Why You Should Worry About the Future of Chromebooks 216
dcblogs writes "PC manufacturers may try to corral Chromebook, much like Netbooks, by setting frustratingly low hardware expectations. The systems being released from HP, Acer, Lenovo and Samsung are being built around retro Celeron processors and mostly 2 GB of RAM. By doing so, they are targeting schools and semi-impulse buyers and may be discouraging corporate buyers from considering the system. Google's Pixel is the counter-force, but at a price of $1,299 for the Wi-Fi system, reviewers, while gushing about hardware, believe it's too much, too soon. The Chromebook is a threat to everything, especially PC makers, as its apps improve. Compare Tweetdeck's HTML5 version with its native app. Can you tell the difference? It might be a year or two before Adobe delivers Web-only versions of its products, but if it doesn't it will be surrendering larger portions of its mindshare to users of Pixlr, Pixel Mixer, PicMonkey and many other interesting and increasingly capable tools."
Yes (Score:5, Interesting)
And then when it fails to bring money it gets discontinued. And you have a very expensive paperweight... Google Reader was an eye opener. Depending on a third party for core functionality is something I'll be avoiding from now one, since you never know...
Re:Yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Instead of chromebooks why not run a Android gain a touch screen screen and add a bluetooth keyboard and be done with it.
when chromebook concept first came out it was good. it just took 3 years longer to get to the market than it should have and android tablet can beat it in every way.
Re:Yes (Score:4, Insightful)
Because android isn't that nice at providing a good desktop environment.
the chromebook with normal nix running on it would allow much better interaction.
I say this as someone with a very nice nexus 7 and an android phone.
Though take the arm chip out of the nexus 10 and give me a linux laptop with the chromebook pixels monitor\keyboard and most importantly battery :)
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
You must have a pile of money you're just aching to get rid of if you need to keep investing in things that are only "mostly worthless".
Google can go fuck themselves, free email is pretty awesome, but if you can't rely on the services that connect to it to be around in five years, there's no reason why I can't privatize my email on a portable cloud instance somewhere else. I don't even use Google Reader, but it's clear that the idea* that "you can trust your data with Google forever" is dead. Spendi
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Yes (Score:5, Interesting)
Gmail and Google Reader are two different beasts. Gmail is used as the primary authentication of many, many Google services and provides its parent company with much more detailed profile of users than what feed you read... Just saying.
Actually, the authentication system used by Gmail is the primary authentication of many, many Google services. That's a whole different animal from Gmail itself, and it's very easy to cut loose a massive email system but keep the authentication infrastructure, especially when you developed both of them to begin with. You have a point about the detailed profile of users...but that's a double-edged sword. Google has been, I feel, under a level of scrutiny that I think is out of proportion with how they actually treat private data. All that it would take is a scandal (either at Google or at some similar service) and all of a sudden that one value they get out of Gmail could be taken away from them. Then what?
Anyone here remember Juno? Just saying.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
If you think Google Reader's cancellation is in any sense a useful indicator of the future of Chrome OS or Google Drive, you're not really paying attention.
Re: (Score:2)
tweetdeck for chrome is lacking many features of the AIR app for windows. Such as a list of trending topics as a pane you can select, so you can see them all the time. How stupid
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I am not so sure the future is quite the same.
I think that, first of all, Chromebooks should be running or have available to them, Android apps. A quick google search shows this is presently not the case. (I did not look any deeper than the first few responses) And, of course, they should have touch screens to support Android better.
This makes it a tablet with a keyboard... which is not a tablet but still, you get the idea. Then the low specs won't mean as much and people will want them more.
Yes,
Re:Yes (Score:5, Funny)
You bought Google Reader Hardware?... and now have an expensive paperweight?
I'll buy it from you to put in my museum.
Re:Yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Comparing Google's Chromebooks to Reader is silly.
For one thing, Chrome and Chromebooks are central to Google's future.
And for all the fuss about Reader (i'm a heavy user myself) switching away from Reader has been dead simple since it is just a viewer based around a standard protocol. Google turfing it was annoying at most, and no indication that they will kill off their core initiatives.
Re: (Score:3)
Oh, you're such a tease. If only the failure that is Chrome would drag Google down with it.
It is, you can quite clearly see that Chrome drags Google around. Since it's release it has become the worlds most popular browser in many metrics and Google's shareprice has sky-rocketed.
I wish I could fail this hard.
Why you shouldn't worry (Score:5, Interesting)
Because Chromebooks are exactly zero threat to any of the three established operating systems. It's all hype, smoke and mirrors. If people want a lightweight computer, the iPad and its Android counterparts are right there, priced well and offering all manner of ergonomic amenities superior to any lap-anything... even if you need to type seriously, a cheap bluetooth keyboard and you're going. If, on the other hand, someone actually needs a laptop, it'll be to run software X; and a Chromebook... won't. Best you can say for them is they can be crowbarred to run linux; but we already know how linux laptops fare in the marketspace. Not well. Chromebooks are simply a bad idea, DOA, FUBAR and catastrophically late to the party.
