41–50 of 180 posts
So effectively your PC becomes a Google ThinClient. Got all the Office Applications with Google Apps. Email/Communication with Gmail. The rest of the web. Multimedia with YouTube/Hulu/etc. Sounds like what majority of the people need. Even for work environments, would be pretty good (you can offer your proprietary application in the form of a web application).
I couldn't help thinking about the crunchpad when I read this. Slap this on a tablet with a hybrid display and you might have something very interesting.
That would be fantastic to have a OS to handle all web related activities for general users.
This is the kind of competition that I would like to enjoy (i.e. between products that both belong to me). I wonder if it actually will work out for them, and if so, how I could use that strategy myself.
A browser is one thing. But an OS? I have my doubts.
You have to re-think what is meant by an "operating system". What is Windows? It's that thing, in the background, that lets you run all the applications you want to run. But what if all your applications were written in Javascript and HTML, and had URLs instead of .exe files? With all the extra power built into Chrome, they could still write to file systems, store data, work offline, do sophisticated graphics and par…
http://www.gilder.com/public/telecosm_series/software.html
It's taken 14 long years -- and it's Google-Chrome-plus-Javascript rather than Netscape-Navigator-plus-HotJava -- but the browser has finally become a complete alternative to a desktop OS.
The article's final sentence: "In the age of the hollowed-out computer, the king of the desktop rules an emigrating empire."
Interesting. The one missing piece--a RAD development environment that's as efficient as Visual Studio is at producing fat clients. The business world will only embrace the webcentric model when it becomes as efficient to code in as .net click-once fat clients. The idea of simple, cheap, rugged hardware is very appealing. But programmer time is the #1 cost--businesses go for easy drag/drop fat client apps. Software w…
Can you clarify your statements a bit more? I don't think that Google Chrome OS would be suitable for most corporate shops that are generally Microsoft centric (and have been for quite some time). I think this free OS will be geared towards light users that primarily use their computer for surfing the web and checking their email.
jeffspost notes a startup opportunity: webapps for creating webapps (actually webapp clients, but that's less memorable)
Key Data Point: > The software architecture is simple — Google Chrome running within a new windowing system on top of a Linux kernel.
If their approach to Android is any guide, much of the work will consist of eliminating any GNU or GPL components from the (userspace) runtime environment.
Android: http://mjg59.livejournal.com/100221.html
Palm Pre: http://mjg59.livejournal.com/111453.html
"...overall the Pre has the appearance of being a well-engineered distribution. It's recognisably Linux in a way the Android isn't."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This denies that Android runs on top of Linux, which is licensed under the gpl. Or that the Google search appliance runs on a ton of gpl'd code, all mirrored off of code.google.com...
You must be talking about some other comment, because I don't mean to deny any of that. I was merely pointing out that on Google's largest (public) OS project to date (Android), Google evinced a strong desire for a copyleft-free userspace and succeeded in building a non-GNU Linux distro. This is clearly a different project with different goals, so we'll see how it turns out.
Google's approach to licences is far more nuanced than blind adherance or avoidance of any particular licence.