Just because you have a chromebook does mean you need to use Google's services. You can use any cloud service available. They just hope to pitch the best service / app ecosystem at you in order to stay. And as as offline apps they do exist with in the chrome OS space.
Just ordered the top of the line MBP 15". At these resolutions (DPI) it is splitting hairs. After careful review the MBP represents the best in terms of value to product (but it is still quite expensive). I'll be using it for extensive graphics and mapping in the field (geologist).
Because they couldn't possibly have noticed it on their own?
Yes, and sometimes I actually enjoy them. .... btw, replying to my post by asking an irrelevant question usually means you don't have an intelligent comeback ... care to try again?
I continue to see arguments that the Nexus is far superior to the iPad. I wouldn't have thought the Nexus was as horrid as you suggest. I am interested in your further thoughts.
The Nexus has always been Google's subtle way of telling the OEMs 'Ok, this is how you build an android phone.' For the most part, it has been pretty successful:
Prior to the Nexus One, Android phones were kind've all over the place in regards to screen size/resolution and buttons -- we had phones with 2.5, 3, 3.5" screens, 320x240, 640x480, 854x480 resolutions. We had phones with 3 buttons (omitting search), 6 buttons (all 4 + send and end), and everything in between.
Then the nexus one comes out with a 3.7" 800x480 display, and the 4 capacitive buttons
After that, you pretty much expect android phones to have the iconic 4 capacitive buttons, and a 800x480 display.
The nexus S pushed NFC heavily, and although slow to catch on at first, almost every new android phone I can think of includes it now.
Then when phones started to stray in display (we started getting 4.3, 4.5", 800x480 and 960x540 displays), the Galaxy Nexus comes out with a 4.7" 720p screen and onscreen buttons. The latter still hasn't really caught on yet, but how many 720p android phones have come out since? I've lost count.
I would rather see Apple develop a personal cloud device. Something like a battery/mains powered data archive, accessible via high speed WiFi by all one's devices.
Just because you have a chromebook does mean you need to use Google's services. You can use any cloud service available. They just hope to pitch the best service / app ecosystem at you in order to stay. And as as offline apps they do exist with in the chrome OS space.
Huh. . .
I just assumed you had to be "connected" to do much of anything on a Chromebook. I also didn't realize that you could connect to any of your other computers and run applications loaded on those too. Overall it's more capable than I realized, making that $249 entry price pretty darn attractive compared to a full-fledged laptop or even tablet. Now is it still worthwhile at $1200? Not so much IMHO.
All it does is run Web Apps inside a browser based OS. It's only good for basic tasks like e-mail, browsing, social interaction or creating basic documents. You can't do anything requiring graphical power (photo or video editing, illustration or even games). It would be useless for web developers since you don't have a way to check your website on multiple browsers for compatibility.
Actually it is not, there is slight ambiguity in the usage. I have seen discussions dealing with PPI but the most common is a strict value of pixel count.
Even within that there is ambiguity in the common definition, but since a realistic scenario is highly unlikely to appear using the horizontal and vertical pixel counts to are perfectly reasonable. For example, take a 100x100 display and a 1000x10 display. They are not the same display resolution but both have exact 10,000 pixels. In one sense they resolve to the same number of pixels but they are not the same. Again, such a situation where the length and width or inverse of the length and width will equal the pixel count of a different length and width that I doubt we have to think about it outside of a theoretical discussion.
Google Native Client (NaCl) is a sandboxing technology for running a subset of Intel x86 or ARMnative code using software-based fault isolation.[1] It is proposed for safely running native code from a web browser, allowing web-based applications to run at near-native speeds,[2] which aligns well with Google's plans with Chrome OS. It may also be used for securing browser plugins, and in the future parts of other applications or full applications.[3]
The only way Google can get top quality devices is to fully adopt UNIX, be it BSD or Linux. Their weird choices of Chrome and Android drive to nowhere but failure. Android isn't UNIX, as it replaced UNIX security by Windows 3.1 (lack of) security. Drop Android, drop Chrome, and go UNIX. It's the only way Google can make any interesting products
Who cares? It's clear the only reason google did it is for bragging rights. The computer is pretty much a $2200 web browser with a useless OS, barely any storage space, and an inability to run any real, professional apps. It's infinitely more useless than my MacBook Air at near double the price - but hey, it has alot of pixels! Win!
The only way Google can get top quality devices is to fully adopt UNIX, be it BSD or Linux. Their weird choices of Chrome and Android drive to nowhere but failure. Android isn't UNIX, as it replaced UNIX security by Windows 3.1 (lack of) security. Drop Android, drop Chrome, and go UNIX. It's the only way Google can make any interesting products
You lost me. Linux isn't UNIX but Android and Chrome OS both utilize Linux as their kernel.
The only way Google can get top quality devices is to fully adopt UNIX, be it BSD or Linux. Their weird choices of Chrome and Android drive to nowhere but failure. Android isn't UNIX, as it replaced UNIX security by Windows 3.1 (lack of) security. Drop Android, drop Chrome, and go UNIX. It's the only way Google can make any interesting products
You lost me. Linux isn't UNIX but Android and Chrome OS both utilize Linux as their kernel.
We refer to these OS as unix-like. Read this page for more info:
Sure, but being UNIX-like is not the same thing as being UNIX certificated, like Mac OS X is, or the comment that Android nor Chrome are not built off Linux.
Bought Office for Mac today. See, they offer "the next version for free if you buy now". Got to the offer site. Filled in the code. Found I actually get "one year of Office 360 cloud-based service". Feel cheated.
