Once upon a time, Apple didn't take a threat too seriously from a couple of guys in Washington who designed their word processing software. Look how that turned out. Chrome plays on your turf Steve,and will grow and evolve over time.
Web standards take ages to finalize. Do people really think if Google wants to add a new feature to one of their web apps, and HTML5 doesn't support it, they won't just add a proprietary extension to Chrome/Chrome OS? Of course they will. In which case, if these units get too popular, Google could be the next IE/Microsoft.
But that requires that a single vendor, in your example Google, has a large enough market share to be able to drive developers to use their proprietary extension. That was why MS having monopoly in web browsers was so bad. They created those proprietary extentions and then convinced developers to use them. They also had the clout to convince major content providers (like CNN) to use the proprietary formats.
If 50% of the browsers use HTML5 (and the other 50% is IE), but that 50% is divided between Apple, Google, Firefox, etc, then it will be much more difficult for a single vendor to bastardize the standard.
But does the average person know that Star Office and OpenOffice even exist? I'm not so sure.
Lot's of people know it exists. For example, most people here know it exists for the Mac as well. For a while, it's even been as a native OS X app. How many use it as opposed to iWork or Office? Almost none.
Business knows these apps exist. Much software used at home is known and used because business uses it. Yet, businesses almost never do use it, so people at home don't.
To the contrary Gil was brought in to turn the company around, and he did. He settled on NeXT and made sure Steve was part of that package. He had to know that he was hiring his replacement, and said that Apple needed Steve because Steve was a visionary.
MS is in trouble because Ballmer is more like a bean counter, with no vision and when he tries to fake it, it all goes bad. But you can see his strength, he can oversee a big OS project and bring it to market. Bit by bit it gets better, but his management of just about everything else is not good and that more than offsets his accomplishments.
An OS is a very curious thing for Google, I would have thought that they would have milked more from their online apps, and the like before making this departure. Hope they get it right, Apple wasted how many years until they hired NeXT.
Lot's of people know it exists. For example, most people here know it exists for the Mac as well. For a while, it's even been as a native OS X app. How many use it as opposed to iWork or Office? Almost none.
Business knows these apps exist. Much software used at home is known and used because business uses it. Yet, businesses almost never do use it, so people at home don't.
Yet it's free.
NeoOffice is Native to Mac. OpenOffice is not and when printing you end up with Double Margins.
It's catching on... Trust me it's Catching on. People like me, companies like mine, will ALWAYS offer up the multi-thousand dollar office suite but also put in the proposal the open-source versions. And in the end the heads of corp get the paid version and the monkeys that do the work get the open-source. For the last 2 years we have been putting in open-office without even asking and then let them call about it. One issue though, you need to change the default "Save-As" to office versions otherwise you get calls.
Sergey Brin should just kick his ass. Just walk up to him, and be straight up, "What you sayin' 'bout Chrome OS ****?!? I already heard!" and drop him. Pow- one hit- Sergey's fist- his face- his face- the floor.
Then Sergey be like, "Do no evil? **** And then he rollerblade on out of there.
That is an extremely unlikely string of events, but I do have to admit I would digg it.
EDIT: language
I know this was probably just a joke, but I don't find it funny.
People who do this kind of stuff are the cause of most of the worlds problems. The sooner this kind of "in your face" stuff is bred out of the gene pool the better of we will all be.
MS is in trouble because Ballmer is more like a bean counter, with no vision and when he tries to fake it, it all goes bad. But you can see his strength, he can oversee a big OS project and bring it to market. Bit by bit it gets better, but his management of just about everything else is not good and that more than offsets his accomplishments.
An OS is a very curious thing for Google, I would have thought that they would have milked more from their online apps, and the like before making this departure. Hope they get it right, Apple wasted how many years until they hired NeXT.
You sure about dat? Took 5 years to bring Vista and he was 100% in charge of that. He's a clown who's not well respected in his own company. He's there because a friend got him a job. Would he be re-hired if he applied today? Would any company aside from MS take him? Maybe a Bank.
The browser on an OS has been done. Puppy Linux based with mozilla 3.5. Runs on PII 266mhz, 128mb +. It's fast, light and works. Google can simply copy that...
