Support NeoGAF

[Threi]

No HDD support?

Only specific Wireless NICs?

LOL

 

[D4Danger]

Wow. No HDD support! Just SSD!

That's me out. Thanks Google.

edit: That video was awful.

 

[panda21]

Dude, just check out Intel's Moblin, it's X.org + Clutter and has some pretty nice effects even on shitty ass netbook: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsCpIeLLoT8&feature=related

This is the technology Google are using. I don't think they need to or would really benefit from reinventing the wheel.

oh wow that is pretty good

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

Still not buying it. Cloud computing + computers for dummies. Great for netbooks, etc. at this point, but nothing at all to write home about for PC computing.

 

[ToxicAdam]

Most of all, we are obsessed with speed. We are taking out every unnecessary process, optimizing many operations and running everything possible in parallel. This means you can go from turning on the computer to surfing the web in a few seconds

I think like it's browser, the shortcomings of this OS can be looked over in deference for it's speed.

So, while I'm not going to run out and put this on my desktop, it seems like the perfect solution for my laptop.

 

[El Papa]

SSD support only in the future? ;(
i'll be buying a laptop/netbook? next year so i guess i'll keep in mind what i get.

SPEEEEEED!

 

[D4Danger]

dodged the price question about the hardware from CNET and the follow up question about a price target

not a good start

 

[CaptainABAB]

My biggest concern?

Pichai back on stage to talk about how they'll bring Chrome OS to market. Short version: through OEMs (aka computer makers)

Pichai: "As a consumer, you can't go download chrome os. You will have to go and buy a chrome os device"

 

[giga]

If the entire source is open, couldn't one just build it and install it?

 

[Polari]

No HDD support?

Only specific Wireless NICs?

LOL

Someone will do a spin with HDD support and NDISwrapper so you can use any wireless device that works on Windows with it. Probably before the week is out.

 

[CaptainABAB]

If the entire source is open, couldn't one just build it and install it?

From the live blog ... "Custom firmware"

Also, everything is signed - I doubt they will give out the keys (otherwise any malware author could use it)

 

[GSG Flash]

So you need to be connected to the web all the time to use the apps?

Wow. No HDD support! Just SSD!

That's shitty, I can't believe I'm saying this, but Google fail!

 

[CaptainABAB]

So you need to be connected to the web all the time to use the apps?

They will probably use the Google gears model where some stuff is cached locally - so you can read recent emails and start composing new emails but you can't send/respond until you are back online, etc.

 

[Dead Prince]

oh well. their focus is on netbooks/SSD and lots of online connectivity. I'll pass.

 

[Fordzilla]

This is a terrible idea. An OS that only allows you to use web-based applications, and probably only those hosted by Google. Many others have stated this would be good for a netbook, but I wouldn't even use this on a netbook. This isn't revolutionary at all, this is just limiting.

 

[panda21]

not sure but i think chromium OS (one with public source) is not the same as chrome OS, as with the browser.

i guess chrome OS will only be available with hardware it is known to support, whereas chromium will be able to download/build but with no 'official' support.

most people are idiots so i think this is actually a good idea.

i thought SSD's where fundamentally the same as HDD's as they appeared to the computer hardware though? do they just mean they will only make chrome OS devices with SDD drives? cos the chromium build/install instructions specifically tells you how to install it to a hard drive...

 

[quaere]

Anyone catch the name of the dumbass who asked about Android servers and how other browsers would run on Chrome OS? :lol

 

[D4Danger]

It looks like the only way this works offline is if the web app uses HTML5 offline storage

ouch!

 

[CaptainABAB]

Target timeframe: End of next year, ahead of holidays 2010

On security: Chrome autoupdates. "Verified boot." Every component in the Chrome OS is cryptographically signed and checked on boot

Nothing is stored locally (except for caching purposes.) Your data is in the cloud.

 

[pCeSlAyEr]

It looks like the only way this works offline is if the web app uses HTML5 offline storage

ouch!

for now... since its open source that could be changed

 

[Nabs]

wow, this sounds pretty cool.