What you want to be paying attention to at this point in time is Google Glass. Now that is likely to change your life. You won't like it, either.
OMG The Sky is Falling! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:OMG The Sky is Falling! (Score:5, Interesting)
It used to be that I'd use a web browser for websites and specialized applications to access other services like email and newsgroups.
Now I read my email in a browser, but websites are always asking me to install an app to view them!
If that isn't a sign of the end-times, what is?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:OMG The Sky is Falling! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, but 1 is for all practical purposes equivalent to 1+1E-100, and (1+1E-100)^Googleplex is quite a large number.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
...software as a service hellscape.
Orifice365 ? That's unpossible!
Re: (Score:2)
ChromeOS is the problem not the hardware (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:ChromeOS is the problem not the hardware (Score:5, Informative)
I have looked a couple of times. (Planning on dropping a real Linux on it.) But every chrombook I have seen was at least $100 too expensive for what you get. For the same money, or in some cases less, you can get a real full laptop.
I freely admit to being a cheap bastard.
Re:ChromeOS is the problem not the hardware (Score:5, Informative)
But every chrombook I have seen was at least $100 too expensive for what you get. For the same money, or in some cases less, you can get a real full laptop.
I consider my $250 Samsung Chromebook was money very well spent. I fly a lot for work --two roundtrips per month-- and am usually stuck in tiny "economy class" seats. I can open up the chromebook and actually type on it while sitting on a plane, even tiny regional jets. I usually can't open my regular notebook computer up on a plane because it is too big to fit between me and the seat in front of me.
The Chromebook also came with a dozen free Gogo passes. Gogo passes currently cost $14 each, if I buy them prior to my flight.... so the dozen free passes are woth $168 to me.
Re:ChromeOS is the problem not the hardware (Score:5, Informative)
You are not the target market (Score:5, Insightful)
Chromebooks are awesome for non tech folks. Buy one for your parents and you'll never get another tech support call. I'd call the $249 Chromebook a deal for what you get. Yes they do have slots for more storage including USB. Stop trying to cram Linux on something just because you can. Great you installed Linux, now what? Meanwhile people are using them for their intended purpose. If you want a real laptop then buy one. I'll never understand the Chromebook hate on here.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You can even get a [gasp] Apple laptop.
The recurring problem here seems to be Microsoft.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Ah, but we LEFT the centralized computing story- which is what in the hell this stuff IS.
Chromebooks are all but a brick without an Internet connection. Will be for Google's model of this "new" (or is it OLD with better trappings??) idea to be usable for them.
It's got "FAIL" printed all over it. Extend it so that you're less beholden to Google and tethered to the Internet and the story changes at least a little bit.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Stop drinking the Kool Aid (Score:5, Insightful)
Just because something is new doesn't magically make it better. HTML5 isn't a silver bullet that magically makes everything better; in fact Adobe makes desktop applications because that's what makes sense to do, *not* because it's the latest fad.
At any rate, have fun uploading 20 gig videos to the cloud before editing them. I'll stick with Final Cut on my Mac, thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I don't need to send gigabytes of data back and forth to Adobe to do every edit. I don't have to worry about the interface changing overnight when I have a deadline. Or not being able to do anything because of a "temporary" service interrupt
Aha! Someone knows the future of computing! (Score:2)
Run.. run away (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Once the data is collected, it can then be used by others to misconstrue your intentions/character/viability for future opportunities. Forever. The only way to prevent this is to prevent it from being collected in the first place.
Knowing your enemies is only part of it. Having control over information and intellectual process is where the real power is, so, of course, assholes have come out of the woodwork in the last 10-15 years proclaiming privacy as dead/having never existed. Without privacy, such exp
Re:Run.. run away (Score:5, Interesting)
The decision that "privacy is dead" happened over a decade ago. Or, do you not remember Scott McNealy, former chairman of Sun Microsystems, who in 1999 said, "You have zero privacy anyway. Get over it." And the observation by Oracle CEO Larry Ellison: "The privacy you're concerned about is largely an illusion. All you have to give up is your illusions, not any of your privacy." ??
Privacy gets in the way of money, and money is a means of attaining and exercising power. Throw in the alarming statistic about CEO psychopaths [time.com], and you have what ails our world today.
Government has no incentive whatsoever to intervene here, because they also directly profit from stomping on privacy. Look at this editorial for instance. [wsj.com] Unless the politicos are themselves harmed by the loss of privacy, they have no incentive to protect it, and every reason to trample all over it instead.
The cleary proscribed solution to this problem is to exploit the fuck out of this surveylance society they are working oh so hard to make, and put THEM under the spotlight. It is the only way to get the retractions on positions and rulings required to halt the slide downhill. The leaders are only concerned with themselves, as is true of all psychopaths. You have to make them feel the fires too to get them motivated to do what is right, and they will bitch mightily about it the whole time.
