To conclude, no-one here can comment on the OS or it's potential without even knowing what it looks like. Most people expect the same layout as Chrome Browser, but it could change. Everyone needs to stop and think before they talk. They have no idea how it's going to look/work/compete with Microsoft etc.
The web being the OS is hardly revolutionary thinking and ceased being brilliant about a year or two ago. Its the basis of all pushes on several fronts by multiple companies looking at RIAs. Adobe, Google and yes Microsoft are the main players in this field. You really don't seem to know much outside of your MS hate and Unix over infatuation. Maybe google will win such a race and maybe not. Google certainly has not knocked off any Windows boxed application yet. Frankly the idea that everyone wants to run all their application through a web browser is IMO deeply flawed. At this vaporware stage (and yes its pure vapor that such a system will run all applications as well or better than straight desktop applications) alot of companies are making similiar claims for their RIA approaches. Why is it flawed? As long as I own a computer I think I will always want a more direct access to my system resources and I certainly want to own my software not lease it which is where all this is heading and from a performance issue for intensive applications I don't want the web to be my exclusive OS. I haven't experienced a web service provider that works perfectly and why should my computer be a dead weight or crippled of any feature when offline? I'll always take an application that fully works offline and can connect online. I don't see RIAs eliminating My systems OS but rather working alongside it for access from anywhere.
Finally someone on this forum who understands the need for direct access. Offline activity would be worthless. ISP's always go down, some just fix their problems sooner than others.
Uh, I may not know much but I know more than you. The first time I read about "the web as the OS" was in 2001 in a book by esr (I know you don't know who he is but every *nix person does). Even then, such interoperability has always been available on *nix and claiming it came about a year or two ago shows how little you know. The *nix community has been doing it for decades. Uh, you can download it if you wish from Google. It's not current but it's there. RIA is not the same thing. An internet application is not an operating system. Running the new Word over the internet, as Microsoft is now going to do, is not the same thing. You already lease your software. You don't own your copy of Windows or most anything else you've bought. Read your EULA. Another example of how little you know. Again, you failed to read or understand what I said about Native Client. You can run Google apps offline and ChromeOS will allow the same. Again you are confusing RIAs with a webos. Learn the difference. RIAs are not the same thing.
You don't need to be online to use Google apps should the internet go down. Apparently you aren't aware and neither is he.
Too silly for me Howard.. Sure I am using unix boxes. I have with great pride for many years. Even run my own in my work. Now the truth. The majority of people reading this are also using Windows to do so. Windows and Linux side by side. The destruction of neither one - a world you can't handle because of a lack of something to be passionate about more than software Incidentally if you were as up on this then you wouldn't write such nonsense. THE RIA Approach is not and never will be simply another packaging of Linux. Read the whole paragraph from Google that you quoted. comprende? Probably not so let me explain. This is standard RIA talk that has been going on for years. This is not a standard Linux approach where the software runs directly on the OS. APplications will run on the web utilizing all kinds of OSs and technologies NOT Linux. All that is happening here is that heavy lifting that present day OSs (including Linux) handle is being handed off to external servers. This aint just Linux. Ingenius on Google's part? Adobe has been on this for years with Flex Microsoft has been on it for two years with Silverlight and now last google is on this with Native client Worse for you is that you didn't even read the following Windows lives on and is not "doomed" even Google sees a world where Windows continues. You just haven't thought it through in your grand Kill microsoft fixation. If I am a Corporation do I run my operations on Chrome OS or a full fledged operating system that has ALL its power residing on my boxes and still can run ChromeOS? That can allow my company to work with sensitive data I don't want my browser used to access? If am a home user what system will i choose to use? One that runs only ChromeOS or one that can integrate with my entertainment system ala whatever XBOX will eventually morph into? For home users all this talk about desktop supremacy is too late anyway. We are not going to continue to have seperate boxes for video and games and another for web and standard PC work. Its going to fuse together and MS already has millions of boxes in homes that are the precursors of that coming convergence. and one last word. Will that be the end of security concerns? Really? When my applications are on web servers? Let me guess Servers that run on Linux have never been hacked into right? So I may still lose critical applications for hours or maybe even days without MS? The myth of the greener grass.
