further increase in our bandwidth needs. Instead of listening to 4 hours of music from local storage, it has to be streamed. Now, everyone is going to do that? Same thing with all other media.
A terabyte drive costs $50. A terabyte virtual storage solution probably costs $1000 per year. You buy auto-backup for the money, but that's what I said. You pay more for things. But if one takes the risk of not have an off-site backup, it costs much much less.
Networking is not free.
Quote:
netbooks struggled because of cramped keyboards and because windows sucked on that hardware. This offers a full keyboard, and the software is optimized for the hardware. larger screen resolutions will most likely come. This is the INITIAL RELEASE.
The initial release should have come with 14" to 16" machines where half the market exists. For 12" sizes, that's less than 5% of the market laptop market. People aren't dumb. They have chosen 15" machines over 12" machines for many many good reasons. Full keyboard is probably a pretty small factor in that.
The optimized software argument is stupid. You're arguing that a system with native compiled code will be worse than a system based on JIT-compiled interpreted code. That's seems pathological to me.
The argument is that netbook hardware today is powerful enough today to meet the needs of 90% of the use cases with interpreted code. That question has been asked since the the early 90s.
Quote:
It can save companies and schools potentially thousands a year, and reduce headaches considerably.
How?
Quote:
Better usage models? you mean like their programs for schools and businesses?
-or the fact that you can access your information from ANY chrome machine? That's a new usage model. Or the fact that you never have to worry about updating your device, or dealing with clearing out space.. also a new usage model.
Will it make one more productive? Will it make using it more fun? Is it easier to use? Will it let people do things newer, better, faster?
Quote:
-This is the Freaking INITIAL RELEASE. It WILL NOT be able to do everything the currently industry leader can out the gate. Seriously, this expectation for everything to be "instantly better" is stupid.
-For how MOST people use MS Office, Google Documents does more than what they need. All the "added" features are for continuously smaller niche markets. And again, it's the freaking initial release. The product was given a launch date and devices TODAY.
Everyone who has gone up against MS over the last 20 years has failed. Networking computing is 40 years old. Novell, Sun, others have all charged the hill against MS and have lost, using the same ideas the Google is espousing for ChromeOS.
IT NOT A REPLACEMENT FOR A TRADITIONAL COMPUTER FOR THE TRADITIONAL USER!!!
Don?t me drive up there and beat you with a chromebook on June 15th. I?m not that far away!
I have no idea what this means? It?s like your saying legs are bad concept because you found one person with a twisted ankle. Why are you assuming that apps will suck? Are all apps great on the iPad or do some stand out as brilliant and others aren?t worth trying again? Why assume that because it?s Atom it will suck when Atom is much faster than ARM and I doubt you?d claim the iPad sucks.
As I understand it:
1) a word processing program running on Windows is compiled to the x86 machine language
2) a word processing program running in a web browser (on or off line) is running an interpreted combination of HTML, CSS, JavaScript, Flash *
Do you honestly think, all things being equal, an interpreted solution can outperform a compiled solution on an underpowered machine?
* My limited experience with theChrome browser supports because it ran:
-- 1 copy of the Chrome Browser
-- 1 copy of Shockwave Flash for the Chrome Browser
-- 5 copies of Chrome Renderer -- one for each tab (even though only 1 was open)
Comments
But any smart enterprise manager is not going to turn all of his data over to Google. So the target market is cheap, uninformed IT managers of large corporations who don't care about data privacy.
Doesn't sound like a very large market.
You're Paranoid. The issue for you is NOT the price, it's not the tech (browser only) it's the fact that Google is providing it.
So this will be my last post to your astroturfing.
1-Google had HUNDREDS of companies (large and small) test out the ChromeOS model with the Cr48.
2-over 75% of them said they could move all their work to them today.
3-other THREE MILLION companies use Google Apps for business, including some rather large ones in privacy sensitive fields (Biotech, News, Consulting, etc)
Here is a partial list: http://www.google.com/apps/intl/en/customers/index.html
So 3 million companies isn't a large market? Let's say that they only get an average of 10 chromebooks per company, that is still over 30 million devices, and there are some huge names on that list.
