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

Chromebox

google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 305 posts

Re: Chromebox

#281

Post by tapsboy »

tmzt wrote: post #264
shpoonj wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With advertising and spec sheets like this, you're right. But if they tried a little, their demographic could be massive.

Come on Google, use an ARM processor, make it a dongle with a HDMI plug that attaches to the majority of cheap LCD displays, and price it at $99 or free with the first year (per seat) of a Google Apps Enterprise Account. Now add a local ActiveDirectory proxy as a stadalone router-like box and hit Microsoft where it hurts. (Before Larry does).

Add bluetooth to the dongle and add a wireless keyboard/mouse for $25

Re: Chromebox

#282

Post by G5ANDY »

scrrr wrote: post #153

Not even my parents would want to use this. No Skype.

The website in no way makes this clear, but I think you can video chat through your Skype account using the built in IMO app.

Re: Chromebox

#283

Post by ZeroGravitas »

tapsboy wrote: post #281
tmzt wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Come on Google, use an ARM processor, make it a dongle with a HDMI plug that attaches to the majority of cheap LCD displays, and price it at $99 or free with the first year (per seat) of a Google Apps Enterprise Account. Now add a local ActiveDirectory proxy as a stadalone router-like box and hit Microsoft where it hurts. (Before Larry does).

Add bluetooth to the dongle and add a wireless keyboard/mouse for $25

They already have a bluetooth keyboard and mouse set for the Chromebox, though I've not seen it priced yet.

Here's an image:

http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/electronics/samsung/sam...

Re: Chromebox

#284

Post by nwenzel »

I get that Google wants to try weird stuff. But how did Samsung green light this adventure? I can't imagine that it's easy/cheap to produce these things in small production runs.

Re: Chromebox

#285

Post by ZeroGravitas »

suboptical wrote: post #160
krzyk wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me first thing to do when I would receive either Chromebox or Mac Mini, I would format the disk and install my Linux distribution of choice. So, also from my point of view the OS provided in the beginning is not interesting.

1. The Chromebox has 16gb of internal storage. I'm fairly certain it's using the same SSD model the Cr-48s and other Chromebooks used, which is not easily replaceable (difficult to find a fitting card) 2. Chrome laptops and (now) desktops use verified boot, you won't be able to install your own OS unless you literally crack open the case (there are physical implements to prevent firmware flashing) and flash your own…

I'm fairly sure I've seen guides to put Ubuntu on the various Chromebooks and it just took flipping some kind of dev switch to get access.

Re: Chromebox

#286

Post by ZeroGravitas »

WiseWeasel wrote: post #244
xxqs wrote: post #195

nice specs, I would put Debian on it and use as a portable network analyzer. I'll probably do so as soon as it's available in my country

You would have to flash the BIOS to get past the Verified Boot security.

What you say appears to be true, yet quite misleading since there's a simple process, provided by Google and built into the device, for flashing the BIOS (or at least there was on the Series 5 Chromebooks):

http://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/developer-information-fo...

Re: Chromebox

#287

Post by WiseWeasel »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #286
WiseWeasel wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You would have to flash the BIOS to get past the Verified Boot security.

What you say appears to be true, yet quite misleading since there's a simple process, provided by Google and built into the device, for flashing the BIOS (or at least there was on the Series 5 Chromebooks): http://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/developer-information-fo...

Ah, thanks for the clarification. That'll learn me to parrot information from random people.

Re: Chromebox

#288

Post by drivebyacct2 »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #285
suboptical wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. The Chromebox has 16gb of internal storage. I'm fairly certain it's using the same SSD model the Cr-48s and other Chromebooks used, which is not easily replaceable (difficult to find a fitting card) 2. Chrome laptops and (now) desktops use verified boot, you won't be able to install your own OS unless you literally crack open the case (there are physical implements to prevent firmware flashing) and flash your own…

I'm fairly sure I've seen guides to put Ubuntu on the various Chromebooks and it just took flipping some kind of dev switch to get access.

Just a note: there are three levels of access in the CR-48: regular (out of the box), dev mode (flip the switch), unprotected (open it up, take out the mobo, tape over a contact to disable bios protection).

The guides that don't require flashing the BIOS are nightmares. Awful, awful hackish nightmares. I say this as someone who did it. It's much easier to open it up, but a piece of tape over some contact, flash the BIOS and install whatever you like.

However, I flat out don't think the disable BIOS protection option is available on retail devices. (I have the cr-48).

If you want a lightweight Linux box, don't buy this, you don't want it, honest.

Re: Chromebox

#289

Post by drivebyacct2 »

sherwin wrote: post #56

I used a Chromebook (Samsung Series 5) for an entire academic year as a student. The biggest benefits were having everything synced in the cloud (so you're not too attached to it), extreme portability (super thin and super light, instant on is fantastic) and ~10 hours of battery life. I charged the thing about once a week! However, I question who would get a Chromebox though, because the portability + battery life +…

I think Google is still chasing a different crowd than is going to be found here.

Think of how many places have convenience computers that they have to manage from an IT perspective. Not with a Chromebox.

Re: Chromebox

#290

Post by drivebyacct2 »

jeffool wrote: post #95
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you implying? I think almost all modern browsers support app caching manifests, meaning web apps work offline.

I think joestink could've instead said: When web-app DEVELOPERS finally get the whole offline thingie working, a web-first option will become much more of a real option... /edit: Then again, I'm not positive if Google Chrome's "intalled web apps" often being shortcuts are developer's fault or Google's? I'd love someone with insight to tell us.

It's an awkward combination. By installing a Chrome App, the app can use more and newer (read: more privileged and untested) APIs. These can help make offline apps better. Sometimes they simply look like links but DO enable other functionality. This is the case with several of the Google Apps.

I agree that it's confusing and it's one area where Google could (and I'm not saying they will, I really hope they don't) exert themselves and use the Chrome Web Store as a way of gating "web apps" in Chrome (versus branded "Chrome Apps")

Post reply on HN