
Google Plans to Introduce a PC Operating System (for netbooks) - aston
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/08/technology/companies/08operate.html?hp
======
10ren
_Web browsers will evolve until they are operating systems. Those that can't
will be replaced by those that can._

Their aim seems to be instant web-access, which benefits google. Linux
compatibility would seem secondary - and perhaps even deliberately omitted, as
Google wants you to use web-apps, not desktop-apps. And if Google Chrome is
fast enough, and offline operation is seamless enough, that might not be a
problem at all.

This is the thing that Microsoft feared from Netscape and Java. It got away
that time. Round 2: the game has changed, but the outcome, even if
preordained, remains as yet unknown.

~~~
edw519
"Round 2: the game has changed,"

I guess spending 10 years building infrastructure to support web apps had to
happen first.

~~~
10ren
What are you thinking of as infrastructure? I suppose broadband is more widely
available now (10 years ago I was on dialup at home, now my max is over
2MB/sec); PC hardware has become fast enough for Javascript/Flash/Java (and
much improvement on their software implementation performance).

From the developer point of view, AJAX-style dynamic webapps have become
easier, with browser-support, dev tools, and a trained workforce; ditto for
the server (esp. ruby on rails, but it's across the language-board, and DB, OR
mapping, XML, JSON); and cheaper servers (which are also much more powerful).
OK, OK! You've convinced me.

------
lunchbox
Announcement of Google Chrome OS:
[http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/introducing-google-
ch...](http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/introducing-google-chrome-
os.html)

~~~
vaksel
the name is pretty crappy, Chrome means browser to everyone, what's the point
of doubling it's meaning? Couldn't they come up with something unique like
Google Doorway or Google Vents or Google Tunnel

if we use the Windows example, it'd go like:

Damn my windows just crashed.

The OS or the browser?

~~~
rms
I don't think Chrome has had enough penetration among the average consumer to
mean anything yet. How many people use Chrome? It's just a word; apparently
they are branding their consumer desktop platform as Chrome.

Chrome is a much better name than Doorway or Vents or Tunnel. It's different
than Windows. It's fast and shiny.

~~~
rms
In addition to fast and shiny, Chrome is elemental. It's really a great brand
name for their attempt to make the dominant web operating system, where web
operating system means the underlying software infrastructure from bottom up
required to run advanced web services perfectly.

------
netsp
The time to do this was 2 years ago, when netbooks were desperately looking
for an operating system.

Now they have adapted themselves (slightly higher cost/specs) to Windows XP,
and people are fairly comfortable with that. The market is established &
shaving an extra $50 off the price is not as much of an issue.

The near future will have Windows 7 netbooks & Ubuntu for netbook to provide
some theoretical competition.

That doesn't mean this definitely won't take off, but a Google backed
operating system made for small screens & cheap hardware could have been the
default choice 2 years ago.

~~~
swolchok
I have to disagree -- $50 is 20% of the price of the cheapest netbooks, and
it's 10% of the price of relatively expensive $500 netbooks. The cheaper
netbooks get, the more of an issue $50 is. The Eee PC was supposed to be the
$200 laptop and we're still not there.

~~~
netsp
That is my point. For the theoretical $200 impulse buy EeePc, that $50 would
have been a deal breaker. Armchair strategising would have led you to that
conclusion. An OS that lowered costs by that much would have been an obvious
choice. That's why they originally launched on Linux.

But over time, the specs drifted up. Consumers preferred XP. They were willing
to pay for it. I don't know what the median price is, but I'm guessing around
$400-$500. In other words, the market has moved towards Windows. Windows has
also moved towards netbooks.

Google OS could have been the default choice for netbook manufacturers at the
time when there were petitions going to keep XP alive. When this launches
(2010?), Windows 7 netbooks will be the default choice.

That doesn't mean this won't work. maybe people will prefer Chrome OS to
Windows 7 for netbooks. Maybe it will enable $200 netbooks, almost a distinct
class. If that's the case, they still need to go through the market test. Do a
lot of people really want a $200 netbook?

