Google pulls the curtain off Chrome OS, releases source

As planned, Google showed Chrome OS to the world for the first time earlier today. The unveiling came hand-in-hand with the release of the operating system’s source code under the Chromium OS project, which allows anyone to grab the code, modify it, build it, and run it. Google doesn’t seem to have released a pre-built distribution, though.

Laymen might not be able to grab Chrome OS and use it just yet—the public launch isn’t scheduled until a year from now—but Google has given everyone enough to salivate over. For starters, the company has revealed the OS’s user interface, which places the web browser at the center of the user experience:

Chrome OS essentially looks like a souped-up version of the Chrome browser, with a menu to access software at the top left and web apps that appear as icon-only tabs, which users can keep pinned to the tab bar. Non-web-based applications show up in “panels” that float over or dock next to the central browser window, and Google lets you switch between browser “windows” (virtual desktops, for all intents and purposes) with mouse gestures and transition effects straight out of the Mac OS X playbook.

Google has also broken new ground on the security front. In this video, Google Security Engineer Will Drewry explains how Chrome OS houses system files on two mirrored partitions, with all local user data residing on a separate, encrypted partition. If an update or malware breaks something, the operating system can restore itself from the mirror partition with a simple reboot—and the user ought not worry about anything.

Chrome OS also looks fast, a trait that should come in handy considering Google’s decision to target netbooks with the first public release. Google’s Martin Bligh details and demonstrates in this other video how the Chrome OS team greatly streamlined the startup sequence, allowing a boot time of just six or seven seconds (by my count) on a lowly netbook. Impressive stuff.

Comments closed
    • End User
    • 10 years ago

    I tried out Chrome OS in a VM. Very cool. It is perfectly suited for use on a secondary device. I would love to see this on a tablet in my living room sometime in the next year.

    §[< http://daringfireball.net/2009/11/a_car_and_a_bicycle<]§

    • anotherengineer
    • 10 years ago

    um so is this really an OS in the sense of an OS.

    I mean will it come on a disk and be able to format and boot up like windows, OSX or linux??

    If not its not an OS in my book

      • WaltC
      • 10 years ago

      Basically, it is brain-dead software that will only run on a very short list of hardware–so short that I think saying it will run on a “netbook” is a great exaggeration. If you want “the web” to be your primary platform to the degree that when your web connection drops so does your Google set-top box, then Chrome OS is your cup of tea…;)

      Personally, I like a strong, local-control environment that allows me to use the web when I want to, and on my terms, instead of becoming dependent on a web connection for having a platform of any kind at all. I thought SUN’s “Network Computer” died a long time ago–but it’s back, I see. New name, new box, but more of the same.

        • indeego
        • 10 years ago

        Except this isn’t Sun, this company has ballsg{<.<}g

          • WaltC
          • 10 years ago

          Balls or no, this is an old idea that has never worked for anyone who has promoted it. Remember when Netscape in its glory days was fond of telling the world how it had some mysterious plan to “abolish the OS” as it was known? Netscape had similar ideas, but obviously, just like Google, had no idea of the complexity, depth and scope a company has to have to provide the kind of hardware compatibility Microsoft provides for its OSes.

          The irony here is that it seems that Google, just as it was true for Netscape, *does not realize* that the vast majority of the business it has sits right on top of Microsoft’s OSes in terms of actually being dependent on those OSes…;) It’s truly remarkable how these companies fail to understand the distinct differences between an OS and a browser.

            • indeego
            • 10 years ago

            Google knows this quite well. It has much smarter people than Netscape did. They are executing quite well so far, I have little doubt they’ll be able to do well in this space. Mind you we’re only talking about the netbook space, which is so miniscule. But Google will be selling <$150 Netbooks by this time next year I pretty much guarantee it, a price Microsoft will not like.

            How do I know this? Microsoft is following Google for the past 5 years in everything Google has done well. Search, Search appliance, ad networks, online services, full service antispam, etc. Microsoft also has a serious issue with cost structures. Office at $100-$600 versus “free” will eventually start to hurt them, especially at the SMB end.