While that may be a true statement, the challenge was to name where it originally came from. But I agree that AjitMD was mistaken.
xwiredtva, I formally request my one point!
A bit more:
- Microsoft's first spreadsheet was Multiplan, which was released in 1982, prior to Mac, however the first release named "Excel" was on the Mac in 1985, and not for Windows until 1987.
- Word, on the other hand, was first released as Microsoft Word for the IBM PC in 1983, prior to the public release of the first Mac. So unless Word existed for the Lisa, PCs had it first.
People want to run standard i.e. Windows, apps, which is why Linux netbooks were such a failure. People would get them home only to find they couldn't install Office or other apps they used.
Those buying netbooks look at them as smaller, cheaper laptops, when they are not really.
But putting Google's name on what is basically a Linux OS that doesn't run standard apps will still have a lot of resistance.
Apple could get a way with it because it also has those standard apps with many more f its own.
But I'm skeptical about Chrome so far.
I don't think the failure of Linux netbooks is about the apps. Chrome OS is theoretically going to support x86 apps anyway, but even if it didn't and only supported online apps that opened and saved Office files it would be the same thing for the user.
The problem with Linux is it's a confusing mess. It's the elephant in the room that no one wants to talk about. I am in IT and do a lot of techie things. I have in the past been a Windows expert and now I'm a full-time Mac expert but I find Linux to be confusing annoying crap in terms of the UI and actually getting anything done.
The Linux guys (some are friends of mine), will say that it's not that hard and it really isn't if you spend the time to learn it. But the problem is the user just wants to get their email. They don't want to learn how to manage their hardware and software and they don't want to spend all day configuring tricky little things.
It was interesting when computers first came out to get into all the little details and build your own etc. I did it myself for years. But today, people want a computer that they can turn on and use. Like a TV. This evolution has happened with every significant consumer product of the last century. Cars, Radios, TVs etc.
No one wants to (nor should they need to) look at configuration files all day long when they really just want to send an email or look at a video clip.
I think you kind of hit the point here. While most people on these forums know about free and proven alternatives to both MS Office and Windows, the end user does not know. And maybe they don't care. Sheep need to be led. And the marketing machine at MS has very deep pockets, and are capable of convincing most people that even the worst product is a must have.
If Linux and Open Office had similar marketing budgets, or even a fraction of them, the awareness could get out there, and result in a higher install base. But it's not going to happen... unless someone with large pockets gets on board. Google is the most likely at this stage, so their entrance to the ring should be welcomed.
The only other alternative would be if all PC manufacturers unanimously agreed to dump MS and support Linux to potentially save money and gain back some control. But this won't happen either, because no one wants to be first, and even when someone does jump the MS ship, it will be alienated, most likely by the MS negative marketing campaign machine. So they all have to jump ship at the same time... wishful thinking.
You're giving too much credit to consumers.
Most consumers use Windows and its associated software because they use it at work, and are familiar with it, in addition to the fact that they can often get it free from their employer.
That's almost the only reason other than the fact that PC's are made at cheaper levels.
When I did much work for the school system in past years, parents were almost violent against having Macs in school because they used PC's at work. They tried to insist that their kids needed to use PC's in school, even elementary school, so that they would be able to use them at work when they got older. That diminished greatly over the past few years as Mac sales have prospered and have shown up at work as well.
There is no interest in using Linux in schools, or, for the most part, in business. Linux desktop use has hovered from below 1% to about 1% and back in the US for years now, while the Mac has grown considerably. I know that Linux users like to think differently, but as far as OS's on the internet goes, Linux is still around 1%.
Almost everyone has heard about Linux, but as soon as they buy a computer with Linux on it, such as netbooks, which should be the easiest way to get on Linux because netbooks have the least computing demands, what do they do? They return the machines.
Many of these machines already have had OpenOffice installed, along with other open source software that is perfectly usable. But they want their own apps, and they can't have them. So, back to the store.
It's been mentioned that it's driver problems. Well, that's just another nail in the coffin.
This is about as much a closed environment as you could ever hope to get for a Linux foothold, but it didn't work.
