Sure, you may've already downloaded an early Chrome OS build on your current machine, but unless you want it to be your sole platform, and running just the way Google intended, then you'll need to buy the official hardware. Acer's stated its intent to be first with a product release, presumably at the tail-end of next year, but ASUS, HP, Lenovo and Toshiba are also involved in the Chrome OS project too.

A "request for proposal" has already been issued to potential suppliers, such as those mentioned above, supposedly listing the specifications Google would like to see in that first netbook. Google is believed to be working with just the one manufacturer, to build the ideal netbook. TechCrunch's sources are claiming they'll be 3G-embedded, and quite possibly subsidized by a carrier.

Michael Arrington, editorializing at this point, goes on to say that:

"I'd be willing to bet one of our writers' right hands that it's ARM [as opposed to an Intel Atom processor]. And I'd even go out on a limb and suggest that they may very well be targeting Nvidia's Tegra line."

Adobe, Freescale, Qualcomm and Texas Instruments are the other parties already working with on the Google Chrome OS project, so presumably the netbook will contain some components from them as well.

So, which company do we think Google will choose in this all-important talent show? Acer, ASUS, HP, Lenovo or Toshiba, or even someone else? ASUS obviously has strong heritage with netbooks, thanks to inventing the market for it back in 2007, but Acer launched the first Android-powered netbook. HP, Lenovo and Toshiba have all produced some solid netbooks in their time, but haven't quite measured up to Acer and ASUS' success just yet. [TechCrunch]

Teo en Ming, the ChromiumOS64 project lead, says of the download:

"The original Chromium OS project does not support 64-bit platforms. This is because the majority of the netbooks in the market are based on Intel Atom processors, which are mostly 32-bit."

With Chrome OS launching properly at the tail-end of 2010, we've got a full year to wait before we see anything more solid become available. And even then, it'll only be available on Google-branded devices, with Acer hoping to launch the first official netbook running it.

Let us know how you get on with the 64-bit Chromium browser below. [ChromiumOS64 via TechRadar]

Acer has been developing a Chrome-based netbook since mid-2009, and its Chairman, JT Wang, has told DigiTimes, he wants it to be the first netbook out there when Chrome OS is released in the second half of 2010. [DigiTimes]

Ultimately, Ubuntu Netbook Remix 9.10 did the best, and openSUSE 11.2 also did well. But Chrome OS performance was far from spectacular. That shouldn't be a huge surprise, though. It's not slated to ship for like a year, and its performance should pickup as builds continue. The main surprise looks to be Moblin 2.1's comparatively slower speed, despite Intel's efforts to optimize it for netbooks. It looks pretty, though.

All distros were tested with default configurations/packages, except for Chrome OS. They "needed to remount the root file-system in a read-write mode and add in the standard Ubuntu Karmic package repositories for which Google's operating system is based."

The Phoronix test suite included H.264 video playback, OpenArena, LZMA and 7-Zip file compression, IOzone, PostMark, WAV to OGG audio and H.264 video encoding. Full test results at: [Phoronix via Slashdot]

Google Chrome OS UI Concept Video

Google went to great pains to emphasize that today's event wasn't a launch—that'll come a year from now, apparently, with a public beta still well over the horizon. This is all about a seeing the OS for the first time; understanding in real terms how it's different from what's out there; figuring out why you might actually want to use it; etc. So! Here's what we knew going in:

Google Chrome OS is an open source, lightweight operating system that will initially be targeted at netbooks" and "most of the user experience takes place on the web." That is, it's "Google Chrome running within a new windowing system on top of a Linux kernel" with the web as the platform. It runs on x86 processors (like your standard Core 2 Duo) and ARM processors (like inside every mobile smartphone). Underneath lies security architecture that's completely redesigned to be virus-resistant and easy to update.

Like I said, there were plenty of questions. Onwards:

What It Is

• It's basically just a browser: meaning that it'll be based around preexisting web services like Gmail, Google Docs, and so on. There are going to be no conventional applications, just web applications—nothing gets installed, updated, or whatever. Seriously.

• It only runs web apps: It's going to integrate web apps into the operating system deeper than we've ever seen before, meaning that a) they'll seem more like native apps than web apps and b) they'll be able to tap into local resources more than a typical web app in Firefox, for example. They're web apps in name, but they'll have native powers.

• How, exactly?: With HTML 5. This is the next version of HTML, which gives the browser more access to local resources like location info, offline storage—the kinds of things you'd normally associate with native apps. More on that here.