The crapbook, OTOH, has no advantages over a real laptop.
- It's the same price (or more)
- It's the same size
- It has the same keyboard
- it has the same screen size as many laptops (and many sub-400 laptops even have much larger screens)
A veteran industry blogger over at Engadget has a pretty fair editorial on why Google's Chromebook subscription model might appeal to educators and enterprises. Read thru the entire article (only takes 2 minutes or less) and some of your questions might get answered.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/11/e...ns-might-have/
I tried to run Parallels so I could download Chrome under Windows -- to see if it included more than just the Chrome Browser available on native OS X.
I hadn't used Parallels for over a year. About a month ago I wanted to try a specialty program that was Windows only. I tried to load Parallels, but it won't run on the latest Mac/OS X combination.
I was able to download and install a trial and all went well.
Now, the trial has expired and it will cost me $80 to upgrade.
Not worth it to me.
So, can someone tell me: If you install Chrome on Windows -- do you get anything but a browser?
If so, I may decide to go through a painful reinstall of Parallels Trial Windows (NT-->XP Upgrade--Service Packs) on another Mac.
The Windows installs are several hours of frustration and I won't do it just to run a Chrome browser,
Finally, Chrome seems OK as a browser -- but I would not use it because of Flash. I am comfortable with Safari -- but periodically run FF,
Though, I can see that coming at this from the perspective of a Windows user, that Chrome would be attractive for its integration, consistency, and efficiency -- the UX!
I still don't know if there is enough capability with Chrome OS only (no underlying Windows OS) to attract enough people to sustain the platform.
I suspect that, after Chrome OS matures a little and gets some basic app categories satisfied (for offline use) -- it will need a run rate of 20 million per year to compete with the personal computer and tablet market,
HP and WebOS could be a real competitor to Chrome OS -- and could offer a comparable device with a Windows underpinning. I can envision an HP Thick-Client or tablet that primarily runs WebOS -- but runs an App that runs a few needed Windows apps when necessary.
Then, of course, there is Microsoft -- they could still get it right!
I'm not convinced though that most enterprise and education is ready to move into purely browser-based apps.
Enterprise is already moving. Probably the majority of enterprise users today regularly use at least one browser based app.
I don't think ChromeOS is for everyone. Right now it probably isn't even for the majority of enterprise users. But there are a significant number of users who are already mostly or completely working in the browser who could easily switch and I think that number is only going to go up.
Browser based apps make sense for enterprise as they are much easier to manage. You don't need to push software to people's machines and worry what versions they are using. Everyone always has the latest data. You don't need to worry about company data being lost/stolen when someone leaves their laptop on the train, especially running your own servers. So if you are already moving people to the browser, going that final step and eliminating Windows also makes a lot of sense.
You're Paranoid. The issue for you is NOT the price, it's not the tech (browser only) it's the fact that Google is providing it.
So this will be my last post to your astroturfing.
1-Google had HUNDREDS of companies (large and small) test out the ChromeOS model with the Cr48.
2-over 75% of them said they could move all their work to them today.
3-other THREE MILLION companies use Google Apps for business, including some rather large ones in privacy sensitive fields (Biotech, News, Consulting, etc)
Here is a partial list: http://www.google.com/apps/intl/en/customers/index.html
So 3 million companies isn't a large market? Let's say that they only get an average of 10 chromebooks per company, that is still over 30 million devices, and there are some huge names on that list.
I looked at the list -- 140 entries with about 20-30 big names.
Even if these 140 companies bought 1,000 ChromeBooks each -- thats only 140,000.
Certainly, If Google could knock off a few industry leader "flagship" accounts, that would attract a lot of other 2nd and 3rd tier companies.
P.S. I would have thought that Google would have salted CR48s at Stanford University -- considering that Larry and Sergey...
... gotta' understand how to play the game!
... or, maybe they did salt Stanford...
