There’s lots of excitement about ‘Chrome OS’ floating around at the moment. Apparently, Google will be giving us more details tomorrow and I hope for the sake of them that it’s more than just a browser and a set of HTML5 containers with Google apps inside. I think we all know how most consumers will react when they see something as bare-bones as that!
What’s the one, critical, element of consumer-focused operating systems that makes them successful? Applications.
OK. I’m talking about the western world here. Maybe Google is targeting towards the emerging markets but I doubt it. The ‘cloud’ hardly works well enough in Germany or Finland, let alone in India!
Actually it’s not so much the applications that excites the users, it’s the impression of a dynamic device that can change, adapt and mature as its lifetime progresses. The excitement of a new operating system upgrade or a look into the application store is like getting a new device again except this time, it’s a sub-$10 upgrade instead of a $499 one. It’s happening to all mobile operating systems and to many desktops too. Check out Moblin, the Linux-based browser-focused slim OS. (Yes, a competitor to Chrome OS on PCs) Intel are spending lots and lots and lots of money in order to make it dynamic. It’s going to be exciting. Even in the minor upgrade from 2.0 to 2.1 it was fun to see the new features. It was free too.
Google will need to do this too. They can. Easily.
- Dalvic runtime. (Run Android apps)
- Small-payments and authorisation system for HTML5 applications.
- A new app store.
If Google can announce a dynamic Chrome OS operating system on Thursday that works on PCs then, good; it’s another free option for netbooks and UMPCs. If they announce a dynamic Chrome OS for ARM-based platforms then it’s game-on. At last there be an exciting option for tablets, smartbooks and other ultra mobile computing devices. It will only be one piece of the complex puzzle that makes up a truly complete product but it’s an important one.
If they don’t announce anything Dynamic then forget it. There are a number of better options out there already.
Further reading available at: JKOntheRun, more from us, gigaom and an interesting one from TGDaily
November 18th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
With the recent increase in Android usage (and information in the press due to the Motorola Droid), it would make sense to allow ChromeOS to run modified Android Applications.
I would love to have an ARM based tablet with a 7-10″ screen to go with an Android phone, being able to run versions of the same software.
A Purely browser based system is not going to work in the short term.
Reply (threaded)
November 18th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
Good Headline, brings it to the point. Hope to see it soon, wanna test it.
Reply (threaded)
November 18th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
It frightens me how willing people are to just hand over everything to a private corporation like Google.
Reply (threaded)
November 18th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
Chrome can be secondary OS. Something you’re using on your notebook when you’re on the go, and you need fast web access without long boot of a full OS. Instant on, instant connectivity, without advanced features, work with web apps.
Bringing more mobility to notebooks, allowing fast mail checking on PC, and so on.
That’s the only way not to compete with full operating systems and their own mobile Android OS.
Reply (threaded)
November 18th, 2009 at 9:03 pm
You’re making a point similar to what I said over at jkontherun: it needs to have some form of local apps (Dalvik, Java, or even Python). Here’s the list I posted over there:
I think if ChromeOS’s features include:
possibly has both x86 and ARM support,
1) Fast Boot (like a splashtop),
2) can hand off to other OSes (also like a splashtop, but not limited to Windows as the “other OS” … specifically, I may want to have it hand off to Ubuntu and/or Android, depending on other device specifics),
3) can properly handle touch screens, multi-touch, and screen rotation (for both tablets and convertible-tablets) (Ubuntu fails at proper screen rotation with a touch screen),
4) can handle hybrid display devices (like the PixelQi hybrid e-paper/LCD screens),
5) has e-reader software (like the ereader.com software released for Android today, and hopefully Kindle software),
7) has media software (local music files, local video, local pictures, as well as support for remote streaming apps, like Rhapsody, Pandora, and such … though, the remote streaming stuff can probably be done through Flash),
6) can run local Dalvik, Java, and/or Python applications,
7) has some planned tablet and/or convertible-tablet netbook devices in the line-up, and
then I’ll probably be rather interested. But for each of those things that isn’t present, I’ll be progressively less interested.
I think if they do that, they’ll have a winner on their hands. Put it on the Acer Aspire 1420P, and that’d be rather nice (though, slightly large), or maybe on a one of the Gigabyte convertible tablet netbooks.
Reply (threaded)
November 19th, 2009 at 10:38 pm
So, out of those, we got #1 and #8. Though, to be fair, some of my items (#3, #4, and #7) are hardware things that aren’t ruled out. (I just realized I have two number 7’s, due to an editing mistake … the 2nd number 7 is hardware related … the first #7 isn’t).
But, based on what was presented today, #2, #5, the first #7, and #6 seem to not be addressed. So, they got 2, they missed 4, and there are 3 that are left to the vendors/device-makers.
It’s going to require custom firmware, which means this wont be a general purpose/general device OS.
