

First Chrome OS netbook expected this month - Uncle_Sam
http://www.geek.com/articles/gadgets/first-chrome-os-netbook-expected-this-month-may-be-google-own-brand-hardware-2010112/

======
devmonk
I'm excited to hear that but also surprised.

When I checked on Chrome OS project page only a few weeks ago, it looked like
the project had done very little of public mention since a year ago. And the
video on the linked page with the demo is a year old.

And, I'm confused about what Google is doing with Chrome OS and Android.
Google TV runs an old version of Chrome, stamped as a newer version, but is
supposed to later run newer Chrome and Android apps. I know that Android isn't
really mean for netbooks (even though it has been run on some), and I like the
idea of Google providing an operating system that can run seemlessly like the
rest of the web in a browser. But, it almost feels like these two efforts
(Chrome OS and Android) should be managed by two different companies. I just
don't see how the company can effectively focus on one or the other in
marketing and not cause problems for the other: If I create an ad for Chrome
OS that implies running in a web browser OS is smarter, that would be a slight
against Android, even if it is unrealistic to run Chrome OS on a mobile
device; similarly, if I create an ad for Android saying that people should buy
Android because there are 50 million apps (not yet, but just an example) then
that might be a slight against Chrome OS which may have many fewer apps
available in the Chrome OS Web Store ( <https://chrome.google.com/webstore> ).

~~~
bstrong
The Android/ChromeOS strategy makes sense from Google's point of view. At this
stage in the game, it's unclear whether the future of app development is
browser-based or native, but it's incredibly important to get the answer
right. So what do you do? If you're Google, you run a big A/B test and let the
data decide.

Apple is doing something similar on a smaller scale by investing heavily in
both webkit and native apps. In the short term it causes some developer and
user confusion, but it's worth it to make sure they aren't left behind if web
apps win in the end.

~~~
devmonk
I don't think it is an A/B test. They just want to dominate the web in the
short and long term. The majority of their efforts support this hypothesis.

To own the web in the current day and age, they would want to:

\- Own the browser (so they started the Chrome project)

\- Own the OS (preferably using Chrome, to reduce
complexity/overhead/duplication)

\- Own the applications/be what people use (Google apps, App Engine, Search,
Gmail, ...)

\- Own the data (Search, Maps/Street View/Google Earth, Google Base, Google
Apps, Google Groups, Gmail, ...)

\- Make business dependent on Google (Search, Ads, ...)

To own the web in the future they would want to:

\- Embrace web to transition world from client-centric/thick-client to fully
browser-based that just _happens_ to run on their browser. (I doubt they will
make the browser pluggable, using the excuse that this would be way too
complex.) Android does not further this purpose as much as Chrome OS.

Android was originally supposed to be a temporary solution to the mobile OS
(like iOS, Windows Mobile, etc.). However, when it took off (exceeding their
expectations, I imagine) they had to temporarily deprioritize Chrome OS. But,
eventually mobile devices could run Chrome OS, at which point they'd ditch
Android.

I think Apple is making a similar play now, heading towards the eventual
"merge" of iOS and OS X, using the iOS model of controlling the apps sold via
the app store in OS X until mobile devices are powerful enough to run (the
future version of) OS X (after it has been redesigned to better support usage
on a smaller screen without mouse, etc.). Except that Apple won't (in this
century) ditch the significant investment in Cocoa for a browser-based OS.

------
jaxn
Netbooks just seem like a solution needing a problem to me. My kids have a
netbook that I bought them for Christmas last year, but the greatly prefer
using a regular sized computer or my iPad.

~~~
cryptoz
The problem: I want to browse the web (on the go) for long periods of time, on
a reasonable screen and without a cord.

Potential solutions: Traditional laptop: nope. Probably < 4 hours battery,
huge and heavy, overpowered for the task.

Phone: nope. screen is too small for comfortable web browsing, typing is slow.

Tablet: sure, this would work. But they're > $500, so that's a pretty solid
commitment.

Netbook: yep! > 10 hour battery life, okay screen, perfect solution to "I want
to browse the web on the go". They can be had for ~$200, so you can save
hundreds by not going for a tablet.

Note: I own a netbook and love it (I have the new System76 Starling). I don't
own a tablet. So maybe I'm biased.

~~~
stcredzero
_The problem: I want to browse the web (on the go) for long periods of time,
on a reasonable screen and without a cord._

Once again, Apple has the right answer. Go lighter and not too small. I think
there was a powerful economic incentive to go with smaller screens for early
netbooks because one could still deliver laptop-like functionality with
cheaper hardware. The problem with this is that the user has to pay with less
comfort. The smaller Unibody Air still has a comfortable keyboard and a screen
larger than most netbooks.

To make a profit: sell something with components like the 11" Macbook Air,
with just as much performance and a comparably slick design but just a tiny
bit thicker, with a plastic body, even less weight, and over 8 hours of real-
world battery life. There are currently 11" netbooks, but they seem to fall
short in one or two of the above aspects. (HP Mini 311 is close.)

------
dstein
Google is going to have a really tough time marketing this. It's a bold idea,
which, one way or another, is probably the correct direction for personal
computing. But the timing is just too soon. And I doubt people are willing to
hand a golden key to all their data, documents, photos, passwords, everything
to a single company.

Also I wonder if Google even realizes that the iPad has pretty much nuked the
entire netbook market. Nobody really wanted these machines anyways, they
wanted touchscreen tablets.

~~~
karterk
Actually, I think quite a lot of people won't care about this golden key
thing. If they did, they wouldn't be using Facebook either.