• Chrome is Chrome: The user's experience with Chrome OS will basically be synonymous with their experience on Chrome Browser. Technically speaking, Chrome OS is a Linux-based OS, but you won't be installing Linux binaries like you might on Ubuntu or some other Linux distribution. Any "apps" you have will be used within the browser. Chrome OS is effectively a new version of Chrome, that you can't leave. There are a few reasons Google's pushing this, which we'll get to in a bit.

• And as you've probably guessed, it's super-light. It starts up in a matter of seconds, and boot straight into the browser. Likewise, the Chrome browser is apparently very, very optimized for Chrome OS, so it should be faster than we've ever seen it.

• It won't support hard drives, just solid state storage. I mean, hard drives are dying, sure, but this is pretty bold. Hardware support sounds like it'll be pretty slim, because:

• You'll have to buy a Chrome OS device: You might be able to hack this thing onto your current machine, but you won't just be able to install it to replace Windows, or opt for it on your next laptop, for example. You'll have to buy hardware that Google approved, either component by component, or in a whole package. They're already working on reference designs.

• For now, it's for netbooks. It's not intended for desktops, to the point that Google is saying that the first generation of Chrome hardware will be secondary machines.

How It Looks

• It looks like Chrome browser—specifically, like the leaked shots we saw before. As in a browser, you have tabs—these have to serve as a taskbar as well. To the left of the tabs, you have a sort of start menu, which opens up a panel full of shortcuts. These are your favorites. These are your apps. (Get used to this weird feeling, btw. That Google whole point here.

• You can peg smaller windows, like chat windows or music players, to sit above your tabs at all times. This feature looks a lot like the Gchat feature in Gmail, which is to say, it's a box in the corner.

• Along with tabs, it's got its own version of virtual desktops. This means you can have multiple "windows" of Chrome OS to switch between, each of which is a different set of tabs. Think one desktop for work, one for play, on for porn, etc etc etc. It's a bit like using Spaces on Mac, except only with the browser.

When, and How, It's Coming

Google's staying specifics on the exact release date—it'll be sometime next year—but the source code for the project is published now. That doesn't mean it's ready, really, but rather that they're just planning on developing it in the open from here on out. Expect builds to start showing up online, which'll probably work wonderfully in a virtual machine app like VirtualBox.

The code is available as part of the Chromium OS (the Chromium/Chrome distinction should be familiar to anyone who's wrestled with the open source Mac version of Chrome) project, posted here.

Why It Matters

With Chrome OS, Google is taking (or in a way, forcing) the operating system to go totally online. As Google's freshly designated evangelists are eager to tell you, the browser is already the center of most people's computing experience. The idea here is to make the browser powerful enough to render the rest of the operating system, and its native apps, moot.

It's more pure than a lot of people expected: When Google said that Chrome OS would be centered around the web, I think most people just assumed it would be a lightweight Linux distribution with deep integration for Google web services. It's not that. It's a browser.

But it's a browser that runs different processes for each tab, that will have access to local OS resources, will to some extent work offline. In other words, it's not really a browser in the sense that we use the word, and the web apps that we'll be using won't be like the ones we're used to now, either. The idea, here, it seems, is to replicate most, if not all, of the functionality in a native OS, while keeping the lightweight, ultra-secure framework of a thin client. In other words, Google's not asking much of its users in terms of changing how they do stuff; they're trying to change the way the operating system lets you do those things, transparently.

Think of it this way: now, the buttons in your taskbar or dock are now tabs; your email client now runs within your browser, but stores stuff offline just like Mail or Outlook; your documents will still open with a few clicks, but they'll be stored remotely (and locally only if you choose). It's all the same stuff, given to you in a different way.
Update: you can download it here. [Chrome on Giz]

According to Techcrunch this isn't really a launch, but rathe a chance to give us a first look at the OS, and for Google to detail their actual launch plans (we've been sitting tight with the "late 2010" projection from the initial announcement):

The plan is to give some technical background information as well as show off some demos, we're told. More notably, they will be giving a "complete overview" of the new OS, which they say will launch next year.