            1 million businesses, small and large have already gone to Google Apps, mostly at the expense of Exchange infrastructures. That is Amazing and Netscape nor Sun could dream of pulling that many people from Microsoft in such a short timeg{<.<}g

        • MadManOriginal
        • 10 years ago

        YO DAWG, WE PUT YOUR OS IN YOUR BROWSER SO YOU CAN ONLY OS WHEN YOU CAN BROWSE.

        • Skrying
        • 10 years ago

        The ignorance in your statements are annoying at best.

        Limited hardware? Only as limited as the hardware manufacturers out there want to provide drivers. Nearly any hardware than runs fine on other Linux distributions can be easily updated to run Chrome OS, seeing as how the real “operating systems” parts are mostly standard Linux.

        For many people all they do need is a web connected device in this form factor. Additionally I would expect many of the netbooks that would ship with Chrome OS would come with wireless hardware (not just WiFi, but 3G, etc) so the chances of being outside the reach of Internet is low.

        Clearly you don’t care for the concept. So why post nonsense that paints in a bad light when all you have to go by is purely conjecture on your part?

      • vikramsbox
      • 10 years ago

      Google’s dominance on the net had made many people say just “Oh yes! Oh Yes!” whenever Google’s name was included in a product. Didn’t take long for google to take the hint! Now we can all say “Oh, yes! to the OS”. LOL.

      • FuturePastNow
      • 10 years ago

      Nope. It’s an appliance, like your TV or microwave, for the internet.

      You can pull the power cord and yank the battery, when you turn it back on and log in it will be in exactly the state that you left it, because the OS is read-only and your data is stored online.

      That is going to appeal to a lot of people, if it is marketed well.

    • Usacomp2k3
    • 10 years ago

    If they’d stick Hulu in this…

      • Skrying
      • 10 years ago

      ….

      ….

      Your comment is a joke right? I seriously can’t tell. I don’t know if it’s the lack of clear sarcasm or the overwhelming ignorance of what Chrome OS is suppose to be in these comments.

      But… I’m going to /[

      • FuturePastNow
      • 10 years ago

      If you’d look at the picture of the applications tab, you would see the icon for Hulu.

    • provoko
    • 10 years ago

    Stop complaining, it’s free. AND if you haven’t already figured out, a browser can do almost everything your desktop can do. And if you apply any logic to that statement, eventually a browser WILL do everything your desktop can do. But if you think… just think what this really means… it’s a first step of what google can really do with an OS.

    The foundation of the OS is already primed to be better than Windows/Apple. It’s boot, security, and automation features are already better.

    Chrome OS is a baby, you don’t shout at a baby, “LOOK AT HOW LITTLE HE CAN LIFT”. r[

      • MadManOriginal
      • 10 years ago

      It’s all just a scam for Google to be able to track *everything* you do, open source or not. Yeah, I trust MS more than I trust Google with my OS. And ‘backing up my files to Google’s cloud’? Dream the hell on Google.

        • provoko
        • 10 years ago

        If you use gmail or google anything, thats the cloud, the internet is the cloud. So start waking up from your dream or I guess nightmare.

      • WaltC
      • 10 years ago

      Browsers are really terrible at booting machines, supporting hardware like cpus and 3d cards and hard drives, etc., and besides all of that–what do you do with your browser if your Internet connection goes down–which you might not have noticed happens fairly frequently in many locales around the world…?

      Why is it so hard to understand that a browser is an application that runs on top of an OS–and that the OS doesn’t run on top of the browser? Heh…;) Chrome OS doesn’t run on top of the browser, either.

      BTW, the set-top boxes the Chrome OS will require (unless you VM it in which case you’ll need a PC you’ve paid for) certainly won’t be free. Also, concerning the principle of “free” in the first place–I always say you get what you pay for.

      I cannot imagine what good a browser pretending to be an OS might possibly be…;) OTOH, a browser that knows it’s a browser–now that can be pretty interesting and useful–especially running on top of an OS that does a whole heck of a lot more than running browser(s)–notice the plural there? I wonder–how many browsers will Chrome OS run? (rhetorical question.)

    • stmok
    • 10 years ago

    A lot of people don’t quite understand what this is really for.

