Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci | Twitter
Sean Fallon | Twitter
Jack Loftus | Twitter
John Herrman | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Danny Allen | Twitter
Rosa Golijan | Twitter
Chris Jacob
@Arekku: Argh, I know! People are saying "Will we get to install programs?" "Why can't I just do this in a browser?" "ANDROID APPS PLZ"
It is WEB BASED, people. WEB apps only. It's designed for people who use WEB APPS often, and it is assuming that around next year WiFi will be extremely easy for anyone to find anywhere.
What I want to know if it's going to be available for, say, someone's existing notebook to dual-boot... It seems like they're saying is that it's open-source for people to make their own versions, but the official Google finished version will only be in Google-branded netbooks? That's kinda stupid, even though the netbooks will likely be very inexpensive.
@AvohkahTamer Has A Lazorcat!: I would love to dual boot to Chrome OS when all I want is to check the movies schedule or read my email or watch a youtube video. Thta would be awesome.
@Arekku: Exactly. I already use Chrome when I want a quick-open browser for really quick tasks, but I use Firefox and its many extensions for my usual, more heavy use. I'd hope I can bring that same concept over to Chrome OS. Especially if the OS is free, as it's looking to be.
Of course, they also said that a TON of the functionality in the Chrome OS will already exist in Chrome browser a few months before the hardware/OS release, so the features themselves aren't luring me over so much as the fact that it's such a light OS.
@AvohkahTamer Has A Lazorcat!: Brother , we are in the same page. I just wonder how much time will it take for people to have a dual boot installation or at least VHD to try. I want to try this OS right now. I guess it would take some time, if it is hardware locked.
@Nexcidia: exactly... plus all the other problems like if your ISP gets a corrupted DNS table or just plain goes down and Google's not accessible... or if you have a bandwidth cap (this will use plenty...).... and so on....
"Security: users don’t install binaries, so Google can understand everything on the system. They know exactly what’s going on on the system, so they can differentiate between good and bad apps."
@Nathan Obbards: As for me, I'm still waiting to see a single example of Google actually misusing this power for malicious purposes. As opposed to potentially misusing it. But that's just me. ;-)
@OCEntertainment: I think Google has held up a reputation of keeping your information secure, but I don't like the idea of EVERYTHING being stored in the cloud. Seems like it might be inconvenient.
@darkmonk04: That's a good point. Google recently started some kind of initiative to give you an out if you want to pull your data from their servers and go somewhere else with it. So maybe that will be helpful. Perhaps, though, a piece of software for offline syncing would be in order? I mean, I realize "syncing" is kind of the opposite of the point here, but I really truly doubt Google's dumb enough to think that folks will entrust their entire workflow to internet availability. Not with as often as people lose connectivity/servers go down.
@Elwillow: And apparently not finished. Interestingly, the "What is Chrome OS" link sends you to a YouTube video that is currently set to Private. Hehe. Keeping us in suspense eh, Google? Not bad.
@Yinzers Are People Too: It updates automatically (you'll see way more updates once the thing starts any minute now). It's slightly off, so if you absolutely want to get new info that extra five to ten seconds faster, though, you can keep pressing F5 if you'd like. ;-)
I'm curious at it's ability to run on lower grade machines. I have a "couple" of computers I could scrap together from parts, but aren't really snappy enough to do anything meaningful. If the new Chrome OS could give life to older machines by actually being a true lightweight, capable, OS...I have a feeling there is going to be an increase in home built projects using old computers and Chrome OS.
Am I the only one who thinks that Google can't (or rather doesn't) make very nice GUIs? I don't want to use any of their web stuff for more than like 2 minutes..
@TheCrudMan: I prefer Google interfaces. I get annoyed with IE/FF/Safari very quickly. I just want to get my work done, and not be oohing and aahing over the interface. With the Google interfaces everything is where I need it, simple, clean and uncluttered. But, I understand we allhave different tastes and needs.
@met2art: True. Some of us would like to use our ocean-themed Firefox skin with our dolphin-cursor that goes "ssswwsssshshhshhhs" like an ocean everytime you click. And error messages that sound like foghorns. At full volume.
@Nathan Obbards: +1. Chrome is my preferred browser. I also love the Gmail interface. And I have an Android phone. Also Google Talk, Google Voice, Google Calendar. Google owns 75% of my soul at this point.
@jakemg: After FF got slower than molasses I switched to Chrome and haven't looked back (though I do miss AdBlock and Flash block). Fastest browser out there for me and more user friendly to me than Opera. Gmail can be a pain sometimes, but it's better than all but Online MS Exchange.
@met2art:
Why did everyone assume I was talking about Chrome?
I'm talking about Gmail, google docs, google earth, google maps...all the online stuff.
I understand the point of lightweight stuff for the web and visual flash is not what I meant by nice.
I find google interfaces incredibly cluttered. Gmail is a clusterfuck. Google Earth is as well. Google docs is too, but then again so is MS office and every other app like that...
I don't like them for a lack of visual flashiness, I don't like them because they're not nice places to be because they are cluttered, improperly laid out (IMO), and generally discomforting...maybe I'm the only one and if so that is fiiiiine..I just won't use chrome OS if it's the same way. That's why I asked if I was the only one.
Oh as for Apple, they did spartan interfaces correctly. The realized we can learn iconography really fast and don't need everything to be text (yes yes the web I know I know) a'la Gmail.
@daftrok: Hell yes it is. I'll have FF time out on my school's internet sometimes, and that's with it optimized. Chrome literally loads 2-4x faster than FF.