I read articles in OSnews about how Linux netbooks were going to be the gateway to the consumers heart, and lead to the big breakthrough that Linux people have been predicting for almost a decade now.
But it was a major flop. Now there are some articles about what went wrong.
It's simple, you can't force an OS, or software, on people who don't want it.
Most people want Windows and its software. An increasing number want OS X and its software.
It's also interesting that over the past few years, and increasingly so after the Intel move by Apple, that some of the best known writers on the Linux scene publicly moved to OS X.
I really don't see Chrome, which won't be out for at least a year as being any different. And we all know Google. Will this ever get out of beta?
Most consumers use Windows and its associated software because they use it at work, and are familiar with it, in addition to the fact that they can often get it free from their employer.
That's almost the only reason other than the fact that PC's are made at cheaper levels.
When I did much work for the school system in past years, parents were almost violent against having Macs in school because they used PC's at work. They tried to insist that their kids needed to use PC's in school, even elementary school, so that they would be able to use them at work when they got older. That diminished greatly over the past few years as Mac sales have prospered and have shown up at work as well.
There is no interest in using Linux in schools, or, for the most part, in business. Linux desktop use has hovered from below 1% to about 1% and back in the US for years now, while the Mac has grown considerably. I know that Linux users like to think differently, but as far as OS's on the internet goes, Linux is still around 1%.
Almost everyone has heard about Linux, but as soon as they buy a computer with Linux on it, such as netbooks, which should be the easiest way to get on Linux because netbooks have the least computing demands, what do they do? They return the machines.
Many of these machines already have had OpenOffice installed, along with other open source software that is perfectly usable. But they want their own apps, and they can't have them. So, back to the store.
It's been mentioned that it's driver problems. Well, that's just another nail in the coffin.
This is about as much a closed environment as you could ever hope to get for a Linux foothold, but it didn't work.
I read articles in OSnews about how Linux netbooks were going to be the gateway to the consumers heart, and lead to the big breakthrough that Linux people have been predicting for almost a decade now.
But it was a major flop. Now there are some articles about what went wrong.
It's simple, you can't force an OS, or software, on people who don't want it.
Most people want Windows and its software. An increasing number want OS X and its software.
It's also interesting that over the past few years, and increasingly so after the Intel move by Apple, that some of the best known writers on the Linux scene publicly moved to OS X.
I really don't see Chrome, which won't be out for at least a year as being any different. And we all know Google. Will this ever get out of beta?
Ed Zachry.
Since 1996 I've been preaching the power of linux (since I did some lo-lever driver work and found it to be fun) but without a commercial name behind it, it will never move and I preached that too. When it comes to Linux the geeks are in charge, and we don't want "people" messing it up. In a business environment it had it's hay day but with too few intelligent IT people it never took off (you can fight me on this one but that's the truth! Ask any business why they won't use linux and it's the IT personnel issue, Those crap tech schools can turn out cert-monkey's all day long for MS but you can't do that with a real OS - OS X or Linux for that matter).
The original argument for Linux in a business was that it was free. But after you add in IT costs to setup and maintain it got even with MS. Then you add in the cost to develop a software system for your business and it went over the top. Then you had to add in maintain costs and fee's. Over the top again and it's out. For a web, email, file server it works great. As a remote desktop client to a Terminal Server it works great too, even provides the user with email and office productivity suite and eliminates the need to massive security repairs. However it's the lack of support, end all be all, that keeps it off the desk at work.
Oh, and what went wrong in the Netbook Linux? It was restricted to the manufactures desktop which was large buttons. You had to hack it to get a real desktop and then packages and the os got broken all to easily. What's wrong with throwing the regular grade Ubuntu on it? Wifi drivers for the cheap wireless chips was beyond horrible. Asus 2g original had to be within 30' of the base station. Cloudbook, 10' line of sight. Swap in a Dell 1400/1450 wifi card and it worked up to 150' on either. XP drivers worked on the cheap hardware in the same way WinModem's worked under windows and not linux, the software was the key.
Drivers, crappy hardware, whatever. It should have been tested prior to release. But in the ways of MS they rushed it out.
Once upon a time, Apple didn't take a threat too seriously from a couple of guys in Washington who designed their word processing software. Look how that turned out. Chrome plays on your turf Steve,and will grow and evolve over time.