Knowing what Chrome OS will look like is only half the fun anyway—three months after it was announced, we still don't really know what the hell it is, or how it's going to work. Soon! [Techcrunch]

Previously, Google had set the release date had been set roughly at H2 of 2010. In their words,

[T]he first netbooks running Google Chrome OS will be available for consumers in the second half of 2010

Of course, that's when a dedicated product will launch, as in, a netbook from a prominent manufacturer running Chrome OS as sold. But Google did go on to say in the same announcement that that they'd "soon be working with the open source community," after which Eric Schmidt dropped a few hints that we could see Chrome OS, most likely in beta form, "as early as this year." So, that brings us to the new rumor: TechCrunch has it from a "reliable source" that we'll see Chrome OS within a week, available as a download. It'll have limited driver support, meaning Google will only endorse installation on a limited number of computers—mostly netbooks—including a number of Eee PCs.

The obvious question now is what will it look like, though I'd like to remind you that, in all likelihood we've been given a pretty good preview: Remember the version of Chrome browser for Chrome OS that leaked for Linux machines a few weeks ago? It had (or has, above) a nonoperational Start-style button, a clock embedded in the title bar, and a minimalist interface, and it's probably a pretty good indicator as to where Google's going with this. [TechCrunch]

This is all total speculation, but a writer on ReadWriteWeb suggests that it may mean Google intends to lock down Chrome OS to only use Google software, in order to keep things simpler and easier. After all, it's tough to use a single sign-in (SSO) cookie if you don't control the software being signed in to. However, I don't think this is likely—all of Google's software (Gmail, Picasa, Chrome, Blogspot, Earth, etc etc etc) uses a single sign-in, and I think that's all the phrase "login manager" implies. But the question remains: In a browser-based OS, what happens if you want to change browsers? We'll have to wait for more information before we know. [ReadWriteWeb via Electronista]

Gundotra reiterated a lot of what we already know. Google believes the future of the computers lies in the browser, with apps coded according to web standards and data existing in the cloud. However, what stood out as interesting was that Gundotra, who isn't directly part of the Android team, referenced all this in the same breath as the rapid evolution of mobile browsers and mobile data plans. While he never explicitly referenced Chrome OS, it seemed evident that the upcoming, browser-based platform was in his head as he spoke.

After all, part of the point of Chrome OS is that it scales—from netbooks to desktops, so why not down to phones? And if the future is in web apps, why wouldn't Google move its web app OS down to phones once the ubiquitous connectivity is there? In Google's worldview, native apps are already just about archaic—just a necessary evil in Android's case.

He also spoke on how browsers and web standards are advancing so quick, that web apps will be more powerful than people realize: "Steve Jobs had it right when he said build for the web. But timing was an issue." And it looks like for Google, the time is now. [Chrome OS]

Some of the products on this list were or are vital to the computing industry as we know it, especially the dearly departed Palm OS and the sure-to-infuriate-fanboys inclusion of Linux. But then...who the hell ever heard of Inferno? [Silicon Alley Insider via Switched]

Abu-Hadba's statement that "Most of what Google does is defensive" isn't actually the tech world's most hypocritical statement (when was the last time Microsoft created something that wasn't a version of an already-successful product?). He means that everything Google does is designed to keep their core business, search and advertising, growing and dominant. The impetus behind Chrome OS, according to him, isn't to encourage simpler and easier computing, but weirdly enough, to distract other companies from attacking its own cash cow.

This is an interesting conversation because Microsoft has been doing just that, attacking Google's core, with Bing—yet Abu-Habda doesn't see Bing as a similar distraction to stop others from attacking Microsoft's core business, Windows. So why is Microsoft allowed to venture into new-for-them waters with projects like Xbox, Zune, Silverlight, Bing and more, while Google is an inherently defensive company for announcing a ballsy new project of their own?

Microsoft might just be a bit nervous about Chrome OS, which we don't think is really warranted at this point. Microsoft's got an outrageously dominant OS marketshare, and seeing as how we know just about nothing about Chrome OS, it's quite a bit soon to be launching attacks at a product that may well not be a competitor at all. [Venture Beat via Crunchgear]

Here's the creator's explanation, in his own (poorly written) words. It was all just a prank, for some unknown reason!

I am sorry if you beleived it. It was a really bad attempt. You all are smart people. I never planned on it getting this big. But it did. (Come one, I know the Google logo. I am actually a graphic designer, I just wanted to see reactions if it was a crappy back.)

Oh, right, I also DO know CSS and HTML. Just clarifying that. I never was going to let this go on longer than 12 hours.

We're mostly just disappointed, since a more professional mockup would've been so much harder to disprove. Couldn't he have waited one day and gotten the damn Google colors right? [Faker's Blog via PC Mag]

As an employee of a parts supplier for Acer, one of Google partners for Chrome OS (true!), he was privy to a brief demonstration of a Private Developer Beta. They showed a full installation, which took about 10 minutes. After installation was done, desktop to desktop reboot took about 25 seconds.