@TheCrudMan: I realized you weren't speaking solely of Chrome, just thought I'd throw my thoughts in there. My Gmail interface is clean, nicely laid out, and I moved things to where I like them, and got rid of the parts that are rarely used. Ditto with my other Google-related interfaces. It's an aesthetic that is minimal and makes it easier for me to concentrate on what I'm there to do.
I don't care for Apple interfaces very much, they are usable but too visually over-designed for my taste (likewise with Windows' Aero). Any time I see a lot of rounded edges, shadows, highlights and glassy bits... well, I find it childish and a waste of time. To me they represent space and resources that could be put to better use. I'm an artist, and I enjoy art... but I don't need my tools to be pretty, just functional.
@met2art:
I've always found apple's interfaces to be highly functional...they're about form and function merging not about form over function. Even things that you might consider just for flash, like say, cover flow, are valuable features. As a video editor I use coverflow regularly to flip through and quickly preview clips, or to find one I want when my labeling is ambiguous or if I am on a project that's not worth labeling.
@TheCrudMan: I don't like coverflow, but that's good that it works for you. I personally prefer looking at thumbnails arranged by shape, color, content, faces, tags, etc. Maybe if I worked with tons of video I'd find it helpful, but I'm a photographer and illustrator, and there was no advantage to coverflow for me (nor any other Mac specific advantages that kept me in the Apple camp). Just different styles and tastes. I use Macs on occasion, I just don't prefer them. Otherwise, aesthetics aside, Apple vs. PC is just a matter of taste, to me. I've found neither to be more stable, reliable or problem free, despite what marketing teams try to tell me. :)
Unless Motorola is unveiling a Terminator that is running Android and looks like Felicia Day, they have nothing to say that could possibly interest me.
I hear that the part when Sanjay rides out onto the stage on a unicycle always kills. If he juggles Razrs and Q's while doing it, I'll buy stock right now.
Wow.. didn't everyone trash the original Zune for having an FM radio? Now Apple adds it two years later and it's like "ooooh ahhhhh".
And WTF - the freaking *Nano* can shoot video, but my iPhone 3G *can't*????
Sheesh.
BTW, if you need a desktop app to manage the icons on your music player (or phone since I assume this works for the iPhone too), you have a *major* UI fail on the device.
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
It is WEB BASED, people. WEB apps only. It's designed for people who use WEB APPS often, and it is assuming that around next year WiFi will be extremely easy for anyone to find anywhere.
What I want to know if it's going to be available for, say, someone's existing notebook to dual-boot... It seems like they're saying is that it's open-source for people to make their own versions, but the official Google finished version will only be in Google-branded netbooks? That's kinda stupid, even though the netbooks will likely be very inexpensive.
11/19/09
11/19/09
Of course, they also said that a TON of the functionality in the Chrome OS will already exist in Chrome browser a few months before the hardware/OS release, so the features themselves aren't luring me over so much as the fact that it's such a light OS.
11/19/09
11/19/09
Q: Can you run it in a virtual machine now?
A: Yes, you can compile and run it in a virtual machine.
11/19/09
All internet based operating system renders your machine near useless when you cant afford to pay for Wi-fi everywhere you go.
11/19/09
11/19/09
Oh shit.
11/19/09
11/19/09
''ALL data in Chrome OS is in the cloud.''
My biggest fear has been confirmed. No Chrome OS for me.
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
the main question then is hardware support and how are they going to get manufacturers to support it?
11/19/09
Maybe FF is slower but you still can customize it with great pluggins.
11/19/09
11/19/09
Just updated.
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
#tips
11/19/09
If that makes sense :)
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
Why did everyone assume I was talking about Chrome?
I'm talking about Gmail, google docs, google earth, google maps...all the online stuff.
I understand the point of lightweight stuff for the web and visual flash is not what I meant by nice.
I find google interfaces incredibly cluttered. Gmail is a clusterfuck. Google Earth is as well. Google docs is too, but then again so is MS office and every other app like that...
I don't like them for a lack of visual flashiness, I don't like them because they're not nice places to be because they are cluttered, improperly laid out (IMO), and generally discomforting...maybe I'm the only one and if so that is fiiiiine..I just won't use chrome OS if it's the same way. That's why I asked if I was the only one.
Oh as for Apple, they did spartan interfaces correctly. The realized we can learn iconography really fast and don't need everything to be text (yes yes the web I know I know) a'la Gmail.
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
I don't care for Apple interfaces very much, they are usable but too visually over-designed for my taste (likewise with Windows' Aero). Any time I see a lot of rounded edges, shadows, highlights and glassy bits... well, I find it childish and a waste of time. To me they represent space and resources that could be put to better use. I'm an artist, and I enjoy art... but I don't need my tools to be pretty, just functional.
#tips
11/19/09
I've always found apple's interfaces to be highly functional...they're about form and function merging not about form over function. Even things that you might consider just for flash, like say, cover flow, are valuable features. As a video editor I use coverflow regularly to flip through and quickly preview clips, or to find one I want when my labeling is ambiguous or if I am on a project that's not worth labeling.
11/19/09
#tips
11/19/09
11/19/09
09/10/09
09/10/09
09/09/09
And WTF - the freaking *Nano* can shoot video, but my iPhone 3G *can't*????
Sheesh.
BTW, if you need a desktop app to manage the icons on your music player (or phone since I assume this works for the iPhone too), you have a *major* UI fail on the device.