It’s intended for “companion devices”, which in some sense is good news … esp. if they’ll make all aspects of Chrome OS be present in the Chrome Browser for other OSes (I couldn’t tell if that was going to be true or not, from the Gizmodo live blog). Then you could use Chrome for all of its good points on any OS, and those of us who want/need native apps can use Mac OS X, Maemo, Ubuntu, perhaps even Android (and, of course, Windows, for those who are so inclined).
Personally, though, there are definitely things for which I don’t want a web app. IM is one (haven’t used a decent web based IM client yet). And I don’t see a _point_ in being limited web based media (music/video). I like the option for Rhapsody, Pandora, Hulu, Netflix streaming, and Youtube. But only as an OPTION.
There are going to be times and places where that option isn’t practical nor available … even if there’s a 3G card right inside the device. Sometimes that will be because you’re out in a remote location that doesn’t have coverage (I just did a road trip through West Texas, NM, AZ, and the Mojave Desert … there were lots of zero-bar areas along that trip). Sometimes it will be because you’re in a secure location (or in a location whose construction has similar results — I work in a concrete bunker, but it’s that way due to construction considerations when it was built, not due to security). Sometimes it will be because you’re worried about battery consumption. And in those situations, a Chrome OS device (as currently presented) is going to be an expensive doorstop. Or, as Verizon recently said about that situation: “Paperweight Mode!”
Things that, IMO, definitely need local runtime:
1) SSH/VNC/Remote-Desktop clients (which are a must for me on my mid-range device … which includes netbooks, UMPCs, and 7″+ tablets).
2) IM clients.
3) Media software for media I own and/or created (my own music collection, e-books I own, documents I created, videos I created, copies of my Tivo programs, podcasts, etc.), or that I have cached for use when I don’t have/need a WWAN connection of any kind.
4) off-line games (off-line because they’re not multi-player, or off-line because I plan to play them when I don’t have a WWAN connection).
5) Media creation software (camera, video, audio, note taking in a class/meeting).
And, the thing is, they could easily work Dalvik, Java, and/or Python into their application model. It just changes whether the “untrusted app” is loaded from a web page, or a local file. Dalvik even has a similar lack of trust of its apps.
Without those native software capabilities, Chrome OS is going to limit itself to limited companion devices (for people who are willing to use limited companion devices). And, frankly, I wont consider that to be interesting. I’d much rather stretch Android a little past its intended scope and run it on a 10″ tablet or netbook … than use Chrome OS (as currently presented) on that same device. And if they find a way to not give me that option, then I’d still pick Maemo, Ubuntu, or Mac OS X over Chrome OS (even with the security implications Chrome OS says those other OSes have).
Reply (threaded)
November 18th, 2009 at 9:15 pm
I don’t know what to expect from a company that created its own browser that doesn’t use it own toolbar!
I like and use the Google chrome browser but I dearly miss the Google Toolbar!!!
Speaking of OSes I’m running Win7 on my HP Mini Note 1000 with a SSD 32Gig drive and I’m loving it! The dang thing loads quick and is a dream to use.
Reply (threaded)
November 19th, 2009 at 12:49 am
Chrome OS will rely heavily on the engine of Chrome browser. And that’s because the engine is too good to be spoiled on just another browser. It is blazing fast, secured, compliant with all standards and well written.
Reply (threaded)
November 19th, 2009 at 2:56 am
“A browser and a set of HTML5 containers with Google apps inside” is the best description I’ve read of what we should expect to be announced tomorrow.
Reply (threaded)
November 19th, 2009 at 7:36 am
If you are interested in free, alternative operating systems, don’t forget Haiku (which is looking more and more promising) and has just released version Alpha 1. Read more here:
http://ninjarabbits.blogspot.com/2009/11/download-haiku-os-alpha-1-release.html
Reply (threaded)
November 19th, 2009 at 6:40 pm
http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2009/07/google-chrome-operating-system.html
Suggests a Linux Kernel working on both x86 and ARM processors.
Reply (threaded)
November 19th, 2009 at 10:05 pm
Well the announcements over… don’t think Chippy will be especially happy with what was shown, essentially it being a ‘Cloud Portal.’ Working on both x86 instruction set stuff and ARM has potential though, maybe. I think I am interested but lets see what that fast boot (and hopefully fast sleep) can do for consumption. Then we’ll guess what the average consumer thinks.
Reply (threaded)
November 22nd, 2009 at 2:31 pm
“Actually it’s not so much the applications that excites the users, it’s the impression of a dynamic device that can change, adapt and mature as its lifetime progresses.”
…This is very well put!!!
This theory applies to all android phones, iPhones and Nokia N900.
For many the device itself is not the main thing… it’s the possibilities of the device and what possibilities it might hold during the lifespan of the device that makes (tech savy) people invest in those expensive smart phones etc.
Reply (threaded)
January 9th, 2010 at 5:31 am
I have installed Chrome OS on one of my laptops. Well, it feels like Ubuntu GUI the first time i use it. It is pretty much very basic.
Reply (threaded)
February 3rd, 2010 at 2:02 pm
i installed Chrome OS on two of my netbooks. the Chrome OS works great and its loading time is very fast too.
Reply (threaded)