So, can someone tell me: If you install Chrome on Windows -- do you get anything but a browser?
Chrome on windows is still a browser. What you would need to do to test the OS is to fine the full OS and boot it up in the VM by itself.
I will say that Chrome tends to run much better on windows than OSX, just like Safari runs a LOT better on OSX compared to Windows. Since this thing would be native though, those performance bugs shouldn't be an issue.
Finally, Chrome seems OK as a browser -- but I would not use it because of Flash. I am comfortable with Safari -- but periodically run FF,
I can understand your desire not to run flash. but at the same time, Chrome most likely has the better implementation of it since it's a sandboxed apps, and will update automatically since it's considered part of the browser. I know a lot of people who use FF/Safari as their main browser, but keep Chrome around for if they have to see flash content (since click to flash still registers your device as flash enabled)
HP and WebOS could be a real competitor to Chrome OS -- and could offer a comparable device with a Windows underpinning. I can envision an HP Thick-Client or tablet that primarily runs WebOS -- but runs an App that runs a few needed Windows apps when necessary.
Then, of course, there is Microsoft -- they could still get it right!
The problem is that windows (or OSX) suck on bargin machines. you can get them to run, but they're slow. It's a different matter entirely if you're using an OS designed for lower power devices. That's why the ipad2 can have the specs it does and perform so well.
I'm really excited to see what HP does with WebOS as well. That's just a fun OS (though it has memory management issues still) but I don't think that having any basis in windows will help it (unless they get a VM environment)
I think where it will really take off is Native Client. Chrome devs at google (and I'm assuming other companies) are working to try and build native client support into HTML5, which would allow for you to write a program using C++ and have it run like a native app even though it's running in the browser. No VM, no plugins, etc. That would make porting traditional desktop applications to a browser based os (Chrome, WebOS) a lot easier
I'm not convinced though that most enterprise and education is ready to move into purely browser-based apps.
I’m not understand why there is this end-all-be-all all-or-nothing mindset with many of the regular posters here who i usually find to very objective and fair.
There is no most as it’s an unproven design. It’s not like most have moved to the iPad even though it’s surely a hit. Even a great idea can be hindered by some poor decisions so there is no proof the Chromebook will work.
There is also no claim that they will move to a purely browser-based system. There is, however, a great deal of computing doing solely with the browser for certain tasks. How many employees only use the browser for accessing a company’s backend? It’s a lot and it’s not a new concept.
No one is saying that students will be playing Crysis on a chrome book or that a CEO will want use one as his personal computer. That’s simply not what they’re tasked for. But there is a market for which they do fit.
PS: Why hasn’t WebOS been stated as not being a competent OS simply because the UI is based on WebKit? it was a market failure because of Palm’s ineptitude against’s Apple’s success and had some issues with the design, but the OS itself was never belittled simply because it was a WebKit-based UI.
I looked at the list -- 140 entries with about 20-30 big names.
Even if these 140 companies bought 1,000 ChromeBooks each -- thats only 140,000.
Certainly, If Google could knock off a few industry leader "flagship" accounts, that would attract a lot of other 2nd and 3rd tier companies.
P.S. I would have thought that Google would have salted CR48s at Stanford University -- considering that Larry and Sergey...
... gotta' understand how to play the game!
... or, maybe they did salt Stanford...
There are over 3 million companies, those were just 140 of the bigger ones. Remember, most business is small business. Also, those are just companies that are ok with Google using them to advertise the business.
That's also the business listing only.. hundreds of schools use Google Apps:
http://www.google.com/a/help/intl/en/edu/customers.html
(and these are again just companies that gave their consent to have their testimonials used in marketing, not the whole number)
Note one of them will boot in 8 seconds. I bet they take at least 4 minutes for the initial boot and will take 2 minutes from logging in just to get your web browser started.
Did you ever hear of 'sleep' rather than 'shut down'?
You're Paranoid. The issue for you is NOT the price, it's not the tech (browser only) it's the fact that Google is providing it.
And you know what I'm thinking now? I guess the moron trolls are delusional.