As for the desktop, it is minimalist: at the bottom of the screen is the Chrome Bar, which is the system's dock, start menu, or whatever you'd like to call it. The glowing blue icon, which looks like the center of the Chrome logo (also true!), opens the main menu, and hides when not in use. It can be activated with the Windows key, a la the Start Menu, though Chrome-loaded netbooks could well have a dedicated Google key, or Chrome key. Update: The creator of these screenshots has admitted that they're fake.

Now, some reasons to be suspicious: these shots come a little soon for my comfort, just one day after the announcement; the shots could easily be mocked up in an existing Linux desktop environment (this one looks a bit like XFCE, actually); the shots don't necessarily look like they were taken in an Acer conference room (floral table tiles? really?); and, most damningly, the colors in the word "Google" are ordered incorrectly. Lastly, the demo was carried out on a Acer Extensa 4620Z—not a netbook, which would accord with Google's stated first target for the OS. So.

But you can see the same evidence I can, and the description in the leak is quite long, so just have a look for yourself—I'm just not overly hopeful. And anyway, even if this is real, we're just getting a tiny aesthetic preview of an early build of Google's Linux desktop environment, not any meaningful insight into how the OS works, performs or is in any way distinguishable from other existing products. [ChromeOSLeak—Thanks, MC Gamer!]

The full list: Acer, Adobe, ASUS, Freescale, Hewlett-Packard, Lenovo, Qualcomm, Texas Instruments. Google is quick to note that it's a partial list, but we can see a range from primarily small-form computer makers like ASUS to bigger PCs like HP and Lenovo, and the addition of Qualcomm and TI means they've got low-powered chipset makers on board. Adobe is an interesting pull—can we expect heavy use of Flash in the OS's core?

The biggest name that's missing is Dell, although smaller PC makers like Sony and Toshiba are also AWOL. We're not sure what Dell is doing to leave them out of the equation: They make pretty popular netbooks and Chrome OS could be as big a boon for them as anyone else. We'll keep you updated on future Chrome OS developments. [Chrome Blog via Engadget]

Here's what Google says: "Google Chrome OS is an open source, lightweight operating system that will initially be targeted at netbooks" and "most of the user experience takes place on the web." That is, it's "Google Chrome running within a new windowing system on top of a Linux kernel" with the web as the platform. It runs on x86 processors (like your standard Core 2 Duo) and ARM processors (like inside every mobile smartphone). Underneath lies security architecture that's completely redesigned to be virus-resistant and easy to update. Okay, that tells us, um, not much.

After all, Google's Android is a mobile OS that runs on top of a Linux kernel. But Chrome OS is different! Android is designed to work on phones and set-top boxes and other random gadgets. Chrome OS is "designed to power computers ranging from small netbooks to full-size desktop systems" for "people who spend most of their time on the web." Hey wait, they both run on netbooks? Hmm!

Since the official blog post is all Google has said about Chrome OS and it doesn't say much, let's do something I learned in college, turning tiny paragraphs into pages of "deep reading."

It seems like there are two possibilities for what Chrome OS is, on a general level. The more mundane—and frankly uninspired—possibility is that it's essentially a Linux distro with a custom user interface running the Chrome browser. As someone quipped on Twitter (sorry I don't remember who), if you uninstall everything but Firefox 3.5 on Ubuntu, would that be the Firefox OS? What's the difference between Chrome OS and a version of Chrome with Google Gears on Intel's pretty Moblin OS?

The other possibility is more interesting. Look at this closely: "Most of the user experience takes place on the web." The software architecture is simply "Google Chrome running within a new windowing system on top of a Linux kernel." That sounds familiar. A lot like Mike Arrington's CrunchPad, actually, which boots directly into the WebKit browser running on top of Linux.

Meaning? The entire experience of the CrunchPad takes place on the internet, and the web is its "platform" as well, essentially. Chrome is WebKit-based as well. (I'm surprised Arrington didn't mention this in his post, actually.) If I had to guess, I'd say Chrome OS is somewhere in between an entirely browser-based OS and a generic Linux distro, though leaning toward the former.

The image associated with this post is best viewed using a browser.But running a full computer like Chrome OS, based entirely on web apps, is crazy, right—I mean, what if you're not online? There are two things that show it actually might not be completely retarded.