    This is *[

    • blastdoor
    • 10 years ago

    I’ve been mulling this over, and I think it has potential. This is not an operating system for a general purpose computing machine, which is what we’re all used to. This is an operating system for a computing appliance that is designed to do a somewhat limited set of things pretty well and at a low cost. In that sense, this is more like a game console or an iPod than it is like a PC.

    As others have pointed out, this isn’t terribly original. There are plenty of other people with products that do something similar. The difference is that this provides Google with a guaranteed way to get their adds in front of people, whereas those other products do not necessarily have that “feature”.

    From the consumer’s standpoint, this could be appealing because the ad revenue will mean google can subsidize it (in part by giving the OS away for free, but maybe they can provide an even bigger subsidy than that). The success of the ad-driven broadcast networks suggests that people are happy to accept a medium-quality product for the price of watching ads. Of course, the success of Showtime also shows that people are willing to pay a higher price for a better product with no ads. Thus, Google and Apple can happily coexist.

    • FireGryphon
    • 10 years ago

    So, this is basically Linux with a web browser pre-installed. How come no one thought of that yet?

    Wait a second…

    It’s not that, it’s Linux with a web browser and /nothing else/! The biggest reason no other browser could challenge Windows’ ubiquity is that Windows can run so many more programs than other OSes. Making a new Linux distro that is /less capable/ than what’s already out there seems like a foolish move.

      • Tamale
      • 10 years ago

      you really don’t see value in having an OS centered around a browser that can’t be corrupted, never needs to be manually updated, never has to have apps installed / updated, and boots in a few seconds?

      interesting. different strokes for different folks, I suppose. this seems like exactly what I want in a netbook, personally.

        • bimmerlovere39
        • 10 years ago

        At the risk of getting flamed out of sight, I think crippling app support might not be such a great idea, either.

        Look at the iPhone/iPod Touch; apps are no doubt a huge factor in their success – and I’m not so sure I want a netbook that is capable of doing less things than my MP3 player.

        • UberGerbil
        • 10 years ago

        …that /[

          • Tamale
          • 10 years ago

          You really find too many ads in webapps like google maps, google docs, gmail, and the like?

          I don’t notice them.

        • FireGryphon
        • 10 years ago

        I use my netbook as an extension of my regular system, and it must be program-compatible with my home computers and the computers in my lab. It would do me absolutely no good to have a system that couldn’t interoperate easily with my other computers.

    • sweatshopking
    • 10 years ago

    to me this seems worse than apples restrictions. i dont really see how this “os” is really an OS. yes it runs a browser, but what about other apps? it is a linux kernal, can i install firefox? how about wine? it doesnt seem to really be an OS to me, just a web browser that runs on a linux kernal. i would hardly call that an “Os”, more like a self booting browser.

      • Farting Bob
      • 10 years ago

      Its in pre-release right now, closer to alpha than beta i expect, and your bitching already because you cant install programs designed for other linux OS’s? Jesus, you must be a hard man to please.

        • sweatshopking
        • 10 years ago

        Ha! Hardly! I guess my question is whether or not I have control over my pc or not. If i do great! If not, this thing does little for me. Take it easy homie, we are all friends….

          • Tamale
          • 10 years ago

          This won’t be for you. As far as you’re concerned, there’s no hard drive what-so-ever. ALL your data on this thing will be synced to the web. All of it.

          You don’t install applications, you create bookmarks to webapps.

          You don’t save stuff on your drive, you save stuff to your account.

          You don’t switch between programs, you switch between browser tabs.

          For some programs, you can use ‘panels’ to better multitask, but they’re just special browser pop-ups.

          The OS can’t be modified at all except by the OS itself.. all hard drive partitions are read-only to users. It will update itself, verify its own integrity, and restore itself to a known good state if something goes awry.

          The only ‘control’ you’ll have over your computer is what accounts show up at the login screen by default when you boot. I’m fairly sure that’s the only machine-specific data that can change.

          Make more sense?

            • albundy
            • 10 years ago

            so essentially you have a nice paperweight if there is no internet access around you. kinda seems pointless then.

            • Tamale
            • 10 years ago

            *shrug*.. I tend to have internet access everywhere I go these days.. and even when I don’t, I can use my phone as a modem. I didn’t think I was so alone in feeling this way..