 

[CaptainABAB]

Rafe: Question: Will you have an app store (like apple or android store)?
And what about drive certificiation?

Sundar: We'll have more details later. On the Web, there are hundreds of millions of apps... we'll be working hard on solving the problem.​

Didn't Apple say the same thing in the beginning about iPhone apps - how html & javascript should be sufficient for everything?

 

[VAIL]

This is big, anyone looking at it from a big PC point of view and calling it shit is so full of fail.'

 

[nubbe]

A bit disappointing it can't just be downloaded and installed.

But it will be interesting to see it be use in a real world way.

 

[White Man]

What with the speed and the small amount of RAM required, I'm kinda hoping that they also optimize battery usage for netbooks. It would be a pretty impressive move for them to break the 10 hour mark.

 

[Karma]

Where do we store all our videos, music and pictures? If it is all in the cloud does google give us all unlimited online storage?

edit:

This is far too limited. Why would I choose this over Linux?

 

[D4Danger]

Guy just asked what would happen if one of these cloud services go down and the answer was "well if it goes down it goes down for everyone" which wasn't very reassuring.

It doesn't bode well if you are relying 100% of that service being up. What if you want to create a Word file while it's offline? or edit a photo? or write a blog post?

not impressed with their current answers.

 

[LCfiner]

If gaf expressed concern or frustration over the chrome browser upgrading in the background, I wonder you all feel about the chrome OS updating in the background.

Not sure I like that.

I definitely know I don't like the idea of webapps-only.

I understand and recognize what they're trying to do but this is a pretty clear case of it not being "for me". I still feel a netbook -- especially the larger, high-end ones google wants to use, should be a normal PC without restrictions.

@ captainabab. You're right. And it was limiting and not flexible enough for lots of different apps. Devs cried foul till the sdk came out

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

This is a terrible idea. An OS that only allows you to use web-based applications, and probably only those hosted by Google.

Sometimes it helps to look at facts before forming opinions.

 

[SpeedingUptoStop]

Zomg Goougle bought Facebook!!!11!

 

[Goldrush]

I hope they ease up on the hardware and OEM requirements. There are more than a few family members I would like to force feed this to.

 

[Polari]

What with the speed and the small amount of RAM required, I'm kinda hoping that they also optimize battery usage for netbooks. It would be a pretty impressive move for them to break the 10 hour mark.

In the original announcement they said it was going be for both x86 and ARM. ARM based netbooks are going to have insane battery life.

 

[MrHicks]

people expected this to be on par with windows?:lol
seems shitty so far for my needs

 

[D4Danger]

people expected this to be on par with windows?:lol

no, but I did expect more than a full screen browser.

It's got so many pieces missing it's not even worth considering if you do more than check your email.

Why anyone would choose this over Windows 7 with Chrome installed is beyond me at this point.

edit: Also, I don't like the idea that Google has so much control over the hardware. That's a sure fire way for prices to sky rocket.

 

[Fordzilla]

Ok, but that doesn't change the fact that this is a horrible concept for anyone who uses their computer to do anything other than browse the web.

 

[MrHicks]

no, but I did expect more than a full screen browser.

It's got so many pieces missing it's not even worth considering if you do more than check your email.

Why anyone would choose this over Windows 7 with Chrome installed is beyond me at this point.

indeed

 

[nubbe]

The majority of all computer users just use their computers to use work applications like Office and surf the web and checking mails.

Just add some good media functionality with music and video playback and Chrome OS has every opportunity to be a great success if done right.

 

[Starchasing]

no, but I did expect more than a full screen browser.

It's got so many pieces missing it's not even worth considering if you do more than check your email.

Why anyone would choose this over Windows 7 with Chrome installed is beyond me at this point.

edit: Also, I don't like the idea that Google has so much control over the hardware. That's a sure fire way for prices to sky rocket.