And how is it going to do that? An OS that won't be available for over a year, if ever. It may be in beta when it does arrive for what, another year or more as is Google's want?
And then what? If you've read about this, you would see that it doesn't allow apps as sophisticated as WebOS for the Palm Pre. So what will if offer most people?
It's nor really clear that this "cloud computing" thing will really be successful. It may, and it may not. If it is, then Chrome will have a place in it, possibly challenging some very low end netbooks, maybe in the $200 range.
But if it doesn't, then Chrome will flop.
The word isn't out one way or the other yet. We may not know for years.
And what does this have to do with Apple? Almost nothing.
The only products that Apple has that might be thought of as being challenged by this is the iPhone/Touch combo.
But by the time this arrives, on very weak netbooks, the iPhone/Touch will be ahead by another generation, and will be able to do far more, though they already do far more.
Then, to make this popular, they will need programs. A lot of programs. Not just those floating in the cloud. and they will need games. And they will have to be free or cheap.
But Apple already has all this. In another year, there will be over 100 thousand apps in their store. Most not great, but with thousands of really good ones, maybe tens of thousands.
It could take Chrome several years to mature, but does it have that much time? No one else will be sitting still waiting.
NeoOffice is Native to Mac. OpenOffice is not and when printing you end up with Double Margins.
It's catching on... Trust me it's Catching on. People like me, companies like mine, will ALWAYS offer up the multi-thousand dollar office suite but also put in the proposal the open-source versions. And in the end the heads of corp get the paid version and the monkeys that do the work get the open-source. For the last 2 years we have been putting in open-office without even asking and then let them call about it. One issue though, you need to change the default "Save-As" to office versions otherwise you get calls.
It is native to the Mac. All software has bugs, including Apple's own.
I wonder how long it will take MS to create a browser based OS themselves...
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmoeser
I don't think they have the vision or the skills to do that, otherwise, they might have already.
Windows PE. Would be a perfect foundation for such an endeavor. If Google is successful with this strategy, MS could easily match them.
And probably with better driver support...
Put me firmly in the "meh" camp with the whole Chrome OS thing. Once again the tech press is doing the equivalent of "ooh, shiny!"
EDIT: I should also point out that for $70 Symantec Ghost comes with a full copy of Widows PE 2 - you can add drivers to it and generally customize it with a little tweaking - I was pleasantly surprised. It's great to have Windows PE boot CD's (or flash drives) for troubleshooting and recovery (google Bart's PE)
Actually, the Xbox is now working out very well. If you look at their last quarterly results, the entertainment division with the Xbox bolstered their bottom line nicely.
Their recent quarterly loss (what was it, first in like 20 years?) would have been much worse without the Xbox. Quite a role reversal...
I just think its funny how this guy takes shots at apple and google to cover up his lack of innovation. I have worked in the mobile industry for years and I can tell you that Windows based phones are not the greatest. Functionality is not good and at some times they can be confusing to the average joe. Apple makes everything really easy as far as their os goes. Sorry microsoft, the only microsoft item that i have in the house is the xbox 360
But that requires that a single vendor, in your example Google, has a large enough market share to be able to drive developers to use their proprietary extension.
Really? What's the motivation for me to run a netbook limited to just web apps (even if they are from Google) when for maybe $50 more (if that even) I can have Windows and "have it all"?
Has no one learned anything from the iPhone and the Appstore? It's all about the Apps! Why do you think people want Windows on netbooks?
If anything, I could see Apple extending the Appstore into the netbook space and being far more successful then Google doing anything but unleashing yet another beta product.
How many people are on Hotmail vs. Gmail? People aren't going to run to Google just because of their name. That's about as stupid as the people that like to claim Apples products are doing well strictly because of superficial marketing - what a load of crap!
Comments
Web standards take ages to finalize. Do people really think if Google wants to add a new feature to one of their web apps, and HTML5 doesn't support it, they won't just add a proprietary extension to Chrome/Chrome OS? Of course they will. In which case, if these units get too popular, Google could be the next IE/Microsoft.