            • Skrying
            • 10 years ago

            Chrome OS is targeted towards always connected netbooks. Not just 802.22 WiFi connections but 3G and other cellular data services. Hell, chances are you’ll see many of the most popular models that carry it will be offered from wireless carriers at heavily subsidized prices with contracts. Just like a smartphone.

    • adisor19
    • 10 years ago

    For you old timers out there, doesn’t this remind you or what netscape was planning to do back in the 90’s ? hehe

    MS managed to kill Netscape but Google is another beast all together. This is exactly what MS feared would happen and is the main reason why they buried netscape in the first place.

    Adi

      • Skrying
      • 10 years ago

      Be careful here…

      They don’t fear the concept. They fear the provider. Just like any company would when facing competition.

      Microsoft already has quite an extensive cloud based services and increasingly more.

      Really both companies are going at the same point but from the different ends. Google started at the cloud and worked to the OS. Microsoft at the OS and towards the cloud. The goal, as Bill Gates has been making for many years now, is computing in all locations with your information accessible from any computer.

      I for one support this given that we consumers are ardent in protecting our data, keeping our privacy and vocal about companies being up front about their data keeping practices.

        • MadManOriginal
        • 10 years ago

        It’s worth it to me to spend a few hundred dollars and have my own server. Sure, it won’t be as fast as a ‘cloud server’ (maybe) but I know no one has a chance of f’ing around with my data.

    • pragma
    • 10 years ago

    Remember the times when Bill Gates would talk of Windows OS in every fridge, microwave and TV? Today, Google has brought this dream one big step closer to reality. This isn’t Google revolutionizing the PC. On the contrary, a Google terminal is the antithesis of a PC — a Non-Personal Computer.
    Now imagine TV sets with Google OS; libraries, classrooms with Google; kiosks, info desks in lobbies; Google Panels in superstores…

      • Meadows
      • 10 years ago

      Anyone else thinking of G-Force?

      • blubje
      • 10 years ago

      I have to wonder if it actually works well on low-end hardware. That’s really the only thing that would make it an appealing platform imho.

    • grantmeaname
    • 10 years ago

    this looks really really really cool for netbooks. And usable, but not fantastic, for everything else. I do really like it, I just feel like it would be too limited for serious use. I wouldn’t mind those virtual desktops though… from what I can tell, every application gets its own?

    • swaaye
    • 10 years ago

    So Google wants to essentially turn “netbooks” into dumb terminals and have everyone use Google services.

    • TechNut
    • 10 years ago

    BORING!

    I wish they would get off the “The web is everything” and “Microsoft is bad” bandwagon. I listened to the launch webcast, and they really made this sound revoluntionary. In fact, it’s just a souped up version of the built in BIOS software that ASUS and others offer on their high-end boards.

    Just because it’s made by Goodgle does not make it great. They have only ever had one success, and that’s search. Android is successful because it’s FREE to developers and relies on.. Google Search to bring in dollars.

    When Google becomes more than a one trick pony, then people will listen.

    But until then, I’m sure the l33t g00g13 g33k$ will say “l1nuxxx suxxx chr0m3 rulz!”

    This kinda reminded me of the “application terminals” AT&T dreamed up in the 80’s to replace the computer.

      • Welch
      • 10 years ago

      Ok…

      1. Android, new to the cell phone scene, give it some time before you write it off. I’ve yet to experience it myself… we will see.

      2. I’d consider google maps another thing of theirs that was successful, sure other people have similar “mapping tools” but with street view, satellite view, distance by ground (approximate), search nearby features, all on a web based platform… There is a lot of functionality and is something I rely on for day to day tasks. And then you have Gmail.. which to me is the only email I will use due to its clean and simple non-ad infested interface.

      3. This OS isn’t going to be released to the public for a freaking year, so cool your jets. Microsoft and Mac had to start somewhere and they improved over MANY MANY MAAAAAAAAAAANY versions of their Operating systems… Give Google the opportunity to do the same.

      You also have to take into consideration what this is marketed towards (And a VERY smart target in my opinion)… Netbooks. Most netbooks can’t run 3D apps at any decent speed if at all, although im sure they will be able to soon, thats not what they are intended to do. When you are on a netbook its for very specific reasons.

