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

The Chromebook Pixel

chrome.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 507 posts

Re: The Chromebook Pixel

#161

Post by oskarth »

rayiner wrote: post #142
Kerrick wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome has a wonderful SSH client [0], and with a $5/mo Digital Ocean [1] (or other [2]) VPS for all your UNIX work, it's a perfectly capable dev machine. [0]: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/secure-shell/pnhec... [1]: https://www.digitalocean.com/ [2]: http://www.lowendbox.com/

So you pay $1,300 to log into a $5/month remote box with 20GB of storage and 512MB of RAM?

This and similar arguments in this thread are eerily similar to the arguments made against the first iPhone by the ./ crowd.

Re: The Chromebook Pixel

#162

Post by DanBC »

javajosh wrote: post #58

There are only three meaningful things you can do with a computer with specs like this: development, design, or gaming. And yet ChromeOS can't do any of these things. Perhaps this is a vanity product for the wealthy. But wealthy people are going to just surf the web on an iPad. I really don't get this product.

> I really don't get this product.

Many people are not rational when they buy products. All you can do with a pair of jeans is wear them. Nice denim, nice rivets, nice pockets, and a nice zip (or buttons) - and then some quality control. And yet people can pay very much money for jeans. (Sort by price, high to low. (http://www.mrporter.com/Shop/Clothing/Jeans?sortBy=price-des...)

You say that wealthy people are just going to surf the web on tablets. This is just a tablet with a keyboard. Some people type enough to make on-screen keyboards painful to use.

Re: The Chromebook Pixel

#163

Post by Kerrick »

rayiner wrote: post #142
Kerrick wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome has a wonderful SSH client [0], and with a $5/mo Digital Ocean [1] (or other [2]) VPS for all your UNIX work, it's a perfectly capable dev machine. [0]: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/secure-shell/pnhec... [1]: https://www.digitalocean.com/ [2]: http://www.lowendbox.com/

So you pay $1,300 to log into a $5/month remote box with 20GB of storage and 512MB of RAM?

Plenty of people already do this with the $250 Chromebook, and even iPad. The $1,299 isn't for the 32GB SSD. It's for the 239ppi 2:3 multitouch Gorilla Glass display. It's for the 4GB of RAM. It's for the dual core Intel i5. It's for the impressively made aluminum chassis. It's for the 1TB of cloud storage. It's for everything a high-end cloud device should be.

Re: The Chromebook Pixel

#164

Post by rayiner »

jkn wrote: post #151
rayiner wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's basically worthless in a country where people are paying $10 per GB for 4-5 megabit LTE service, or else hopping on Starbucks Wi-Fi access points to get 1-2 megabit service. I can foresee scenarios where that would be useful: when we have unmetered 30-40 megabit wireless service everywhere. But very few people in the U.S. find themselves in that situation.

I don't see that. For most application the typical Wi-Fi access is enough, e.g. for music and movie streaming, working in Google Docs... Even if it was only working on home Wi-Fi, it would be far from worthless. People pay $200 for a Wi-Fi home NAS. Having your home NAS available anywhere is a nice plus. Also there is the screen that is higher resolution and multi-touch.

You're going to chew through 10 GB of LTE steaming music and movies. Working in Google Docs, maybe, but Google Docs sucks. I can justify $250 to use Google Docs over Starbucks WiFi. Not so much $1,300 to do the same thing.

Re: The Chromebook Pixel

#165

Post by hamxiaoz »

spankalee wrote: post #101
ConstantineXVI wrote: post #48

That is one beautiful laptop (note that it's not 16:9 either). I feel like we're missing something, there's no way Google would be blind enough to build such a powerful machine (vs existing Chromebooks) that's so limited by the OS. There's either something we aren't being told or Google's jumped entirely off the deep end. (Alternative: there's no way they could do a "Retina" Chromebook for reasonably cheap, but the N…

Discliaimer: I work for Google, but don't know about real strategy decisions about this. I think it's all about establishing more demand for web apps. Already I can do everything I need to in Chrome except for a nice development environment, though Cloud9 is getting closer, and music apps like Logic. Those are quite doable though, especially with the Chrome App APIs, someone just needs to get the ball rolling. The cu…

I don't think a high price (>$1000) will establish 'more' demand.