Keep it up. . You are showing you know nothing about what ChromeOS is about. No one is talking about google apps. the whole point of Chrome OS as I have just quoted is to let application developers build their apps on other technologies and access them through their web browser. MANY of these larger and sophisticated Apps will run mostly on the web not your desktop. You are NOT going to get a feature rich fully functional Photoshop working through any browser anywhere without server side assistance. thats just blatant ignorance. at some point you are going to use both the processing power of the user and the Server side technology in concert.
Howard you are a waste of time now. I don't pay every year, month or quarter for my copy of Windows XP. I paid once about three years ago and many paid once longer than that. So no I don't lease it. I buy it once. Eula has nothing to do with reaching into my pocket and taking out dollar bills every month or year on a schedule Frankly thats why MS in particular likes the web based idea. Increases revenue and cuts down on pirated copying. and yet again I must instruct you on chromeOS. Native client IS an RIA approach. Flex and Silverlight are heading int he same general direction. Each has its differences, potentials and drawbacks but they are all talking about running applications through the browser independent of the system's OS.
My name's not Howard. Everyone calls me Doc. Not my name either. Based on your posts, I can't believe you. I never said it was. Either you, or the other guy, imply RIAs are the same as what ChromeOS is trying to do and I just posted that that is not true. I do but apparently you can't read what is written because that's what I've been saying. Thank you for finally agreeing with me. EXCEPT, as I said, you don't seem to understand the difference with RIAs. AND you don't know the difference between "cloud computing" and what ChromeOS is trying to do (or how *nix works for that matter but that's already been established). Absolutely false! Flex and Silverlight do NOT run native x86 machine code compiled applications on the local computer. They are 'interpreters' that translate 'byte code' in a similar fashion to scripting languages. Again you show you don't know what you're talking about. If you read earlier, I said ChromeOS runs everywhere but I'm sure you chose to ignore that. Um. If you can run any application via ChromeOS, why would you need to buy Windows? Um. Sensitive information can stay on the local computer without accessing the web. Or did you not understand that? You mean like I do with my home system via *nix? Are you saying Windows is the only OS with applications that can do that? Or are you again saying you aren't aware of anything outside what Microsoft tells you? Ah! Now you're starting to get it. Now it seems you might have an inkling of what ChromeOS and Google are trying to do. Of course, Microsoft is late to the game with all this since we've been doing this on *nix for decades. See. You look at all this through Microsoft glasses and think everything looks the same. You don't realize that all this, including the security issues, have been dealt with for decades on *nix. You think this is all new stuff when it's old hat. This is why I don't believe you when you claimed you run Unix. If you did, you'd realize that controlling home entertainment systems and these networking issues were available years ago. You'd say, "What's the big deal? I just ssh into my home/office/work computer and do all that." but you didn't! I would have thought you would at least have brought up MythTV, but you didn't! So don't talk to me about things you can't see outside your confined Microsoft box. You are totally unaware of anything else and have no knowledge whatsoever in that area.
But you said you didn't want to run over the web cause your apps would die. Sounds like you're talking about online apps to me. You're lost. Not totally wrong. Just only looking at one side of the equation. So you can't but you can? ChromeOS allows what you just said won't work....but then you said it will if....but ChromeOS does allow that so, you're lost.
Again you profess your ignorance. You do NOT own your copy of Windows no matter how much you pay. And Bill Gates once said the internet was a waste of time. Lol. You guys bore me. I keep telling myself not to get into these long winded arguments with Windows users cause you can't teach them anything. It's never happened before and I doubt it ever will. This reminds me of the time, about 4 years ago, when I questioned why IE was such a bad browser and I'd get into arguments like this. I said, then, that IEs 95% market share would probably dwindle down and become less relevant. Oh the howls of laughter from Windows users. So I guess now that IE is at 65% and declining gives me satisfaction, as well as making my job much easier. But you still find Windows users preaching the virtues of IE, even though it's the worst on the planet. So I'm tired of this thread and moving on. You'll never learn.