      A.) Dont have the cash for a full sized laptop, college student most likely.
      B.) You need something with LOTS of battery life.
      C.) Ultra portability
      D.) All of the Above <<===

      No where in there are we talking about games, or other extensive apps… You want to be able to take notes, emails, web capability and other simple (in comparison) productive tasks.

      Its similar to a Mac OS in the regards to how simple it is…. even simpler possibly. People like the not so wealthy college students may consider getting a netbook with this instead of their next Mac (unless they are doing heavy duty tasks)

        • TechNut
        • 10 years ago

        You just reaffirmed my points. Google does not actually sell anything except Ads, and those ads are generated from their search tech. Again, saying it is for netbooks is the same as what Asus and Phoenix did with their pre-boot BIOS that has a full OS in there.

        The only real addition they made beyond what Asus offers is storing your data in the cloud and the whole “user encrpytion” thing.

        I’m not saying i disagree with these ideas.. more so, that Google is not presenting anything revolutionary here. It’s just a rehash of their sales model.

        Have you actually used Google Apps for anything serious? You’ll find that Open Office is much better. Again, why reinvent the wheel for this stuff? It’s to drive people to use Google Apps so they click on Ads when people see them. Not a terribly complicated or evolved business model 🙂

          • indeego
          • 10 years ago

          I have used Google Apps Premier, and while portions of it are young and need a lot of work, gmail is easily ready to beat Exchange in many of the SMB markets, especially for cost per user. You can still work with your office apps and Google apps, in fact they recommend this.

          Google claims that by next year this time their docs and spreadsheet apps will fit the need of most users coming from Office. That is a ballsy claim, but I bet they can do itg{<.<}g

      • indeego
      • 10 years ago

      Why would the Elite Google Geeks say that about Linux? Google owes its existence to tech within Linux.

      Google, at the very least, returns a lot of its software back to the community, and welcomes input from many corners, and yeah even works with Microsoft on major projects when it can benefit both.

      I don’t see them attacking MS, just saying, “We have a different vision.”

      Geez, you seem angry. It’s /[

        • TechNut
        • 10 years ago

        You missed a bit of my point. The fact is yes, ChromeOS does owe part of it’s existance to Linux, but the rabid “Google is cool” crowd will ultimately miss that message.

        I’m not mad at all. More over, Google does not actually return a lot of its work back to the Open Source community. This is well documented. This years Linux Kernel summit had Google there and they talked about why they do not give back. Most would be of little value to anyone else but them, plus the code quality is not that great. That’s the fantasy of Google.

        The Google business model openly relies on people doing work for them, i.e. open source. Look at Android. It’s not really open source either, most of the innards are controlled by Google. As they say, they have to strike a balance between Google owning and profiting from the work, and what others can do with it. They like Motorola and Nokia building different Android phones. They do not like Motorola and Nokia modifying Android to their wishes and hence losing the Google branding.

        The trouble with Google is its not let the best tech win, it’s who has the best branding win.

          • Welch
          • 10 years ago

          And I believe you are missing the point… Google’s “Business Model” does not rely on other people doing work for them, it relies on their employees finding the most clean and efficient way of doing things, without the fluff. This is the same reason that someone like google can’t just pop out in the open and hand their source code to EVERYONE….. HAVE AT IT… Eventually once its well established and documented, copyrighted or what have you they can hand it over for the enthusiast to have fun. Handing it over while its a work in progress is just begging for one of the big boys to grab it up and bring to market a variation of the idea before the original creators market is even seen. Google has employee’s jobs it has to protect, for them to go under they would suddenly have 1000’s of people jobless, not to mention the other contracts from other companies that work with them, it would hit the market big. If they want to be taken serious as a business they can’t GIVE everything away.

          What makes your posts sound so angry is your use of the “Google Geeks”…… seriously? Your on a tech website and you expect a term like Google Geek to score you brownie points? Sparing any disrespect, I find your post to be utterly useless and based on your own narrow view of how this technology market really works. Its a dog eat dog market… google might be the runt of the litter but he sure is biting back.

            • TechNut
            • 10 years ago

            Google’s business model does very well rely on the fact others contribute. It’s pretty fundamental to their model that they use the labour of the “open source” community to develop their product. The idea that they use is the best ideas float to the top, and they incorporate those as they go along.