But most people just do the following

facebook
email
instant messaging

thats a lot of people... and im sure they dont want to win the "OS war" ... they just want to push the "OS war" into the cloud...


same thing with the browser... they dont care if they become the most used... as long as other browsers become better and support google web apps... so its a win win situation

 

[CaptainABAB]

for now... since its open source that could be changed

It's a heavily customized kernel and OS - they are stripping out anything it doesn't need.

Trying to turn this into a standard desktop OS would be a constant fight against the nature of the OS. You might as well continue with Linux.

 

[PotatoeMasher]

I work in higher ed, so I'm seeing this mostly from that perspective. As a developer, I'm not sure I could use a web only machine. With all that said, this could be huge for education.

Currently our computer labs are filled with overpowered and overpriced workstations. Other than an occasional Word or Excel user, students are on the web (email, Facebook, Youtube, etc.) for nearly everything. We're already a Google Apps school, so hooking this up to Google Apps for Education would be a use-case Google is considering, I would assume.

Cheap hardware, no software maintenance, automatic (and constant) syncing of data? Yes please. I'd love to devote some development time for things like a WebDAV application for user access to network resources.

I'm off to propose some R&D in this area right now.

 

[SpeedingUptoStop]

I work in higher ed, so I'm seeing this mostly from that perspective. As a developer, I'm not sure I could use a web only machine. With all that said, this could be huge for education.

Currently our computer labs are filled with overpowered and overpriced workstations. Other than an occasional Word or Excel user, students are on the web (email, Facebook, Youtube, etc.) for nearly everything. We're already a Google Apps school, so hooking this up to Google Apps for Education would be a use-case Google is considering, I would assume.

Cheap hardware, no software maintenance, automatic (and constant) syncing of data? Yes please. I'd love to devote some development time for things like a WebDAV application for user access to network resources.

I'm off to propose some R&D in this area right now.

Plus users can take their info to any computer with them! No more bullshit "It didn't save properly" excuses!

 

[panda21]

no, but I did expect more than a full screen browser.

It's got so many pieces missing it's not even worth considering if you do more than check your email.

Why anyone would choose this over Windows 7 with Chrome installed is beyond me at this point.

edit: Also, I don't like the idea that Google has so much control over the hardware. That's a sure fire way for prices to sky rocket.

why would anyone chose windows 7 with chrome over this if all they do is browse the web, read email and play video/music?

on a netbook this is bound to run much better but still have what you need. does windows 7 boot in 10 seconds on anything nevermind a netbook?

i can see that some people won't want this but then its just not for you, that doesnt make it useless for the majority of people who only use the computer for web/email and are too stupid to use linux

also surely if they are doing some kind OEM thing bundling chrome os with pcs they wont actually control the hardware price? do microsoft control the hardware price of PCs at the moment?

 

[Burger]

Sounds cool, looks cool, will be cool. Although not as cool as the litl, this little thing is awesome (and probably a little too expensive too).

http://litl.com/

 

[White Man]

edit: Also, I don't like the idea that Google has so much control over the hardware. That's a sure fire way for prices to sky rocket.

The hardware thing is probably only temporary. This way, they only have to support it on their own hand-picked computers and not on every netbook released in the past year. I'd think once the OS matures a bit, Google would be more willing to officially put it out for other machines.

But hey, they're offering the source code. It will be running on every laptop ever within a week of its release.

 

[Polari]

Ok, but that doesn't change the fact that this is a horrible concept for anyone who uses their computer to do anything other than browse the web.

The primary market is netbooks. No-one's suggesting experienced computer users drop Windows or OS X on the desktop for this.

My mum has a Macbook. She uses Safari, iPhoto and occasionally OpenOffice.org. That's it, she even freaks out at the prospect of having to use Finder. I'm willing to bet there's a whole lot of people out there like her. This is potentially a great solution for that market. It's probably going to be a better solution for my mum than the Macbook. OS X is great because she avoids all the viruses and shit you get with Windows, but a netbook with an ARM chip is probably going to cost 1/4th of a Macbook, have three times the battery life and boot in 2-3 seconds. With Chrome OS she's going to be able to access everything from any computer in the world without ever having to even know what a file is. That's a pretty compelling proposition.

