

The Google OS Is Doomed - pgebhard
http://www.slate.com/id/2222564/

======
ErrantX
This article fails in it's analysis in some key areas - not least in
considering Chrome OS as both a desktop offering ans a _windows competitor_.
Once we consider just netbooks many of their issues fall apart.

> Linux is hard to love

They didnt make the point I would have under this title (that consumers dont
"trust" Linux). Instead they talk about software compatibility.

Now as I understand Chrome OS the idea is a completely cloud based OS (one
assumes using Gears extensively too). Software compatibility it irrelevant
because the ideal would be to put it all on the cloud using Googles services
(music, well that is a bit of a sticking point...)

> We aren't ready to run everything on the Web

This is a key point. Though it is worth noting that we wont see Chrome devices
till next year. Considering 18 months ago cloud services were only _just_
taking shape for consumers it doesnt seem a long stretch to imagine things
might make as big a leap forward again.

Irrespective there seems little point in _waiting_ for the cloud to become our
whole lives before making an OS to cater for it. Microsoft made a fortune on
the policy of "build for the next generation and dont wory overly about
supporting the old". Google are taking roughly the same approach - to get real
market traction with their cloud offerings in the future they have to offer
something cool :)

Yes Word is better than GDocs. Yes Word is coming ot the cloud - BUT it still
has to be built using the same tech as GDocs. There is no reason GDocs cant
compete with Word in the cloud - and no reason Word in the cloud isn't going
to make the same "mistakes" as GDocs.

> Microsoft is a formidable opponent.

This seems irrelevant. MS do have weak points - one of them is probably the
netbook market. they are weak there because Vista and W7 are too "over
powered", really, for the current devices. So it's XP for the best
performance. XP is not really designed for netbooks - the screens are too
small for a start. Linux netbooks have done poorly because consumers are
somewhat scared of Linux - Google wont have this problem because I seriously
doubt Linux will be _obviously_ mentioned to consumers :)

A well designed Netbook OS would stand a cracking chance at taking good market
share from MS.

> Google fails often

This is a strange point to make. I dont get if their suggesting Chrome OS will
be a failure or that Google's other failings will leave them lacking. I
suspect the former - which is a bit of a straw man. right? If it fails it
fails (myself I think it unlikely to totally flunk out). Saying "lets not do
it, it might fail" is definitely not how Google got to where they are
today....

> The Chrome OS makes no business sense.

This is the last and worst point of all. It sums up the shallowness of the
article and needs to be dissected in several ways.

 _Google gives away nearly everything for free. That's because it makes
pornographic amounts of money from a single product, Web ads, and can afford
to dally in any other business venture it chooses, whether or not those
efforts hold out any promise of profits_

This shows a fatal misunderstanding of how Google operates. _Everything_ is
about the brand. It's about spreading out influence, getting developers
onboard, reaching consumers. The writer is correct - Google does make a huge
amount from web advertising; the stronger their brand the more money that is.

Put it this way: Google announcing an OS that was somewhat expected anyway and
that will not even be ready for a year made _national TV and radio news_ here
in the UK. That is the kind of coverage companies kill for.

 _Microsoft often does things for no reason other than to frustrate its
rivals—its new search engine Bing being a prime example. But by focusing so
much attention on a venture that's unlikely to do the company any good, Google
will only hurt itself._

This makes no sense - how can it hurt? The writer presents no outcome that
would leave the company in a worse state. Microsoft has been desperate to
launch a decent search engine for ages and now have a solid offering in Bing
(asserting Bing is essentially there to piss Google off is, well, missing the
point entirely....). They are launching web-Office including self-hosted
solutions. Both of those are BIG attacks of services Google might consider
core aspects of it's online service. Google Docs is certainly one of the most
popular online office suites - cloud Office is a HUGe assault on that crown.

So why not do battle with MS on their own turf. They can probably nab the
netbook market if they get it right and that will be good for them and mildly
concerning for MS. And if the cloud proves to be the future Google have an
established OS to bring to the desktop :)

Now Im guessing I am the prime market for Chrome OS. A young professional with
some spare cash to burn who travels quite frequently. This is key netbook
market territory - I want something fast, portable and gets me on the wbe on
the move. Indeed it could be argued the _only_ advantage that XP would have
over Chrome is having a music player - but there is no reason a cloud solution
cant be used (or even that Chrome OS will eventually cater for this).

Chrome OS netbooks could be lower spec without losing performance (just
running a browser after all) ans smaller HDD's. That means a lighter device
which _should_ be substantially cheaper than an XP based offering. Covered in
Google branding, backed by their marketing machine and the fact consumers
trust them.

In my mind they would have to fuck this up _really_ badly for it to fail
entirely.

For me this writer seems to believe that Google is simply creating Chrome OS
to spite MS and because _everyone else is doing it_. I think they have missed
the point entirely. Google have sat and considered the OS angle (similar to
how they watched Mozilla, learnt from their mistakes and achievements, and
launched Chrome based on that experience) and decided this is prime time to
launch an attack.

(sorry for the wall of text - I find this idea fascinating because Google and
MS look more and more likely to be facing off in the next few years. Each with
a huge user base, each with a lot of money, each with products in each others
field. That is a fun and exciting contest to me)

~~~
der_ketzer
I would add, that maybe in Japan, Germany, USA, the internet connection is
very fast, but there are countries where it's too slow or expensive.

What would happen if ChromeOS uses GoogleDocs? All the people without fast
connections would be ruled out? I don't like the idea to need a connection to
use web-photoshop.

------
crs
It seems to me that the press is presenting this as Google Chrome OS vs
Microsoft Windows 7 etc. When really its a competitor for Windows Azure which
is another cloud based platform.

Of course Google isn't doing a very good job setting expectations for it
either. I would be selling it as an alternative to Microsoft's cloud computing
vision, where developers are required to host there apps in Microsoft's cloud
if you want to leverage the Windows Azure's eco system.

~~~
rms
Google Chrome is the competitor for Windows 8. Hasn't Ballmer admitted that
Windows 7 will be the last traditional desktop Windows?

------
michael_dorfman
I can't argue with most of the 5 points, but I think the first one misses the
mark-- Linux is indeed "hard to love", but we don't know enough about ChromeOS
yet to know if it will resemble Linux at all; all we really know is that it
will have a Linux kernel. (Insert Mac/BSD analogy here.)

------
messel
Isn't microsoft pushing out a web version office, wouldn't that imply a
working version of excel within Chrome OS next year?