I don't trust Google. They've proven beyond any doubt that they have no respect for anyone's privacy or intellectual property and all your data belongs to them. But it's not just about Google, either. I wouldn't advocate putting my company's important documents on iDisk, either (although Apple doesn't have the history of mining your personal data like Google does).
But that doesn't change the fact that I gave plenty of other reasons why the crapbook is not a good deal. You can buy a far more capable system for less money which doesn't suffer from the same limitations and privacy concerns.
So this will be my last post to your astroturfing.
Yeah, I'd imagine you're getting tired of having me prove how silly your arguments are.
1-Google had HUNDREDS of companies (large and small) test out the ChromeOS model with the Cr48.
2-over 75% of them said they could move all their work to them today.
3-other THREE MILLION companies use Google Apps for business, including some rather large ones in privacy sensitive fields (Biotech, News, Consulting, etc)
Here is a partial list: http://www.google.com/apps/intl/en/customers/index.html
So 3 million companies isn't a large market? Let's say that they only get an average of 10 chromebooks per company, that is still over 30 million devices, and there are some huge names on that list.
So that's how you do market research? Remind me to never hire you for a market research job.
Apple had no companies testing the iPad and no one committed to buying it before release. Ergo (by your logic), the iPad is a massive failure.
It's also funny how you make the leap from "we've tried Google Appe" to "We're going to buy at least 10 crapbooks for our company". Since you don't seem to care about logic or intelligent argument, why not simply say "there are a billion people using Google search, so Google will sell a billion crapbooks"? That makes every bit as much sense as your silly claim that the far that they use Google Apps means they're going to buy a crapbook.
Furthermore, you're woefully uninformed about how IT works in enterprises. Remember - the entire argument presented here was about how great this would be for enterprises to use. But a responsible Enterprise manager is not going to allow or disallow something without testing. So a company could well be included in your list of companies who had looked at the crapbook, but not a potential customer because they already rejected it.
Feel free to give us a list of major enterprise customers who have committed to wide scale deployment of crapbooks. Oh, wait - you can't since there are none.
I don't know why you're playing with Parallels. I don't think you can download Chrome OS yet (somebody correct me if I'm wrong). But you can download Chrome for OS X. And Chrome OS works exactly like the Chrome browser.
I don't know why you're have problems with it. I switched over to Chrome from Safari a year ago and never looked back. And this is after prodding from several Mac equipped family members who had switched to Chrome. I was the last person in the family to give up Safari. In fact, one of my cousins, outright, uninstalled Safari from his iMac after figuring out he hadn't touched Safari in months.
It's the world's third most popular browser behind IE and Firefox (and has double the marketshare of Safari), and it's rapidly gaining on those two. So I don't think it's a stretch to say, a lot of people will already be familiar with this platform.
As for your predictions of 20 million a year...umm, no. They are trying to compete with the personal or tablet markets....yet. This will be a part solution. In universities for example, I could see every student getting one of these. But there will still be general purpose computer labs with Windows machines for running apps that most students need, or UNIX labs for engineering students, or Mac Pro labs for media students. That general purpose Windows lab though, can be cut down a lot. Same for some enterprise users. Give one of these out to every employee as their general purpose machine. Use the money you save to give every member of your creative staff a fully spec'd MacBook Pro. Give your engineers Windows or UNIX or Linux or whatever machines they want.
Support and IT management costs would be reduced. Saving the salary and benefits of ust one IT guy could allow a school to equip 150 students with Chromebooks. I hope this paints a picture of how these would be used.
You're not going to be editing video on this. You'll be writing essays, checking email, surfing the web. When you need more, you go use a more powerful machine. This platform gives you the option to right size your IT.
Did you ever hear of 'sleep' rather than 'shut down'?
What a fucking stupid rebuttal.
I don't know why you're playing with Parallels. I don't think you can download Chrome OS yet (somebody correct me if I'm wrong).
You sure can but it?s missing some stuff and doesn?t run that well in a VM since it?s not optimized for the device and have HW acceleration. Meaning: You won?t get close to the same experience as with a Chromebook or Chrombox device.