You can already use Gmail offline. I think that will be really indicative of other app experiences in a totally web-oriented Chrome OS with Google Gears. The same goes for Google Docs in offline mode, an option some people have been using for over a year. It's no coincidence that Google pulled "Beta" off of its web apps the day it announced Chrome OS.

Another reason it might work is Palm's WebOS on the Pre, where most of the apps, like Pandora, are written simply using web languages. (It, too, is running WebKit on top of Linux kernel.) As Harry McCracken notes, it seems like a prime opportunity for Google's long rumored GDrive online storage to finally rear its head, picking up on the line "people want their data to be accessible to them wherever they are and not have to worry about losing their computer or forgetting to back up files." That could make Chrome OS wildly more compelling. And don't get me started on all the app-like possibilities from HTML5 by the time Chrome OS launches in the second half of 2010.

Actually, the more minimal it is, the more I think Chrome OS could be better, in some ways, than Android. Google half-assed a lot of Android at launch (UI inconsistencies, missing video player, etc.). If Chrome OS really is just a glorified browser, Google can afford to be that lethargic—all they have to do is maintain the browser, and everyone else will take care of the web apps. Which developers will code, because they'll run on any OS with a browser—Windows, OS X, whatever—and because the web as a platform is the way things are going. Even Microsoft knows this, deep down, as their Gazelle browser project shows.

How will you sync an iPod, manage printers and network drives, or yank photos and videos from your camera? We don't know. Some things may be impossible. Will there be an uproar, like there was with iPhone 1.0, about the limitations of web apps? Surely someone will bitch.

But I can almost see a day where phones run Chrome OS, too, when wireless internet is truly ubiquitous. It seems obvious, now, that this is Google's long-haul play—not Android, even. Either way, Microsoft doesn't have to be scared today. But they might be in about a year.

Still something you wanna know? Send questions about web tablets, web apps, the wicked webs Google weaves and anything else to tips@gizmodo.com, with "Giz Explains" in the subject line. Top image by Cobra Commander, from our totally insaney Google Chrome comic Photoshop contest.

Google says the OS is open source and lightweight, allowing users super quick access to the web. They claim the OS will be virus free (the security architecture is entirely new), and run a newly-designed windowing system on top of a Linux kernel that will be compatible with x86 and ARM processors alike. Though they were quick to mention this was separate from Android, they also conceded there would be some overlap in concept and functionality between the two platforms.

While the discussion of specific apps (and how they will work) was vague, Google made reference to a developer ecosystem that will be heavily web-based, and apps would be compatible with Windows, Mac and Linux (obviously). In a nutshell, it looks like Google Chrome OS is about simplicity, speed, safety, and cloud computing.

The announcement of Google Chrome OS is a big step forward for a company who slowly and subtly wedged their way into web app development. Google says that Chrome OS is intended for "power computers ranging from small netbooks to full-size desktop systems." So what does this mean for Google, and more importantly, what does this mean for Microsoft and Apple?

I think that Google has primed themselves to take a big chunk out of the mainstream computing market. That's not to say that you or I will be exclusively using Chrome OS, but with the internet becoming more and more accessible from ANYWHERE, our parents, grandparents and technophobic siblings probably will be converts. Most of them are already familiar with Google as a brand, and frustrated in trying to learn the intricacies of current operating systems.

And even for those of us who consider ourselves technologically advanced, how much of the desktop experience have Google's web apps already replaced? We'll still have our main computers, but what will be running on our netbooks or old laptops that sit in the living room?

More and more, I find myself working almost exclusively with apps that exist entirely on the web, or with clients that connect to web services. The only apps I use that aren't cloud-happy are either utilities, media players or photo/video editors. And even then, those are heading in that web-centric direction. Cloud computing has been bringing us closer and closer to the mainframe days of yore. Google wants to be the only backbone working behind the scenes. By saying they're keeping Chrome OS app development web-centric and platform-agnostic, they're slowly luring us techies into their web.

Still, Windows and OSX will always have a spacious home in the computer world, undoubtedly. Some apps will always require native architecture, and the businessmen, code-monkeys, graphic designers, video editors and other connoisseurs of nuanced computing would be foolhardy to try and work strictly in the cloud.

But the final hurdle for Google to overcome is easy, accessible online storage. Will they be able to go after Amazon's S3 cloud servers? And perhaps more importantly, will they be able to offer the service for free? If they can let us really extend our hard drives into the cloud, look out. Chrome OS will be a force to be reckoned with.

But do we really have to wait a year to get our hands on this thing? [Ars Technica and Google]