But that requires that a single vendor, in your example Google, has a large enough market share to be able to drive developers to use their proprietary extension. That was why MS having monopoly in web browsers was so bad. They created those proprietary extentions and then convinced developers to use them. They also had the clout to convince major content providers (like CNN) to use the proprietary formats.
If 50% of the browsers use HTML5 (and the other 50% is IE), but that 50% is divided between Apple, Google, Firefox, etc, then it will be much more difficult for a single vendor to bastardize the standard.
But does the average person know that Star Office and OpenOffice even exist? I'm not so sure.
Lot's of people know it exists. For example, most people here know it exists for the Mac as well. For a while, it's even been as a native OS X app. How many use it as opposed to iWork or Office? Almost none.
Business knows these apps exist. Much software used at home is known and used because business uses it. Yet, businesses almost never do use it, so people at home don't.
Yet it's free.
Wordstar, Lotus 123, Harvard Graphics, Mosaic,........
Throw in VisiCalc (which was released with the source code) and we have a winner!
MS is in trouble because Ballmer is more like a bean counter, with no vision and when he tries to fake it, it all goes bad. But you can see his strength, he can oversee a big OS project and bring it to market. Bit by bit it gets better, but his management of just about everything else is not good and that more than offsets his accomplishments.
An OS is a very curious thing for Google, I would have thought that they would have milked more from their online apps, and the like before making this departure. Hope they get it right, Apple wasted how many years until they hired NeXT.
Ballmer = Microsoft's Gil Amelio.
Lot's of people know it exists. For example, most people here know it exists for the Mac as well. For a while, it's even been as a native OS X app. How many use it as opposed to iWork or Office? Almost none.
Business knows these apps exist. Much software used at home is known and used because business uses it. Yet, businesses almost never do use it, so people at home don't.
Yet it's free.
NeoOffice is Native to Mac. OpenOffice is not and when printing you end up with Double Margins.
It's catching on... Trust me it's Catching on. People like me, companies like mine, will ALWAYS offer up the multi-thousand dollar office suite but also put in the proposal the open-source versions. And in the end the heads of corp get the paid version and the monkeys that do the work get the open-source. For the last 2 years we have been putting in open-office without even asking and then let them call about it. One issue though, you need to change the default "Save-As" to office versions otherwise you get calls.
Sergey Brin should just kick his ass. Just walk up to him, and be straight up, "What you sayin' 'bout Chrome OS ****?!? I already heard!" and drop him. Pow- one hit- Sergey's fist- his face- his face- the floor.
Then Sergey be like, "Do no evil? **** And then he rollerblade on out of there.
That is an extremely unlikely string of events, but I do have to admit I would digg it.
EDIT: language
I know this was probably just a joke, but I don't find it funny.
People who do this kind of stuff are the cause of most of the worlds problems. The sooner this kind of "in your face" stuff is bred out of the gene pool the better of we will all be.
MS is in trouble because Ballmer is more like a bean counter, with no vision and when he tries to fake it, it all goes bad. But you can see his strength, he can oversee a big OS project and bring it to market. Bit by bit it gets better, but his management of just about everything else is not good and that more than offsets his accomplishments.
An OS is a very curious thing for Google, I would have thought that they would have milked more from their online apps, and the like before making this departure. Hope they get it right, Apple wasted how many years until they hired NeXT.
You sure about dat? Took 5 years to bring Vista and he was 100% in charge of that. He's a clown who's not well respected in his own company. He's there because a friend got him a job. Would he be re-hired if he applied today? Would any company aside from MS take him? Maybe a Bank.
The browser on an OS has been done. Puppy Linux based with mozilla 3.5. Runs on PII 266mhz, 128mb +. It's fast, light and works. Google can simply copy that...
Good artists copy, great artists steal...
While that may be a true statement, the challenge was to name where it originally came from.
xwiredtva, I formally request my one point!
A bit more:
- Microsoft's first spreadsheet was Multiplan, which was released in 1982, prior to Mac, however the first release named "Excel" was on the Mac in 1985, and not for Windows until 1987.
- Word, on the other hand, was first released as Microsoft Word for the IBM PC in 1983, prior to the public release of the first Mac. So unless Word existed for the Lisa, PCs had it first.