What a fucking stupid rebuttal.
Why?
And I notice that you have no intelligent response - just a silly ad hominem attack --- which seems to be about all you do.
Someone said that the time taken to start the crapbook is a huge advantage over the couple of minutes to start a Windows laptop. Other than the fact that they exaggerated the time it takes, you can get around that problem if it bothers you by simply putting the system to sleep. Why is that a stupid response?
And if for some reason you can't do that, most people are used to that. They come into the office and hit the start button first thing in the morning and then take their coat off, take their work out of their briefcase, go get a cup of coffee, whatever. Seems to me that if you're considering replacing your company's entire workflow system and infrastructure to save a couple of minutes of startup time, then you shouldn't be considered for an IT role, anyway.
I don't trust Google. They've proven beyond any doubt that they have no respect for anyone's privacy or intellectual property and all your data belongs to them.
You're not the only one here with a fear of Google and how they handle your privacy. But today we found out that much of what you may have read about Google privacy concerns might trace back to a purposeful disinformation/smear campaign against them, bought and paid for by FaceBook!
http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/12/f...-smear-google/
It's sad that truth isn't enough when dealing with competitor's. Paying to spread false information and posting fear-mongering blogs must be the way to go.
I think the subscription price is okay....at least from what I gather talking to friends who are IT nerds. And I'm sure, Google's done their homework here and probably knows what competitors are running for. And they can always adjust the pricing if the thing doesn't sell. They obviously have plenty of pricing room.
The only two things I find strange with the subscription model is the term length and the fact that Google Apps aren't included. Sure, most companies only replace hardware every 3 years. But you'd think Google would try and better that, especially for netbook level hardware. I would have thought 2.5 years max. And then there's not tossing in Google Apps. I guess this is Google being benevolent. By why not amortize the $80 per user per year for Google Apps and include it in the price (say $25 for education users and $35 for business users). It seems quite obvious to me that most of the enterprise users taking up subscriptions will be existing Google App users. Why separate the hardware subscription from the software subscription?
The price of the machines does seem a tad high at this point though. When you can get a cheap laptop for that price, it might well be a tough sales pitch to get consumers to switch (large organizations will be a different story...the motivations are different). They've really got to get the base wifi models down to under $300.
The big question when it comes to price, is how much that Chromebox will cost. It's not the Chromebooks, it's the box that will allow a lot of companies to switch over, by replacing their Windows desktops. I also wonder if Google will offer a cheaper subscription for the Chromeboxes.
I’m not understand why there is this end-all-be-all all-or-nothing mindset with many of the regular posters here who i usually find to very objective and fair.
There is no most as it’s an unproven design. It’s not like most have moved to the iPad even though it’s surely a hit. Even a great idea can be hindered by some poor decisions so there is no proof the Chromebook will work.
There is also no claim that they will move to a purely browser-based system. There is, however, a great deal of computing doing solely with the browser for certain tasks. How many employees only use the browser for accessing a company’s backend? It’s a lot and it’s not a new concept.
No one is saying that students will be playing Crysis on a chrome book or that a CEO will want use one as his personal computer. That’s simply not what they’re tasked for. But there is a market for which they do fit.
PS: Why hasn’t WebOS been stated as not being a competent OS simply because the UI is based on WebKit? it was a market failure because of Palm’s ineptitude against’s Apple’s success and had some issues with the design, but the OS itself was never belittled simply because it was a WebKit-based UI.
As to your last question: WebOS was presented as a Smart Phone OS -- not a replacement for a laptop or desktop OS (for however large a number of users).
Even the initial iPhone supported only web-based third party apps. The big stride that set it apart came when Apple allowed running 3rd party native iOS/ARM apps.
WesOS was not around long enough to make this transition.
If ChromeOS is essentially a Browser running web apps (HTML, CSS, JavaScript, Flash) it, likely, is not close enough to the iron to support meaningful apps when off line.
