Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chromebook

google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 323 posts

Re: Chromebook

#251

Post by bergie »

I find it interesting that most comments here mirror the classic Slashdot iPod review: No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame.

I think this isn't targeted at the classic computer market, the one that Steve Jobs said is like like trucks. instead, it is an attempt at building a computer market that is closer to general appliances, like TVs or cell phones. Quite similar to iPad's approach, but with more focus on productivity and the web.

Whether it works will depend a lot on marketing, and also on us hackers creating the compelling web ecosystem. I already mostly live just in the browser and many do the same, so maybe the world is ready for this. We'll see

Re: Chromebook

#253

Post by borism »

runjake wrote: post #164
siglesias wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally find the Angry Birds-Facebook-Netflix picture of the future of computing extremely depressing. Where's Google's suite of content creation apps that "non-techy" people can explore to express their creativity?

What are you looking for, specifically? There are a plethora of web apps for content creation available. There are also a variety of image editing & drawing apps in the Chrome Store (and a basic drawing app in GApps). Edit: If you want iMovie, you want a Mac. My family doesn't use iMovie (though I do personally, but the ChromeBook isnt't for me), they use YouTube video tools & Facebook video crap.

indeed:

http://tinkercad.com

Re: Chromebook

#254

Post by mtw »

runjake wrote: post #123

- browses web? check. - runs the latest fad games, like Angry Birds (and more soon thanks to WebGL)? check. - can connect digital camera and upload photos? check. - can browse facebook, twitter, youtube, gmail, hotmail, etc? check - can play flash games & netflix, hulu, & other crap? check. This will satisfy the needs of all my immediate non-techy family members. And I won't get the monthly calls about malware anymor…

I remember when I was a student, I got a computer for studies but one of my main goals was to play games (warcraft3, battlefield etc.) and I also wanted to play with photoshop. I don't know if students are willing to give out cash if it's only for viewing facebook, youtube and getting them to write papers.

I think anyone will get a laptop which gives them more freedom, for almost the same price

Re: Chromebook

#255

Post by sterling »

My first reaction to this was: creepy. The sales pitch is creepy - telling us in the best newspeak that less is more. The sales language is creepy, describing how much more "secure" a machine is because it only browses the web. The sales video has the smell of a lecture, with a message that hints at Big Brother. The layout of the product page is even creepy, with all kinds of colors and icon styles. Google doesn't want to add value to anything here. They want control, and they are playing catch up with the iPad. This is the textbook way to run business, and it will fail.

Re: Chromebook

#256

Post by kmod »

Based on my experiences with the CR-48 (which I used extensively for a few months), I have to suggest that you not get one of these laptops. Basically, ChromeOS is great, but using Atom processors is simply unacceptable for the tasks that they advertise. The only thing the CR-48 can do well is viewing static content -- and I mean truly static! Scrolling around on an otherwise-static web page is far to dynamic for it to handle. Want to play flash? Yeah right.

These new models have dual-core atoms, which will help, but mostly it's just the awful single-core performance that gets you. Even tying emails in gmail was an extremely painful experience; often the characters on the screen would lag significantly behind my tying, and it would take forever to load the different pages.

I don't think anyone is arguing that you can use these things for "real work". I'm going to argue that if you care about your time, you can't even use these things for any of the other stuff they advertise. Unless the new processors are significantly better, I'd say get something else.

Re: Chromebook

#257

Post by ElliotH »

kmod wrote: post #256

Based on my experiences with the CR-48 (which I used extensively for a few months), I have to suggest that you not get one of these laptops. Basically, ChromeOS is great, but using Atom processors is simply unacceptable for the tasks that they advertise. The only thing the CR-48 can do well is viewing static content -- and I mean truly static! Scrolling around on an otherwise-static web page is far to dynamic for it…

Atom processor in my year old netbook handles scrolling and gmail easily, and flash tolerably. Is there not a chance that these things have improved?

Re: Chromebook

#258

Post by paganel »

abraham wrote: post #214
cookiecaper wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Really? Hardcore gamers are the last people who would use this, and the first people to recognize that. I don't know if you really understand how many people play WoW. Most of the avid WoW players I've known have not been "hardcore gamers" and they've played WoW on really crappy computers, with Intel GMA graphics and everything. There are many normal people that wouldn't drop the cash on a video card that play WoW.…

> Also, you didn't address things like downloading pictures from a camera, syncing with an MP3 player (not necessarily iTunes/iPod), or any of the other local, non-browser stuff that a normal person does all the time. Plug in a camera and it offers to upload them to Picasa. With Google Music there is no need to sync anything. Anytime you want to listen to music on your Android phone it just plays from the cloud.

> Plug in a camera and it offers to upload them to Picasa.

I'm on a 3-day trip to Paris, with my wife. At the end of day one we go back to our cheap 3-star hotel room, and we want to upload the day's pictures. All 200 of them (that's about 700MB on my photo camera). What do I do? Do I use my Internet roaming? That would be ~700 euro, so no. Do I rely on my hotel's crappy and expensive Internet connection to upload the photos to Picassa? No, because I don't want to lose half a night and ~100 euros (at ~20 euros per hour).

Why can't I just download all the photos on my laptop, no Internet traffic involved, and upload a select few on Facebook, like everybody does? (because what would be the fun of going to Paris if you can't brag about it on FB? right when it happens, not after 3 days, not after 3 weeks).

Re: Chromebook

#259

Post by joejohnson »

bxr wrote: post #205
eggbrain wrote: post #16

A little pricy for me to be honest. Is an all day battery and 100MB of 3G data a month worth giving up a whole lot of features over a netbook? For some, maybe. But for me, no.

>100MB of 3G data a month Thats less than a workday's worth of use at a desktop computer. And you're telling me that's the limit for a device that relies so heavily on the cloud?

You can use WiFi at work or home, and 3G elsewhere. 100MB/month has been plenty for my usage on my CR-48 for the last few months.

Re: Chromebook

#260

Post by sterling »

yanw wrote: post #43

$28/user/month, software + hardware (updates for both) is a good deal.

Why is this a good deal? Isn't it about $1000 for this machine (let's say 3 years of use x $336/year). Tablets and netbooks are a lot less than that.
Post reply on HN