Unboxing a $100 Chromebook • Hacker News Board

Re: Unboxing a $100 Chromebook

#111

Post by coldblues » Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 9:10 AM UTC

Sorry to bring this out of the blue, but I can't resist.

The developer in these tweets is surprised that this Chromebook can run Flutter applications. This just shows how bloated and slow software development has become. Why wouldn't a low-powered device such as this run an application without a problem? I guess when you're developing and testing on thousand dollar computers, you don't really consider all the millions (likely billions) of people running low-end computers such as these.

Re: Unboxing a $100 Chromebook

#112

Post by anothernewdude » Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 9:19 AM UTC

public_defender wrote: post #40

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #21

> Like, real Linux, not some weird virtualized or translated environment. Ah, no. It is very much specifically in a container inside a VM. Now, full credit where it's due: You're unlikely to notice. Performance is good, they've done work integrating it (filesystem integration, forwarding windows to the host display servers through Sommelier). But native it is not. (Details: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumo…

This is correct, but also a lot of these machines can native boot Linux if you enable developer mode. It's not the most frictionless experience in the world, but it can work pretty well.

Sure, but it became a waste of time once they stopped allowing you to upgrade the storage - this used to be the best path to a cheap linux laptop. Not any more.

Re: Unboxing a $100 Chromebook

#113

Post by farmin » Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 9:28 AM UTC

prox wrote: post #100

Theodores wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kudos for that. There must be some feeling of accomplishment turning in work done on a toy computer, designed for eight year old kids and with no discernible CPU. I have slipped into working almost exclusively on a Chromebook for a pet project that is going rather well. I have this realisation that I have actually completed something without getting off the sofa. The 'dim' screen is not a problem, the keyboard is act…

I have been using an iPad as a remote workstation. Powerful enough, some great apps and a small package to carry around.

What apps do you use on ipad for development?

Re: Unboxing a $100 Chromebook

#114

Post by mhoad » Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 9:32 AM UTC

coldblues wrote: post #111

Sorry to bring this out of the blue, but I can't resist. The developer in these tweets is surprised that this Chromebook can run Flutter applications. This just shows how bloated and slow software development has become. Why wouldn't a low-powered device such as this run an application without a problem? I guess when you're developing and testing on thousand dollar computers, you don't really consider all the million…

I’m not sure what you think he was doing with that machine to begin with but he basically runs the Flutter project and was testing it with a low end device precisely because that is important to him to know how it performs for users on low end hardware. Kind of the exact opposite of what you are saying.

Re: Unboxing a $100 Chromebook

#115

Post by forgotpwd16 » Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 9:35 AM UTC

chasil wrote: post #69

rvz wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh dear, that is even more locked down than many expected and much more distant from the typical Linux distro that the many Linux Desktop fans have been used to. Either way, it doesn't matter, I'd expect whatever is running in ChromeOS (Linux Kernel) to be replaced by Fuchsia (Zircon kernel) underneath. They will more likely keep the 'ChromeOS' name to limit the confusion and that will be what these devices like that…

Microkernels have always been slower than monolithic kernels, never faster. There is zero chance that Zircon will be faster than Linux. The classic example is Mach from CMU: "When Mach was first being seriously used in the 2.x versions, performance was slower than traditional monolithic operating systems, perhaps as much as 25%... When Mach 3 attempted to move most of the operating system into user-space, the overhea…

Also an ancient example. Mach's latest version is ~30 years old (released 1994). See https://fediverse.blog/~/3542/the-three-generations-of-micro... for advancements since then such as an order of magnitude performance improve.

Re: Unboxing a $100 Chromebook

#116

Post by mhoad » Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 9:36 AM UTC

edent wrote: post #78

I guess the real question is - why is Flutter so resource heavy and slow? We live in an age of algorithmic optimisation. Surely it should be unremarkable that a cheap computer can run modern services?

Not sure you actually read the thread or not but the point was that Flutter actually ended up working great on a $100 machine even when it was compiled to JavaScript and run inside a browser.

Re: Unboxing a $100 Chromebook

#117

Post by dark-star » Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 9:39 AM UTC

shrubble wrote: post #4

https://www.microcenter.com/product/649971/evolve-iii-maestr... On sale $59.99 ; regular price $79.99. Smallish keyboard however...

Why are deals like this always only available in the US? Here in Europe it's really hard to find any Laptops or Chromebooks for less than 200€

Re: Unboxing a $100 Chromebook

#118

Post by ertian » Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 9:40 AM UTC

rvz wrote: post #66

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #21

> Like, real Linux, not some weird virtualized or translated environment. Ah, no. It is very much specifically in a container inside a VM. Now, full credit where it's due: You're unlikely to notice. Performance is good, they've done work integrating it (filesystem integration, forwarding windows to the host display servers through Sommelier). But native it is not. (Details: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumo…

Oh dear, that is even more locked down than many expected and much more distant from the typical Linux distro that the many Linux Desktop fans have been used to. Either way, it doesn't matter, I'd expect whatever is running in ChromeOS (Linux Kernel) to be replaced by Fuchsia (Zircon kernel) underneath. They will more likely keep the 'ChromeOS' name to limit the confusion and that will be what these devices like that…

> They will more likely keep the 'ChromeOS' name to limit the confusion...

I mean, that would make sense. But being Google, I think they're likely to name it something different that nobody recognizes. And then change that name to something similar enough to ChromeOS to cause confusion, since they're actually separate and incompatible products.

Sigh. Sorry, I used to work for Google, on chat and video chat products.

Re: Unboxing a $100 Chromebook

#119

Post by mhoad » Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 9:41 AM UTC

least wrote: post #22

This reads like an advertisement and the constant comparisons with Apple products is weird. I can only assume the comparisons are being made because he or the people around him use very expensive Macbooks, but It doesn't help that this thread was written by the submitter and that he happens to be an engineer at Google talking about how great this cheap Chromebook is. Looking past that, It's good for developers to hav…

I read this the Mac comparisons as “compared to what I normally use as my daily driver at work which is a very high end MBP with a very different price point” which is far more innocent

Re: Unboxing a $100 Chromebook

#120

Post by coldblues » Sat, Jul 23, 2022, 9:46 AM UTC

mhoad wrote: post #114

coldblues wrote: post #111

Sorry to bring this out of the blue, but I can't resist. The developer in these tweets is surprised that this Chromebook can run Flutter applications. This just shows how bloated and slow software development has become. Why wouldn't a low-powered device such as this run an application without a problem? I guess when you're developing and testing on thousand dollar computers, you don't really consider all the million…

I’m not sure what you think he was doing with that machine to begin with but he basically runs the Flutter project and was testing it with a low end device precisely because that is important to him to know how it performs for users on low end hardware. Kind of the exact opposite of what you are saying.

Yes, the fact that he's testing using that device is a good thing. But having software run fast on low-end computers shouldn't be a surprise, and I was just addressing how much we've lowered our standards for optimized software; unrelated to what he's doing. But I guess the way I wrote that, I was putting a lot of blame unto him.