Sure, but being UNIX-like is not the same thing as being UNIX certificated, like Mac OS X is, or the comment that Android nor Chrome are not built off Linux.
Registered or certified just makes it available for enterprise and governments that require it. Linux is every bit as UNIX as SunOS or Solaris. As far as the kernel is concerned, it mostly manages the file system, memory, network, and devices, etc. There is a lot more to Unix than the kernel. Linux has all of the same libraries, drivers, and binaries as any full fledged certified UNIX. So it being Unix-like is enough Unix to run virtually anything that certified Unix can run.
Comments
Did you read our posts at all?
Because they couldn't possibly have noticed it on their own?
Yes, and sometimes I actually enjoy them. .... btw, replying to my post by asking an irrelevant question usually means you don't have an intelligent comeback ... care to try again?The Nexus has always been Google's subtle way of telling the OEMs 'Ok, this is how you build an android phone.' For the most part, it has been pretty successful:
Prior to the Nexus One, Android phones were kind've all over the place in regards to screen size/resolution and buttons -- we had phones with 2.5, 3, 3.5" screens, 320x240, 640x480, 854x480 resolutions. We had phones with 3 buttons (omitting search), 6 buttons (all 4 + send and end), and everything in between.
Then the nexus one comes out with a 3.7" 800x480 display, and the 4 capacitive buttons
After that, you pretty much expect android phones to have the iconic 4 capacitive buttons, and a 800x480 display.
The nexus S pushed NFC heavily, and although slow to catch on at first, almost every new android phone I can think of includes it now.
Then when phones started to stray in display (we started getting 4.3, 4.5", 800x480 and 960x540 displays), the Galaxy Nexus comes out with a 4.7" 720p screen and onscreen buttons. The latter still hasn't really caught on yet, but how many 720p android phones have come out since? I've lost count.
Originally Posted by newbee
...care to try again?
No. Go read our posts. You'll understand what we're talking about immediately by actually reading them.
Sounds like a time capsule.
Huh. . .
I just assumed you had to be "connected" to do much of anything on a Chromebook. I also didn't realize that you could connect to any of your other computers and run applications loaded on those too. Overall it's more capable than I realized, making that $249 entry price pretty darn attractive compared to a full-fledged laptop or even tablet. Now is it still worthwhile at $1200? Not so much IMHO.
http://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/business/devices/features-learnmore.html
It looks like you're incorrect. You can do photo-editing and video creation on a Chromebook. Yeah it surprises me too!
http://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/business/devices/features-learnmore.html#create
Edit: .... and there's a LOT more off-line applications than I would have expected.
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/category/collection/offline_enabled
Even within that there is ambiguity in the common definition, but since a realistic scenario is highly unlikely to appear using the horizontal and vertical pixel counts to are perfectly reasonable. For example, take a 100x100 display and a 1000x10 display. They are not the same display resolution but both have exact 10,000 pixels. In one sense they resolve to the same number of pixels but they are not the same. Again, such a situation where the length and width or inverse of the length and width will equal the pixel count of a different length and width that I doubt we have to think about it outside of a theoretical discussion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
It looks like you're incorrect. You can do photo-editing and video creation on a Chromebook. Yeah it surprises me too!
http://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/business/devices/features-learnmore.html#create
Edit: .... and there's a LOT more off-line applications than I would have expected.
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/category/collection/offline_enabled
There is also Google Native Client
Quote:
Google Native Client (NaCl) is a sandboxing technology for running a subset of Intel x86 or ARM native code using software-based fault isolation.[1] It is proposed for safely running native code from a web browser, allowing web-based applications to run at near-native speeds,[2] which aligns well with Google's plans with Chrome OS. It may also be used for securing browser plugins, and in the future parts of other applications or full applications.[3]
It can also be used to create 3D apps using OpenGL ES
You lost me. Linux isn't UNIX but Android and Chrome OS both utilize Linux as their kernel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecs
The only way Google can get top quality devices is to fully adopt UNIX, be it BSD or Linux. Their weird choices of Chrome and Android drive to nowhere but failure. Android isn't UNIX, as it replaced UNIX security by Windows 3.1 (lack of) security. Drop Android, drop Chrome, and go UNIX. It's the only way Google can make any interesting products
You lost me. Linux isn't UNIX but Android and Chrome OS both utilize Linux as their kernel.
We refer to these OS as unix-like. Read this page for more info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_UNIX_Specification
Sure, but being UNIX-like is not the same thing as being UNIX certificated, like Mac OS X is, or the comment that Android nor Chrome are not built off Linux.
Using WebKit for the UI doesn't mean it doesn't contain an OS. It has everything an OS has.
Me no like new world. Want old world back.
In all fairness, I didn't understand your point either.
Calling ChromeOS a "browser-based operating system developed by Google" is a bit of a stretch. It's just Linux designed to only run one app: Chrome.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
We refer to these OS as unix-like. Read this page for more info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_UNIX_Specification
Sure, but being UNIX-like is not the same thing as being UNIX certificated, like Mac OS X is, or the comment that Android nor Chrome are not built off Linux.
Registered or certified just makes it available for enterprise and governments that require it. Linux is every bit as UNIX as SunOS or Solaris. As far as the kernel is concerned, it mostly manages the file system, memory, network, and devices, etc. There is a lot more to Unix than the kernel. Linux has all of the same libraries, drivers, and binaries as any full fledged certified UNIX. So it being Unix-like is enough Unix to run virtually anything that certified Unix can run.