 

[LCfiner]

I work in higher ed, so I'm seeing this mostly from that perspective. As a developer, I'm not sure I could use a web only machine. With all that said, this could be huge for education.

Currently our computer labs are filled with overpowered and overpriced workstations. Other than an occasional Word or Excel user, students are on the web (email, Facebook, Youtube, etc.) for nearly everything. We're already a Google Apps school, so hooking this up to Google Apps for Education would be a use-case Google is considering, I would assume.

Cheap hardware, no software maintenance, automatic (and constant) syncing of data? Yes please. I'd love to devote some development time for things like a WebDAV application for user access to network resources.

I'm off to propose some R&D in this area right now.

see, I'm not so sure about the cheap hardware bit. they said they want to put this on lager netbooks with better keyboards and trackpads. plus it's SSD only. Chrome OS hardware might be >500 bucks, easily.

I think an existing netbook with Linux or winXP would be cheaper :/

 

[sinxtanx]

All I'm really worried about is if you'll be able to run apps like a word editor locally when you don't have Internet (like on an airplane or similar) at some point in the future. People who this OS is targeted at don't go comatose when their Internet is down, they do stuff to pass the time. Being able to store files locally and permanently is also important. Many people like to do stuff on their computers during bus rides, train rides etc.

You could say it's the notion that you HAVE to be connected to the Internet for the OS to be worthwhile is bugging me.

 

[D4Danger]

The hardware thing is probably only temporary. This way, they only have to support it on their own hand-picked computers and not on every netbook released in the past year. I'd think once the OS matures a bit, Google would be more willing to officially put it out for other machines.

But hey, they're offering the source code. It will be running on every laptop ever within a week of its release.

I do expect this but then we end up with a bunch of forked versions and nobody wins in that situation. Developers won't be able to submit this code to Google because if they wanted it running on different computers it would.

Google might take some of the restrictions off down the line. The problem is this opens them up to all sorts of problems with driver support so I'm not convinced they will. If they can control the hardware from the start I see these Google laptops more like giant smart phones than actually PCs. There's going to be very little choice.

why would anyone chose windows 7 with chrome over this if all they do is browse the web, read email and play video/music?

on a netbook this is bound to run much better but still have what you need. does windows 7 boot in 10 seconds on anything nevermind a netbook?

i can see that some people won't want this but then its just not for you, that doesnt make it useless for the majority of people who only use the computer for web/email and are too stupid to use linux

also surely if they are doing some kind OEM thing bundling chrome os with pcs they wont actually control the hardware price? do microsoft control the hardware price of PCs at the moment?

No, Microsoft just sell the software to OEMs who then sell it to the customer. To Microsoft's credit they don't try and control the hardware. That's why you have so much variation in price and performance.

...

Anyway, I didn't hear Google talk about peripheral support either. Can you use blue-tooth devices? printers? local networks? a USB mouse?

so many questions.

 

[Noshino]

All I'm really worried about is if you'll be able to run apps like a word editor locally when you don't have Internet (like on an airplane or similar) at some point in the future. People who this OS is targeted at don't go comatose when their Internet is down, they do stuff to pass the time. Being able to store files locally and permanently is also important. Many people like to do stuff on their computers during bus rides, train rides etc.

You could say it's the notion that you HAVE to be connected to the Internet for the OS to be worthwhile is bugging me.

If Im not mistaken, they did say during the Q&A that there will be ways for applications to run offline....doesn't Gmail already work offline?

 

[Polari]

All I'm really worried about is if you'll be able to run apps like a word editor locally when you don't have Internet (like on an airplane or similar) at some point in the future. People who this OS is targeted at don't go comatose when their Internet is down, they do stuff to pass the time. Being able to store files locally and permanently is also important. Many people like to do stuff on their computers during bus rides, train rides etc.

You could say it's the notion that you HAVE to be connected to the Internet for the OS to be worthwhile is bugging me.

I presume in Google Docs for example, it will cache your documents to the SSD and sync any changes when online. I presume Google's core web applications will be available offline.