Comments on: Chrome OS: Imminent?

By: Mike

Mike — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 03:17:54 +0000

Chrome OS is just another rebranded Linux GUI, it would be much better if Google came up with an OS that would directly compete with Windows.
-

By: Chrome OS: The Great Unveiling | Technologizer

Chrome OS: The Great Unveiling | Technologizer — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 12:45:57 +0000

[...] sounds like it’ll be the closest thing to an official introduction that the company’s Chrome OS for netbooks has gotten to date: While this will be more of a technical announcement, we will be [...]

By: Pinoytech

Pinoytech — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 12:40:52 +0000

i tried Chrome OS and it is pretty much like a scaled down version of Ubuntu. Chrome is just based on Linux and there is nothing new about it.

By: Mike Cerm

Mike Cerm — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 10:52:17 +0000

@Tom: What I meant to say is that Chromium on Linux is a lot worse than Firefox. If I were a regular Linux user, I’d certainly choose Firefox over Chrome (just like I do on Windows). Building an OS around a browser that doesn’t even run well on that OS seems ridiculous to me.

Also, I don’t know what you mean by “a ‘geek’ OS.” I think that the term “geek” has morphed over the years, and I use it to mean “someone who’s abnormally passionate about a particular subject.” I find it incredibly shocking that among all the open-source-geeks who create Linux, that there isn’t at least one font-geek willing to step up and create some fonts that don’t make Windows and Mac users want to vomit.

Also, I’m not sure what sort of font rendering you prefer, but I greatly prefer Microsoft’s “ClearType” over Apple’s “BlurryText”. I understand that it’s really a matter of opinion, but if there’s one thing Windows and Mac users can agree on, it’s that fonts in Linux are bad. It’s a shame, because they don’t have to be bad; text looks amazing on my Palm Pre.

By: Tom B

Tom B — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 13:29:35 +0000

” I can say that if ChromeOS runs anything like Chrome on Ubuntu, you can count me out.”

What do you mean? LINUX tends to be much faster than Windows.

“fonts in Linux (both the selection and the way they’re rendered) are incredibly bad.”

Not surprising from a “geek” OS. But fonts ALSO render horribly in Windows, and that doesn’t stop people from using it.

By: Mike Cerm

Mike Cerm — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 08:05:16 +0000

I’m testing out Ubuntu 9.10 on an older laptop right now, and I can say that if ChromeOS runs anything like Chrome on Ubuntu, you can count me out. For the price (free), Ubuntu is OK. However, it STILL doesn’t match up to XP. I’m willing to overlook certain shortcomings, but fonts in Linux (both the selection and the way they’re rendered) are incredibly bad. Somehow, Chrome (well, Chromium) manages to handle fonts even worse than Firefox does on Linux.

For ChromeOS to be accepted, it’s going to have to be a massive departure from the Linux that exists today, and I don’t know if Google is up to that challenge. At the same time, it’s going to need to be SIGNIFICANTLY faster and cheaper than XP and Win7 Starter, which is probably not possible. Microsoft only charges OEMs $25 or so for Windows on netbooks. I’d rather have Windows for $25 than Linux for free, even on a $300 netbook.

The only way that Google could bring the cost down low enough to make me consider ChromeOS is if OEMs actually introduce super low-cost ARM-based “smartbooks” with instant-on, and all-day battery-life. Even then, I think most people would still end up choosing a $300 XP/Atom netbook over a $200 ChromeOS smartbook.

By: tom b

tom b — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 02:13:25 +0000

“1) Enable most of the things we want to do on the web, including video playback” Unlikely, with a dinky net book processor.

“2) Bring about that instant-on capability we all want, keep hearing promised, but never seem to find”

Wake from sleep on computers is already near-instantaneous.

“3) Bring the netbook hardware costs down”

Dollars to donuts you’ll still end up paying the Windows Tax.

“4) Increase battery life”

Remains to be seen.

““Web-centric” in Google’s mind is synonymous with ‘ad-based’. a very uninviting prospect.”

Agreed

By: ediedi

ediedi — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 22:23:45 +0000

“Web-centric” in Gogle’s mind is synonymous with ‘ad-based’. a veru uninviting prospect.

By: heulenwolf

heulenwolf — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 22:07:34 +0000

Sweet idea. Moving netbooks to an ARM-based platform would be sweet if they can:
1) Enable most of the things we want to do on the web, including video playback
2) Bring about that instant-on capability we all want, keep hearing promised, but never seem to find
3) Bring the netbook hardware costs down
4) Increase battery life
5) Keep up with the latest radio standards – lets leave 802.11b and “2.5G” behind, okay?
If Chrome OS is just an also-ran for Intel Atom platforms, basically Google Apps for Linux, then I’m not terribly interested.

By: David Ali

David Ali — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 20:56:50 +0000

Well, I don’t like the idea. To me it just sounds like less customization, slower os, a whole bunch of problems…. I’ll have to see how it does before i consider going to it. However, I’d NEVER drop Windows for something like that. Posted to my blog (and trackbacked to you):

http://dailyrampager.wordpress.com/2009/11/13/chrome-os-coming/