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/03/offline-access-to-google-docs.html You still need Google Gears for this to work. A lot of people don't even know what it is...
well i think we are entering into web 3.0 era. We will see web versions of our favorite applications in coming years!
LOL! Okay I understand now Howard. You are totally confused. You think Google Apps and Chrome OS are identical. Oh pish posh. Like I said they have their differences I didn't say they were identical. they both allow for applications to be run through the browser. and therefore for anyone that knows anything about this fall into an RIA approach which is what I stated. Nice try at diversion. got to learn to read there. I said browser access not web. If you foolishly believe that Chrome OS will be beyond hacking into then fine but for the rest of the sane world the browser is a point of entry. Yes I can see the need that some corporations might have for a system that is not directly open to the web through a browser that is designed to give additional access. WHy can't you? Nope. please keep up. I am saying that neither Google, Adobe or any other company not named Wii, Sony or microsoft already have their entertainment units already in millions of homes with the capability of major computer processing. these companies are way in front of google in winning their business and therefore your point is blown - Microsoft is not doomed. they are ahead of the curve no matter what happens on today's desktop. How can a company be doomed when it is one of the leaders in putting what will become tomorrow's PCs into millions of homes? totally and blindly illogical. Don't take a try at being purposefully (hopefully) dense. Security issues on servers has not been "dealt with" servers get hacked into. My goodness thats why you are not now believable. Anyone that works on servers has to be constantly vigilant at hacking attempts and any seasoned server manager would know that being hacked into is a possibility. Whe B) The point of ChromeOS is not to work exclusively with Unix. It has interoperability with a variety of web technologies which can and will be exploited just as EVERY technology so far on the web has been. My goodness man this is pointless. You have zero idea what you are talking about. You are merely running with something you don't understand in the blind hope that it kills MS that you hate. Peace out Howard . Enough time wasted.
just saw this nonsense. I said that leasing is where apps may be headed. that is that you pay every year or month for them. I do not pay for XP each year. You can run off into any dishonest tangent or distortion if you wish. That has its way of showing up ignorance as well.
Well its worse than that Jbrooksuk. Why do I go out and buy the best computing experience I can. fast CPU, fast board architecture memory etc to bottle all my applications through a browser and or browser add on? Yes properly written the browser can access the system resources but its still a potential bottleneck as opposed to a direct access of the resources by a full and mature operating system. The benefits of course is that I can access the application anywhere and some application will in fact be faster as I don't have to have all the overhead but sometimes overhead is there for a reason. Question is do I want to have the same access from anywhere. I can think of a lot of times I don't and far more times when I won't. why? Nothing is going to make an inferior system work better and I am probably always going to get better connectivity from my work and home ISP than on the go. If I am a 3d Artist I am still not going to be able to do a complex render on a supped down Netbook. I'll still want to do it from a system designed to do it. So what good is it to be able to access the rendering application from a system that can't handle it? this kind of approach will kick it with software that really isn't pushing the envelope of new technology. Face it. Word processing can run fine on an old system but pull out the latest video player with HD resolution capabilities and it grinds to a slow down. Same with gaming (example because games do push the envelope more). Even running Photoshop, Dreamweaver and Illsutrator is going to slow down a system. Imagine trying to do all that concurrently through a OS bottlenecked through a browser. It will work? Sure. Its easy to say. because no such OS now exists that is doing that . Its vaporware. So if my best experience is going to be most productive on a system designed and bought to do what I want why should my WHOLE computing experienced be funneled every time through a browser so I can access it through another system that doesn't have the features I want? or do we need buy new laptops every year since they can't be upgraded as easily? and if you are running it on your laptop anyway why not just install the said applications to your laptop and be done? No web OS needed. Interesting side discussion. Actually the only interesting one left in this thread. Thanks
People easily adopt the best that is offered to them. Firefox is the case in point. Let google chrome OS establish its superiority and I am sure people would shun the windows just like IE and embrace the efficient OS with both hands. But till then, people would obviously resent the negative talk about what has been working very good for them... so far! Regards, RightMan
so basically ur saying their is no point in this thread? the whole point of the thread is to evoke opinions of other users and allow them to express their view of the operating system and also educate people on operating systems in general