If a netbook Atom CPU running say a compiled Word (or Word-equivalent) app sucks -- how can an equal or less Atom CPU running an interpreted Word-equivalent be expected to outperform it.
To me the big exposure to the Chrome OS philosophy is that it requires tethering to the backroom or cloud.
To my mind that makes it a specialized solution, great for some use patterns -- not so much for others.
It is very interesting that most of the posters here (me included) say that Chrome OS won't satisfy my needs but it's just great for those other guys (with conforming use pattens and needs).
Why don't we just ask those other guys or wait to see if they choose a tethered solution.
As to your last question: WebOS was presented as a Smart Phone OS -- not a replacement for a laptop or desktop OS (for however large a number of users).
IT NOT A REPLACEMENT FOR A TRADITIONAL COMPUTER FOR THE TRADITIONAL USER!!!
Don’t me drive up there and beat you with a chromebook on June 15th. I’m not that far away!
If a netbook Atom CPU running say a compiled Word (or Word-equivalent) app sucks -- how can you expect an equal or less Atom CPU running an interpreted Word-equivalent be expected to outperform it.
I have no idea what this means? It’s like your saying legs are bad concept because you found one person with a twisted ankle. Why are you assuming that apps will suck? Are all apps great on the iPad or do some stand out as brilliant and others aren’t worth trying again? Why assume that because it’s Atom it will suck when Atom is much faster than ARM and I doubt you’d claim the iPad sucks.
You're not the only one here with a fear of Google and how they handle your privacy. But today we found out that much of what you may have read about Google privacy concerns might trace back to a purposeful disinformation/smear campaign against them, bought and paid for by FaceBook!
http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/12/f...-smear-google/
It's sad that truth isn't enough when dealing with competitor's. Paying to spread false information and posting fear-mongering blogs must be the way to go.
That may be true - but I've seen plenty of confirmed evidence of Google's BS behavior that I don't trust them. I don't need Facebook's shills to convince me of that.
At the same time, the people who are obviously paid Google shills here aren't going to convince me otherwise.
To me the big exposure to the Chrome OS philosophy is that it requires tethering to the backroom or cloud.
Good point. In addition to all the other issues I cited, the crapbook is useless if you temporarily lose access to the Internet. For example, we have regular power failures here. With a laptop, of course, you could continue to run on battery and run your local apps (obviously, you wouldn't have access to corporate data). But with this 'solution', you're going to temporarily lose Internet access - making the system useless. Or your ISP could have an outage. Or, for the remote users, you could be outside the range of Internet access.
One more reason to add to the list as to why this is a lousy solution.
-the entire OS is sandboxed, this means that if something infects one tab, it cannot access the information on your device OR in the other active tabs.
-the OS checks itself on boot for corruption, and will fix automatically
-everything is encrypted as a default.
It uses Flash and executes various things like displaying images, scripting languages, playing media, etc. Eventually, the sandbox will be broken. That's not even necessary for nefarious things to happen as malware-like scripts, who knows what can be done with cookies, and plane jane social engineering will continue unabated.
For most big orgs, a lot of the bad stuff is stopped at the org's firewall. I doubt ChromeOS will eliminate the firewall. For the bad stuff that leak through, you need tech support. I currently fail to see how it eliminates tech support. Any sufficiently complex system will be taken advantage of.
Tech support and MS licensing fees is the disruption here. I don't know what the costs of MS licensing fees are so it's hard to judge the cost-benefits. For tech support, which is basically a fraction of the TCO, we'll see. Maybe it will only take half the personnel to support a typical population of ChromeOS machines.
builds have to be sighed off by Google before they're allowed to use the Chrome name. It's not commoditized netbook parts.
It's commoditized netbook parts. Atom architecture. Plastic construction. TN panels. Heck, basically all of computing from $200 specials to $4000 gaming rigs are basically commoditized parts.
Hardware still hardware. A population of 1000 of them will have quite of few of them fail like trackpads, screens, keyboards, ports, hard drives, RAM. Since these are commoditized parts driven to the lowest cost possible - ChromeOS systems have to do this to make as much money as possible - I'd be suspicious of their quality. This type of scenario is basically the same as it today.