            My response was to the previous post that they are open source, when in fact, you supported my view that they are not really open source about it. Google has plenty of fluff projects and others that have gone nowhere. You must admit that the core business model is to push ads, since that is what they are good at monetizing.

            I would argue I do not have a narrow view, rather, I take the investor view that Google continues to try to “innovate” but is not really pushing any new ideas. Sure, a nice new “Netbook” OS sounds great, but it’s really just another Linux distro, that will fork another 100 copy cats in the end. Their firmware will probably be the secret sauce that makes it unique, but the Linux base it is on certainly will not be. I’m sure you have read the articles that have said consumers have returned in droves Linux based netbooks. The proof is people really do want Windows for a “computer.” The real disambiguation in the market is that people clearly think of their phone differently than a computer. People accept Android because it is fundmentally better than a lot of other Phone OS’s. In the Netbook case, this will be a hard sell, no matter who’s name is on it.

            You should also check your facts. A company with $182B US market cap is not a runt of the litter. They are not even the underdog anymore. They own most of the search market.

            Point is, ChromeOs does not offer anything really new. Sure, it has some fresh takes on the UI, and some other features I commented on before, but, it’s not revoluntionary.

      • Skrying
      • 10 years ago

      Stop crediting Asus. It was DeviceVM who did all the work. I’m sure someone else had a concept before DeviceVM as well. You see the hole you start digging in this desperate attempt to give proper acknowledgment?

      Google brings something unique to the equation thanks to their size and existing products. Other quick boot/instant-on OSes simply suck to be honest. It is the integration that makes Chrome OS interesting not the idea.

      Also, what is wrong with Google being a one trick pony? (Which they’re not, they’ve quickly expanded into enterprise and will continue to do so. You don’t enter that market over night.)

      You don’t have to charge users directly for your software if you can make revenue from other avenues through that software. This has benefits for both Google and its users.

      There’s no rules that demand Google behave like traditional software firms such as Microsoft.

        • TechNut
        • 10 years ago

        Agree with you on the DeviceVM side of things. The technology has been around for a long time, and I do agree, most of the instant on OS’s are utter crap.

        I think the unique part of the market this can serve really is in the instant-on space. A real functional instant on OS that let’s me boot into Windows/Linux or back in a functional pre-boot environment would be a good step forward. That’s where I agree with you, that it has potential to change the market. MS is also keenly aware of this, so, we will see how it plays out. But as “YALOS” – Yet Another Linux OS, that’s where I’m leary. I think Android would have been a better choice. That would have been bringing the simplicity and functionality to a larger platform. ChromeOS splits their market, since it will probably be awhile until ChromeOS runs on a phone (if at all/ever).

        From a investment perspective, there is a lot of trouble being a one trick pony. Yahoo! tried to do the same thing, and look at the shape they are in. What saves Google is the culture and leadership are just much better. It’s great to find ways to make money, especially with a recurring revenue stream. Google’s whole model works around that premise. I do not disagree with how they do business, more of they use a lot of hype to promote products that really as not that revolutionary.

        Have you seen Google Wave? Great idea for collaboration software, unfortunately it’s buggy and unstable. Maybe if they integrated Wave into ChromeOS, and made it work seamlessly, that would be more revolutionary.

          • Skrying
          • 10 years ago

          The revolution is that they are literally from Google. It means a lot for an idea to come from a company that can support it. Google has yet to produce a product that is truly unique, at least from what I’ve seen. Even Wave is just an advancement on existing products. However, being that they are from Google and other people are therefore much more willing to at least take a look is very important. There truly is great value in having a strong brand name for the consumer. It builds a level of confidence and existing user base and a large user base almost always improves a product.

          Now… Wave will of course be “integrated” into Chrome OS. Every web app can be integrated into Chrome OS. Google will provider web app developers a means of using the alert system, etc. Wave’s current problems are from the fact that it is very early beta software.

          Chrome OS is just a portal. A highly integrated portal. Which is what many people need for their web devices (such as a netbook or MID).

          Also, Chrome OS should never go onto a phone. The design is not suited for that.

      • Ashbringer
      • 10 years ago

      You do realize that Android isn’t made by Google. Google Android has parts that is made by Google.