DING! Forgot PP.
People want to run standard i.e. Windows, apps, which is why Linux netbooks were such a failure. People would get them home only to find they couldn't install Office or other apps they used.
Those buying netbooks look at them as smaller, cheaper laptops, when they are not really.
But putting Google's name on what is basically a Linux OS that doesn't run standard apps will still have a lot of resistance.
Apple could get a way with it because it also has those standard apps with many more f its own.
But I'm skeptical about Chrome so far.
I don't think the failure of Linux netbooks is about the apps. Chrome OS is theoretically going to support x86 apps anyway, but even if it didn't and only supported online apps that opened and saved Office files it would be the same thing for the user.
The problem with Linux is it's a confusing mess. It's the elephant in the room that no one wants to talk about. I am in IT and do a lot of techie things. I have in the past been a Windows expert and now I'm a full-time Mac expert but I find Linux to be confusing annoying crap in terms of the UI and actually getting anything done.
The Linux guys (some are friends of mine), will say that it's not that hard and it really isn't if you spend the time to learn it. But the problem is the user just wants to get their email. They don't want to learn how to manage their hardware and software and they don't want to spend all day configuring tricky little things.
It was interesting when computers first came out to get into all the little details and build your own etc. I did it myself for years. But today, people want a computer that they can turn on and use. Like a TV. This evolution has happened with every significant consumer product of the last century. Cars, Radios, TVs etc.
No one wants to (nor should they need to) look at configuration files all day long when they really just want to send an email or look at a video clip.
Wordstar, Lotus 123, Harvard Graphics, Mosaic,........
Integrated Suite
-------------------
AppleWorks (for the //e), first integrated package... Amazing product.
Individual Applications:
---------------------------
VisaCalc (first spreadsheet.... yes Lotus123 was a COMPLETE ripoff of VisaCalc)
AppleWriter, Wordstar (dedicated processor), ScreenWriter (nasty copy protection)
Hardard Graphics (good one!)
File Cabinet (for Apple ][ integer basic..even before MS wrote FP Basic for apple ii)
I think you kind of hit the point here. While most people on these forums know about free and proven alternatives to both MS Office and Windows, the end user does not know. And maybe they don't care. Sheep need to be led. And the marketing machine at MS has very deep pockets, and are capable of convincing most people that even the worst product is a must have.
If Linux and Open Office had similar marketing budgets, or even a fraction of them, the awareness could get out there, and result in a higher install base. But it's not going to happen... unless someone with large pockets gets on board. Google is the most likely at this stage, so their entrance to the ring should be welcomed.
The only other alternative would be if all PC manufacturers unanimously agreed to dump MS and support Linux to potentially save money and gain back some control. But this won't happen either, because no one wants to be first, and even when someone does jump the MS ship, it will be alienated, most likely by the MS negative marketing campaign machine. So they all have to jump ship at the same time... wishful thinking.
You're giving too much credit to consumers.
Most consumers use Windows and its associated software because they use it at work, and are familiar with it, in addition to the fact that they can often get it free from their employer.
That's almost the only reason other than the fact that PC's are made at cheaper levels.
When I did much work for the school system in past years, parents were almost violent against having Macs in school because they used PC's at work. They tried to insist that their kids needed to use PC's in school, even elementary school, so that they would be able to use them at work when they got older. That diminished greatly over the past few years as Mac sales have prospered and have shown up at work as well.
There is no interest in using Linux in schools, or, for the most part, in business. Linux desktop use has hovered from below 1% to about 1% and back in the US for years now, while the Mac has grown considerably. I know that Linux users like to think differently, but as far as OS's on the internet goes, Linux is still around 1%.
Almost everyone has heard about Linux, but as soon as they buy a computer with Linux on it, such as netbooks, which should be the easiest way to get on Linux because netbooks have the least computing demands, what do they do? They return the machines.
Many of these machines already have had OpenOffice installed, along with other open source software that is perfectly usable. But they want their own apps, and they can't have them. So, back to the store.
It's been mentioned that it's driver problems. Well, that's just another nail in the coffin.
This is about as much a closed environment as you could ever hope to get for a Linux foothold, but it didn't work.