Re: The Chromebook Pixel

#166

Post by Lockyy »

mcantelon wrote: post #145
DigitalTurk wrote: post #71

The Verge has more pictures. http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/21/4013480/google-chromebook-... It looks an awful lot like a Macbook: Just witness the aluminum-like color and the black bevel around the screen. Where it looks different, it's uglier. The hinge looks particularly bad. And judging by the pictures it's an awful lot bulkier than a Macbook Air. Chrome OS strikes me as an underpowered OS. That is, there's a lot…

>Both these machines seem better than the Chromebook Pixel in every way Other than not having a touch screen.

Because my laptop doesn't already get enough fingerprints all over the screen.

Re: The Chromebook Pixel

#167

Post by criley »

Kerrick wrote: post #130
criley wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you develop on this? I'm used to using Linux, command line, text editors, local installs of the product I'm developing for, virtual machines, etc... Are you simply forced into using ALL websites to actually develop and unable to use anything else? Seems strange to pay $1250+ to develop on a machine that cannot even run or test the code you write.

Chrome has a wonderful SSH client [0], and with a $5/mo Digital Ocean [1] (or other [2]) VPS for all your UNIX work, it's a perfectly capable dev machine. [0]: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/secure-shell/pnhec... [1]: https://www.digitalocean.com/ [2]: http://www.lowendbox.com/

These are really cool tools that I didn't realize existed! I think I may take advantage of one of them!

However as the other reply said, it seems silly to buy a big powerful incredible machine just to do all of your actual work on a virtual server. Why not just buy a cheap machine and an expensive server instead of vice versa?

I want good performance and it feels wrong to buy a beefy, sexy machine and gimp it with a 1 core 512MB development bottleneck.

AKA lesson learned: the pixel is not for cost-conscious developers.

Re: The Chromebook Pixel

#168

Post by NateDad »

yuxt wrote: post #77
recoiledsnake wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I think it is purely amazing the specs for that price. The display specs are amazing, but storage is a paltry 32GB so I guess it's compensated there.

They also provide "One terabyte of Google Drive cloud storage, free for 3 years"

I don't have to start paying a monthly charge on my HD to access my stuff after 3 years....

Re: The Chromebook Pixel

#169

Post by evv »

derekp7 wrote: post #127
mrb wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am pretty sure Apple patented magnetic power connectors, and that this is the reason no one else uses them.

Many of the deep fryers I've used years ago had magnetic power connectors. How is Apple's design different? Is it just because it is "on a laptop", and not "on a hot oil basket"? Edit: I looked up the patent, and it appears they've patented various improvements to the connector, such as universal orientation (can plug it in either direction), and something to do with the polarity of the magnets.

It looks like Microsoft got their patent because it transmits data as well as power.

Re: The Chromebook Pixel

#170

Post by antimatter15 »

javajosh wrote: post #58

There are only three meaningful things you can do with a computer with specs like this: development, design, or gaming. And yet ChromeOS can't do any of these things. Perhaps this is a vanity product for the wealthy. But wealthy people are going to just surf the web on an iPad. I really don't get this product.

Apparently the codename for the Pixel (in the chromium os issue tracker, svn, etc) was Link[1], and recently they've added a metallic (i.e. chrome) android statue (without a corresponding android update) [2]. I might be just over-analyzing things, but there might be some software update in Google I/O signalling a merge between Android and Chrome OS (where the latter is already starting to get features like Google Now on that mobile-convergence pathway like Apple's OS X Lion).

Android has arguably more high-performance, graphics-heavy and touch-enabled apps, and has the toolchains to compile more sophisticated applications (IDEs, etc).

[1]: https://plus.google.com/100132233764003563318/posts/exCKa13F...

[2]: https://plus.google.com/+PaulWilcox/posts/23QtTfiVrtk

Also, Google has a weird ironic naming paradigm. First is Chrome which is named as such because they want to minimize the browser's chrome (tab bar, menus, buttons, etc.), and now is the Pixel which has a HiDPI display so people kind of forget the pixel. It would probably be a bad idea to call their self-driving car Crash though.

Post reply on HN