    • miken
    • 10 years ago

    Actually GEM was there first, years earlier, with it’s silly two fixed windows forced by the Apple ‘look and feel’ lawsuit.

    • Skrying
    • 10 years ago

    I *[

    • OneArmedScissor
    • 10 years ago

    Hooray! Soon, I’ll be able to Chrome while I Chrome. Or is it Google while I Google while I Google…

    • kenclopz
    • 10 years ago

    As long as there is a screenwriting program, I’m there.

    • lilrabbit129
    • 10 years ago

    I’m a bit disappointed. I guess I was expecting more OS and less browser. I can see this being useful for netbooks or that primarily do web stuff 24/7.

    • finchyo
    • 10 years ago

    it looks really good from the short video, its going to be great on a netbook/nettop

    • jjj
    • 10 years ago

    “Non-web-based applications show up in “panels” “there are no non web apps and that’s the point it’s all web/cloud.

    • indeego
    • 10 years ago

    Looks fine to me. The idea of another company causing MŜFT/AAPL to take things up a notch can only help us all.

    Microsoft and Apple will definitely lose customers to this in years to come. The question is, how manyg{

      • derFunkenstein
      • 10 years ago

      it’s AAPL, if you’re quoting NYSE symbols.

      • Ricardo Dawkins
      • 10 years ago

      Not many…not me. Ubuntu or other linux distros before this crap. Regards.

      • UberLaff
      • 10 years ago

      Don’t think thats going to happen until they allow it to dual boot. I can’t imagine people jumping into an all cloud solution without trying it first.

        • pedro
        • 10 years ago

        I’m sure dual boot will be workable.

          • Corrado
          • 10 years ago

          If its lightweight enough, you should be fine just LiveCDing it. Theres no data to be stored locally, so why not? The problem is going to be hardware support.

          • Tamale
          • 10 years ago

          Actually, I have my doubts considering they’re customizing firmware to verify the integrity of the hard drive’s contents before booting..

      • End User
      • 10 years ago

      This is a direct salvo at Micro$oft and IE.

      Apple does not compete in the netbook space so they won’t feel any impact from this initially. If a company were create a tablet based on Chrome OS then it may compete with future Apple products.

      Does Chrome OS support QuickTime?

        • indeego
        • 10 years ago

        Yeah Google has been focusing most of their efforts on Quicktime, removing the logos from startup, and providing snuggles to developers that try it out, in that orderg{<.<}g

        • no51
        • 10 years ago

        From your parent’s basement?

      • Meadows
      • 10 years ago

      About 5.

        • SomeOtherGeek
        • 10 years ago

        What? Billion? Probably right.

          • Meadows
          • 10 years ago

          Not “billion”.
          “People”.

    • mikehodges2
    • 10 years ago

    Ahh..suppsed to be a reply..oops

    • Fragnificent
    • 10 years ago

    Ugh…this is awful…..I hate when things like a computer OS are dumbed down for people who are too dumb to use it. I don’t want an OS that looks like a web browser, and certainly not one as lame as Chrome. This = FAIL.

      • PRIME1
      • 10 years ago

      It’s open source….write your own uber version.

      • Farting Bob
      • 10 years ago

      Yea, why cant everyone just learn how to use the damn command line for absolutely everything. In fact, who the hell needs a graphical interface, its just dumbing things down.

        • ssidbroadcast
        • 10 years ago

        i kno rite? All you need is “cd” “cd..” “dir /p” and “DOOM.EXE”

        How hard can it be to learn? SHEESH!

        • ScythedBlade
        • 10 years ago

        Troll …

        A GUI makes stuff EASIER to access … unlike switching a GUI to be browser based instead of program based.

        However, by making the browser a central part, you only making it useful for people who want to solely use it for browsing the internet, but not for those who want to do other stuff tha’ts not browsing.

          • Kilos
          • 10 years ago

          Bob was being sarcastic towards Fragnificient.

          Bah! I don’t like the idea of cloud computing, unless there is some sort of free nationwide wifi in the works.
          Perhaps we’ll see a rise in paid web apps as cloud computing gains popularity?