I read articles in OSnews about how Linux netbooks were going to be the gateway to the consumers heart, and lead to the big breakthrough that Linux people have been predicting for almost a decade now.
But it was a major flop. Now there are some articles about what went wrong.
It's simple, you can't force an OS, or software, on people who don't want it.
Most people want Windows and its software. An increasing number want OS X and its software.
It's also interesting that over the past few years, and increasingly so after the Intel move by Apple, that some of the best known writers on the Linux scene publicly moved to OS X.
I really don't see Chrome, which won't be out for at least a year as being any different. And we all know Google. Will this ever get out of beta?
You're giving too much credit to consumers.
Most consumers use Windows and its associated software because they use it at work, and are familiar with it, in addition to the fact that they can often get it free from their employer.
That's almost the only reason other than the fact that PC's are made at cheaper levels.
When I did much work for the school system in past years, parents were almost violent against having Macs in school because they used PC's at work. They tried to insist that their kids needed to use PC's in school, even elementary school, so that they would be able to use them at work when they got older. That diminished greatly over the past few years as Mac sales have prospered and have shown up at work as well.
There is no interest in using Linux in schools, or, for the most part, in business. Linux desktop use has hovered from below 1% to about 1% and back in the US for years now, while the Mac has grown considerably. I know that Linux users like to think differently, but as far as OS's on the internet goes, Linux is still around 1%.
Almost everyone has heard about Linux, but as soon as they buy a computer with Linux on it, such as netbooks, which should be the easiest way to get on Linux because netbooks have the least computing demands, what do they do? They return the machines.
Many of these machines already have had OpenOffice installed, along with other open source software that is perfectly usable. But they want their own apps, and they can't have them. So, back to the store.
It's been mentioned that it's driver problems. Well, that's just another nail in the coffin.
This is about as much a closed environment as you could ever hope to get for a Linux foothold, but it didn't work.
I read articles in OSnews about how Linux netbooks were going to be the gateway to the consumers heart, and lead to the big breakthrough that Linux people have been predicting for almost a decade now.
But it was a major flop. Now there are some articles about what went wrong.
It's simple, you can't force an OS, or software, on people who don't want it.
Most people want Windows and its software. An increasing number want OS X and its software.
It's also interesting that over the past few years, and increasingly so after the Intel move by Apple, that some of the best known writers on the Linux scene publicly moved to OS X.
I really don't see Chrome, which won't be out for at least a year as being any different. And we all know Google. Will this ever get out of beta?
Ed Zachry.
Since 1996 I've been preaching the power of linux (since I did some lo-lever driver work and found it to be fun) but without a commercial name behind it, it will never move and I preached that too. When it comes to Linux the geeks are in charge, and we don't want "people" messing it up. In a business environment it had it's hay day but with too few intelligent IT people it never took off (you can fight me on this one but that's the truth! Ask any business why they won't use linux and it's the IT personnel issue, Those crap tech schools can turn out cert-monkey's all day long for MS but you can't do that with a real OS - OS X or Linux for that matter).
The original argument for Linux in a business was that it was free. But after you add in IT costs to setup and maintain it got even with MS. Then you add in the cost to develop a software system for your business and it went over the top. Then you had to add in maintain costs and fee's. Over the top again and it's out. For a web, email, file server it works great. As a remote desktop client to a Terminal Server it works great too, even provides the user with email and office productivity suite and eliminates the need to massive security repairs. However it's the lack of support, end all be all, that keeps it off the desk at work.
Oh, and what went wrong in the Netbook Linux? It was restricted to the manufactures desktop which was large buttons. You had to hack it to get a real desktop and then packages and the os got broken all to easily. What's wrong with throwing the regular grade Ubuntu on it? Wifi drivers for the cheap wireless chips was beyond horrible. Asus 2g original had to be within 30' of the base station. Cloudbook, 10' line of sight. Swap in a Dell 1400/1450 wifi card and it worked up to 150' on either. XP drivers worked on the cheap hardware in the same way WinModem's worked under windows and not linux, the software was the key.
Drivers, crappy hardware, whatever. It should have been tested prior to release. But in the ways of MS they rushed it out.
