

How  Android is Better Than Chrome OS - adeelarshad82
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2374323,00.asp

======
cryptoz
Absurd.

> ...and I don't see what Chrome brings to the table that an older Linux PC
> with Firefox didn't.

Are you serious? You can't see that Chrome OS is _faster_? Easier? As in:
much, _much_ easier? People are very afraid of Linux - they think they won't
know how to use it if they try, and this is true some of the time. But
everyone will immediately know how to use Chrome OS.

> 1\. Wireless networks aren't reliable.

First, they're totally reliable for me. I've not had interruptions in...well,
a long long time. It has been months or years since I've wanted wireless
connectivity but couldn't have it.

Second, the author claims that Android apps handle this gracefully but Chrome
apps don't. That's garbage. First, that problem has _nothing to do_ with the
platform. Second, Google is pushing hard to make Chrome OS work well offline.
They'll deliver offline Docs, NY Times already has a fully-offline version
working, etc.

> "Living in the cloud" will bust your data cap.

Short term problem. Again, this has nothing to do with Chrome OS. You don't
think your data caps will get higher and higher as more bandwidth becomes
available and consumers demand more and more? I promise you than in 1 year,
the same amount of wireless data will cost less than it does today.

> 3\. Web technologies suck for many app categories, especially games.

Historically true, but changing rapidly. This author is stuck in the past. In
three years, HTML5 support will be old news; it'll be in every browser, fast
and much better than it is today.

~~~
TomOfTTB
This author is kind of known for flamebait. I pulled up a list of his columns
I found (<http://www.pcmag.com/category2/0,2806,2086722,00.asp>). Titles
include...

Samsung to Apple: The Battle is On

Google Acknowledges That Verizon Owns Your Internet

AT&T's Insane Service Plan Strategy

Apple's iPad Could Kill the Mac

iTunes Store Still Has Plenty of Porn

~~~
GrandMasterBirt
I think this guy has a point, from first hand experience with the ChromeOS. I
don't see the value.

~~~
TomOfTTB
I was more commenting on his delivery and the fact that it seems to have
annoyed Cryptoz. So what I was saying was more "Hey Cryptoz don't get so
annoyed because then you're giving him what he wants" than "his points are
completely invalid".

I don't really agree with his points but they are valid for a small group of
people who don't have ready access to WiFi.

------
teilo
PC Magazine: On the cutting edge of 20th century computing.

Chrome OS is a market maker. It is unique in that you _cannot_ use it for
local apps. This also means that, barring memory leaks or serious bugs in the
OS itself, you _cannot_ screw it up with bad device drivers, configs, etc. You
_cannot_ have a malware infection. You _never_ have to back it up, or risk
losing data because of a problem with the device.

There is no other device in its category. Yes, you can use your laptop or
tablet this way if you so choose, but a Chrome OS device forces you to do
everything in the cloud. PCM would have a point were it not for the number of
people who are _already_ living in the cloud. This device is a dream-come-true
for them. They lose nothing, and gain a light-weight device with a long
battery life, that is immune to many of the most common types of system
failure. And it has a real keyboard.

Cloud users will use cloud notebooks if they can get them. This will naturally
lead to more people seeing the utility of living in the cloud: yes, you can
actually do this, and do it very well. The number of cloud users will steadily
increase. This will lead to an ever greater demand for robust cloud
applications. More robust cloud applications will lead to more users living in
the cloud... you get the picture.

------
davesims
Android was not written as a general-purpose OS, it's a mobile-centric API/OS
optimized for low footprint and low CPU. Some of those concerns translate to a
netbook/tablet environment, a lot of them don't, but IMO Android would have to
have a significant re-write to become a full-fledged rich client OS that
developers would want to write for. The iPhone/iPad gap is a lot smaller
because both were built on top of an OSX and Cocoa-derived core that _is_
general purpose.

------
mikeryan
So my current confusion around Chrome OS is I don't really understand what
market it is trying to capture. Considering there are already (admittedly kind
of crappy) sub $200 Android tablets and I can go to Frys and get a sub $300
netbook. Why would I want a Chrome OS device instead of running Chrome (or a
"Chrome Runtime") on a more traditional OS.

~~~
ryandvm
I don't understand why this is confusing anyone.

There is a certain segment of the Internet populace that is interested only in
browsing the web. It may be for lack of technical capability or interest (my
mother-in-law) or it may be due to strict IT administration policies (K-12
schools).

In any case, Chrome OS is the perfect OS when you don't want the user to have
to worry about _any_ of the technical details of maintaining a running
appliance. They don't have to back anything up. They don't have to worry about
background services or anti-virus software. Everyone gets the exact same
experience on Chrome OS and it is web browsing and nothing more.

I'll grant you that they probably could have gimped Android into a sort of
"zero local state" mode. But at this point, Android is not capable of handling
the desktop interaction model that people are accustomed to.