          • Anonymous Coward
          • 10 years ago

          Google intends all the apps to be on the internet. A huge amount of progress has been made in that direction in the past 5 years or so, and I can’t see why it is going to stop. Clearly Google intends to make Microsoft or any other OS company into easily replaced middlemen.

      • StashTheVampede
      • 10 years ago

      You’re going to find plenty of “distros” from ChromeOS.

        • gml_josea
        • 10 years ago

        I think it is actually very good for a /[

      • jdaven
      • 10 years ago

      Heck, even the command line is too user friendly. Let’s bring back typewriters and abacuses.

      • mikehodges2
      • 10 years ago

      Yeah. It also pisses me off when dumb people need “pre-built” houses. Why can’t you just buy the materials and build the WHOLE THING yourself, like I can?

      Jackass.

        • no51
        • 10 years ago

        Psh, buying materials? What are you? too dumb to make your own? Growing a tree makes no effort and making bricks is so easy, a child can do it.

      • derFunkenstein
      • 10 years ago

      I didn’t realize everyone plans on scrapping Windows, OS X, and all 1,052 Linux distros as soon as ChromeOS is released.

        • jdaven
        • 10 years ago

        Uh, derFunkenstein, we were just making fun of Fragnificent for his bonehead comment. I don’t see how this relates to your statement but whatever.

          • derFunkenstein
          • 10 years ago

          It was meant as sarcasm. And since it was several days ago, I can’t remember what I was getting at.

      • jjj
      • 10 years ago

      It is not dumbed down at all, the point is to go cloud and do everything you can to optimize an OS for that.Takes a lot of balls to go this far this soon and it might be a historic moment in the evolution of PC’s.

        • pragma
        • 10 years ago

        Yes, and once AI finally arrives in ten years time, and user interfaces get anatomically perfected as well, humans really no longer need concern themselves with the intricacies of low-level design. Those feeling sentimental may politely ask their Personal Fulfillment Agent – aka the Prompt – to let them program a little, who then with a wry smile and a wave of the wand will create a magic sandbox where little basic snippets come alive. And afterwards she’ll gladly undress, if that might be your desire. In difficult games your Assistant will be invaluable. She will move your chess pieces to your best satisfaction. In combat simulations, she lends you reflexes perfect and aim that is true. In traditional role playing games, she will do the bothersome grinding and leveling on your behalf, freeing your time for important real-life householding tasks such as bleeding the computer coolant lines and maintaining the UPS lead battery banks.

      • Fragnificent
      • 10 years ago

      I’m sorry I stand by my statement….this is terrible, and I hope this is not where modern OS’s are headed. The interface is too simple, yet somehow manages to still be cluttered-feeling. It’s awkward.

        • jdaven
        • 10 years ago

        Well I’m sorry but your statement just doesn’t fly. Every OS since Windows 3.11 has been aimed at making the interface and configuration of the OS as simple as possible. You are nobodies target audience. The target audience is the other 99.99999% of the population who are grandmothers, soccer moms, teenagers, etc. There are old distros of Linux out there for guys like you to feel good about your OS. Have fun!

          • Fragnificent
          • 10 years ago

          Sure it flies…it’s my opinion. You actually believe Windows got simpler over the years? Sounds like you don’t pay attention much.

            • Tamale
            • 10 years ago

            Considering windows 7 just installed everything on all 5 computers I installed it on out of the box, was on the internet, and gave me enough tools to get some serious work done with a minimal amount of effort, I’d say yes.. it’s gotten way easier.

            Thinking about going through the XP setup or god forbid the win98 setup again in comparison just gives me shudders.

            • Waco
            • 10 years ago

            Good God you’re a shitty troll.

          • wira020
          • 10 years ago

          Yerp, chrome os is nothing new.. except for having to log in to google to use the os or being totally cloud… there’s linux for the same purpose…

          I think this is what google is about, making old things better… other than being the big brother… lols…

      • stmok
      • 10 years ago

      l[

        • End User
        • 10 years ago

        l[

    • derFunkenstein
    • 10 years ago

    using the web browser as the start page kind of reminds me of Windows 3.1 and the ever-present Program Manager. 😆

      • ssidbroadcast
      • 10 years ago

      Wow, you’re right! What’s old is new again…

        • Flying Fox
        • 10 years ago

        What goes around comes around…

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This