Drivers and restricted OS. That's the end.
Once upon a time, Apple didn't take a threat too seriously from a couple of guys in Washington who designed their word processing software. Look how that turned out. Chrome plays on your turf Steve,and will grow and evolve over time.
And how is it going to do that? An OS that won't be available for over a year, if ever. It may be in beta when it does arrive for what, another year or more as is Google's want?
And then what? If you've read about this, you would see that it doesn't allow apps as sophisticated as WebOS for the Palm Pre. So what will if offer most people?
It's nor really clear that this "cloud computing" thing will really be successful. It may, and it may not. If it is, then Chrome will have a place in it, possibly challenging some very low end netbooks, maybe in the $200 range.
But if it doesn't, then Chrome will flop.
The word isn't out one way or the other yet. We may not know for years.
And what does this have to do with Apple? Almost nothing.
The only products that Apple has that might be thought of as being challenged by this is the iPhone/Touch combo.
But by the time this arrives, on very weak netbooks, the iPhone/Touch will be ahead by another generation, and will be able to do far more, though they already do far more.
Then, to make this popular, they will need programs. A lot of programs. Not just those floating in the cloud. and they will need games. And they will have to be free or cheap.
But Apple already has all this. In another year, there will be over 100 thousand apps in their store. Most not great, but with thousands of really good ones, maybe tens of thousands.
It could take Chrome several years to mature, but does it have that much time? No one else will be sitting still waiting.
NeoOffice is Native to Mac. OpenOffice is not and when printing you end up with Double Margins.
It's catching on... Trust me it's Catching on. People like me, companies like mine, will ALWAYS offer up the multi-thousand dollar office suite but also put in the proposal the open-source versions. And in the end the heads of corp get the paid version and the monkeys that do the work get the open-source. For the last 2 years we have been putting in open-office without even asking and then let them call about it. One issue though, you need to change the default "Save-As" to office versions otherwise you get calls.
It is native to the Mac. All software has bugs, including Apple's own.
I wonder how long it will take MS to create a browser based OS themselves...
I don't think they have the vision or the skills to do that, otherwise, they might have already.
Windows PE. Would be a perfect foundation for such an endeavor. If Google is successful with this strategy, MS could easily match them.
And probably with better driver support...
Put me firmly in the "meh" camp with the whole Chrome OS thing. Once again the tech press is doing the equivalent of "ooh, shiny!"
EDIT: I should also point out that for $70 Symantec Ghost comes with a full copy of Widows PE 2 - you can add drivers to it and generally customize it with a little tweaking - I was pleasantly surprised. It's great to have Windows PE boot CD's (or flash drives) for troubleshooting and recovery (google Bart's PE)
ballmer pisses me off. Time for someone new to take his job. Someone with some vision.
noooooooooooooooooo!
Oh wait, the Xbox. Yes, that worked out well.
Actually, the Xbox is now working out very well. If you look at their last quarterly results, the entertainment division with the Xbox bolstered their bottom line nicely.
Their recent quarterly loss (what was it, first in like 20 years?) would have been much worse without the Xbox. Quite a role reversal...
I just think its funny how this guy takes shots at apple and google to cover up his lack of innovation. I have worked in the mobile industry for years and I can tell you that Windows based phones are not the greatest. Functionality is not good and at some times they can be confusing to the average joe. Apple makes everything really easy as far as their os goes. Sorry microsoft, the only microsoft item that i have in the house is the xbox 360
But that requires that a single vendor, in your example Google, has a large enough market share to be able to drive developers to use their proprietary extension.
Really? What's the motivation for me to run a netbook limited to just web apps (even if they are from Google) when for maybe $50 more (if that even) I can have Windows and "have it all"?
Has no one learned anything from the iPhone and the Appstore? It's all about the Apps! Why do you think people want Windows on netbooks?
If anything, I could see Apple extending the Appstore into the netbook space and being far more successful then Google doing anything but unleashing yet another beta product.
How many people are on Hotmail vs. Gmail? People aren't going to run to Google just because of their name. That's about as stupid as the people that like to claim Apples products are doing well strictly because of superficial marketing - what a load of crap!
Really, let's get some perspective here