The cheaper-ness is supposed to happen because the device can simply be replaced without some tech coming to transfer one's data to the new machine or loaner machine, because all the user's data is in the cloud.
this is assuming bandwidth will stay the same price or increase the opposite is true. And again, this is NOT meant to replace your full computer if you use the computer a lot. IT's meant to add to it, or for those users who do almost everything on the web.
If it's just an add-on, second computer device, what's the point of this thread? We're discussing its game changing capabilities.
Aggregate bandwidth is cheaper sure. But our usage of it has been growing faster. So much faster that all of the network companies are capping us. So for us to continue on this path of virtual drives with all of our media on it, it represents an even further increase in our bandwidth needs. Instead of listening to 4 hours of music from local storage, it has to be streamed. Now, everyone is going to do that? Same thing with all other media.
A terabyte drive costs $50. A terabyte virtual storage solution probably costs $1000 per year. You buy auto-backup for the money, but that's what I said. You pay more for things. But if one takes the risk of not have an off-site backup, it costs much much less.
Networking is not free.
netbooks struggled because of cramped keyboards and because windows sucked on that hardware. This offers a full keyboard, and the software is optimized for the hardware. larger screen resolutions will most likely come. This is the INITIAL RELEASE.
The initial release should have come with 14" to 16" machines where half the market exists. For 12" sizes, that's less than 5% of the market laptop market. People aren't dumb. They have chosen 15" machines over 12" machines for many many good reasons. Full keyboard is probably a pretty small factor in that.
The optimized software argument is stupid. You're arguing that a system with native compiled code will be worse than a system based on JIT-compiled interpreted code. That's seems pathological to me.
The argument is that netbook hardware today is powerful enough today to meet the needs of 90% of the use cases with interpreted code. That question has been asked since the the early 90s.
It can save companies and schools potentially thousands a year, and reduce headaches considerably.
How?
Better usage models? you mean like their programs for schools and businesses?
-or the fact that you can access your information from ANY chrome machine? That's a new usage model. Or the fact that you never have to worry about updating your device, or dealing with clearing out space.. also a new usage model.
Will it make one more productive? Will it make using it more fun? Is it easier to use? Will it let people do things newer, better, faster?
-This is the Freaking INITIAL RELEASE. It WILL NOT be able to do everything the currently industry leader can out the gate. Seriously, this expectation for everything to be "instantly better" is stupid.
-For how MOST people use MS Office, Google Documents does more than what they need. All the "added" features are for continuously smaller niche markets. And again, it's the freaking initial release. The product was given a launch date and devices TODAY.
Everyone who has gone up against MS over the last 20 years has failed. Networking computing is 40 years old. Novell, Sun, others have all charged the hill against MS and have lost, using the same ideas the Google is espousing for ChromeOS.
Skepticism is warranted.
IT NOT A REPLACEMENT FOR A TRADITIONAL COMPUTER FOR THE TRADITIONAL USER!!!
Don?t me drive up there and beat you with a chromebook on June 15th. I?m not that far away!
I have no idea what this means? It?s like your saying legs are bad concept because you found one person with a twisted ankle. Why are you assuming that apps will suck? Are all apps great on the iPad or do some stand out as brilliant and others aren?t worth trying again? Why assume that because it?s Atom it will suck when Atom is much faster than ARM and I doubt you?d claim the iPad sucks.
As I understand it:
1) a word processing program running on Windows is compiled to the x86 machine language
2) a word processing program running in a web browser (on or off line) is running an interpreted combination of HTML, CSS, JavaScript, Flash *
Do you honestly think, all things being equal, an interpreted solution can outperform a compiled solution on an underpowered machine?
* My limited experience with theChrome browser supports because it ran:
-- 1 copy of the Chrome Browser
-- 1 copy of Shockwave Flash for the Chrome Browser
-- 5 copies of Chrome Renderer -- one for each tab (even though only 1 was open)