~~~
swolchok
Netbook acceptability checklist: 1) Runs a web browser 2) Has k hours of
battery life 3) Has "big enough" screen and keyboard

These things don't compete on features, they compete on binary "good enough"
and price. They're practically commodities, which is why the industry doesn't
like them -- ECON 101 rules about efficiency apply.

Of course, you can still decorate the case to differentiate on fashion.

~~~
pasbesoin
Add on:

\+ I don't have to maintain it. (Anti-malware, etc.)

\+ Comes with the applications I want. (Wherever they are hosted -- local or
on the net.)

Chrome might make the netbook into an (true) appliance. A lot of people would
like that.

I think the killer feature for Google may be manipulable audio-visual. The
ability to insert and control advertising in A/V media. There's a reason they
continue to pour money into YouTube.

------
andeka
I feel like this was Schmidt's dream with Sun in the 80s.

~~~
steveklabnik
You're not the only one: [http://deals.venturebeat.com/2009/07/08/how-googles-
chrome-o...](http://deals.venturebeat.com/2009/07/08/how-googles-chrome-os-
has-deep-roots-in-eric-schimdts-past/)

------
andreyf
One thing I don't understand: why pre-announce so early?

~~~
snprbob86
They are probably bringing hardware partners into the fold. They need some
lead time to do that. Partners are notoriously bad at keeping secrets. Just
ask anyone who worked on a big secret project at a large company: leaks come
from 3rd parties almost exclusively.

------
chaosmachine
x86 Android Live CDs and Chrome OS on the same day? Wow.

------
sfphotoarts
"“Chrome is basically a modern operating system,” Mr. Andreessen said."

This is an odd comment to make coming from an ex coder.

~~~
wmf
It's consistent with his statement 15 years ago that "Netscape will soon
reduce Windows to a poorly debugged set of device drivers."

(Except this time Chrome has reduced Linux to a well-debugged set of device
drivers.)

~~~
sketerpot
It's not like they have a whole lot of devices to drive. They know up-front
what small set of hardware platforms it will have to support. Handy, I'm sure,
if they want things like hardware-accelerated H.264 decoding.

------
vaksel
so basically it'll be a custom version of linux, with Google tools like Chrome
etc thrown into the mix

~~~
pufuwozu
I feel that Linux can really work for the average user, it just needs some
good branding and marketing.

Canonical has performed fairly well with Ubuntu but it'll be interesting to
see if Google can "bring it to the masses".

~~~
vaksel
I don't think your average user really knows anything about the OSes. For most
people, the only OS they know, is the one that came pre-installed by the
computer manufacturer.

Instead of good branding/marketing, Linux needs a good sales team to pitch to
manufacturers. Linux will continue losing, until the manufacturers add to
their custom builds: Linux (-$100) or Microsoft Windows(+$100)

~~~
zimbabwe
All Google has to do is strip down Linux, provide excellent driver support,
and make things look pretty. They've got the infrastructure in place with
Gears, they control the browsing environment. Users don't need to know
anything about Linux. All they need to know is that it's made by Google and
works.

------
derwiki
This article is chock full of bad grammar. I've generally found NYTimes to be
reputable, but this makes me question how hastily this was pushed out. Can
anyone find another source corroborating this news?

~~~
Adrenalist
Yeah - I noticed this too. It seems like they wanted to 'scoop' the story
before Google announced it on their own blog perhaps? I'm not one to criticize
another person's grammar or writing style, but it was unusually bad with this
NY Times article.

------
Tichy
Why would that fare better on netbooks than Linux?

------
hs
please don't repeat linux's mistake by allowing fsf to attach gnu/;
gnu/chrome? yikes!

~~~
cpach
How could you stop them? Unless this OS is not built on the GNU toolchain.

~~~
sketerpot
_If_ it uses the GNU userland, it still wouldn't be fit for a GNU/ name in the
eyes of the FSF. Saying "GNU/Linux" means you're talking about a GNU system
running on the Linux kernel. By that logic, this could be called Chrome/Linux.
GNU doesn't figure into it significantly.

------
gregparadee
<http://2ze.us/Y9>

~~~
10ren
Interesting that the link text is fully black, and not faded out as normal
text would be for "-7" worth of downvotes.

~~~
kirubakaran
HN fades only non-link text. Example:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=401885>