Amusingly, that's what orgs like wikileaks aimed to do. We saw how that's worked for the likes of Assange. (Yes, he is the very definition of douche, but a douche that exposed a lot of dirty dealing, and pissed in a lot of cheerios, which is exactly what was needed, and is still desperately needed.)
Wait 10 Minutes (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Google will drop support for Chromebooks when the next shiny thing comes along and people figure out this is a modern day Wyse terminal."
GOOD. More cheap Linux machines for me.
Oh, and "modern day IOpener" would be a better analogy.
Of course enterprising folk put Linux on used thin clients too, Wyse included:
http://www.parkytowers.me.uk/thin/hware/hardware.shtml [parkytowers.me.uk]
http://www.parkytowers.me.uk/thin/index.shtml [parkytowers.me.uk]
Ah, yes, Tweetdeck. (Score:4, Informative)
Compare Tweetdeck's HTML5 version with its native app. Can you tell the difference?
No, because I'm still using Tweetdeck 0.38.1. I tried the newer version, but every so often it just decides it doesn't want to pull updates anymore.
Re: (Score:3)
"No, because I'm still using Tweetdeck 0.38.1. I tried the newer version, but every so often it just decides it doesn't want to pull updates anymore."
By the end of May, support for the older API will be pulled completely, and you won't be able to use it anymore.
The Web app is nothing at all like the old Tweetdeck. Yes, the web app is comparable to Twitter's version, Twitter's version sucks.
Time Travel (Score:5, Interesting)
The good news in this transition is that we may get back to buying a PC that is geared to what we want rather than being full of junk that tech-illiterates need (specifically in the OS). If MS don't want to provide that experience (and evidence suggests that they don't) then we will just all wipe the machines and put linux on them.
The bad news is that we will also travel back in time with the price of a PC. Inflation has ran at 3-5% for the last 25 years (give or take a couple of years), yet the cost of a baseline PC has more than halved in that time. That scale only comes with the addition of the tech-illiterate (& Chinese assembly) - once they buy pixibooks and tablets we will be left to pick up the full price for our dedicated high power PCs. The only possible depression on prices is corporate buying, but it can't be too long before they create a stable lightweight environment to get the bulk of corporate work done instead of buying a workstation for every desk.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It won't be subpar to the web only corporate/government approved thinclient, esp when such thinclients won't run the software you need.
Re:Time Travel (Score:5, Interesting)
Time travel? Looks more like space travel.
Most of the decline in price in desktop systems results from chip-scale integration. I can't even figure out what you mean by "pick up the full price". We've been paying less? This is news to me. The only reason the price will bounce upwards is further consolidation of the market, as we saw with Seagate and Western Digital.
The largest overhead in the PC business stems from the design cadence. Every shrink is more expensive than the last one. I wouldn't be the least surprised if Intel's two year shrink cadence begins to stretch out, which might slow the investment cycle and reduce prices in the short run, but publicly Intel seems to think not.
From Intel Has 5 nm Processors in Sight [tomshardware.com] -- September 2012 by Wolfgang Gruener
Looks like the underlying cost structure is largely shared.
Re: (Score:2)
once they buy pixibooks and tablets we will be left to pick up the full price for our dedicated high power PCs
No. One of the main things that allowed PC's to become so cheap over time was economies of scale re: mass manufacturing of commodities like RAM. Even if "Desktop PC's" become ultra-exclusive items (doubtful), they'll very likely be packed full of ARM cores and memory chips as you're likely to find in a portable device, just a lot more of them. Certain things (chipsets, high-end GPU's) are another story... but even now, those things aren't commoditized to the same degree that more common parts are (i.e. they
Re:Time Travel (Score:4, Insightful)
Your argument only works so long as you completely ignore any thing that isn't a DOS clone. Once you allow consideration of things that weren't DOS clones, the price situation doesn't seem nearly a grim.
It was the PC that dragged it's feet with a GUI, a real OS, and even reasonable pricing.
My first non-PC cost me 1/3rd what a cut rate and inferior clone of the time would have cost.
Once you stop fixating on secretary terminals, the history isn't quite so grim.
Bah, humbug... (Score:5, Insightful)
The Chromebook is a threat to everything, especially PC makers, as its apps improve. Compare Tweetdeck's HTML5 version with its native app.
It's a thin client. Chrome OS is not likely to put a dent in my plans to continue buying PCs until Google can guarantee complete network coverage everywhere and HTML5 apps are written that can replace complex native apps like Photoshop and the likes. There is a world of difference between Tweetdeck and really complex native apps. Then there is the issue of all my data residing on 3rd party data-center which might get hacked, data mined by the service provider without my permission, destroyed in an unseasonal flood disaster or just discontinued because the service failed to meet profitability goals. Nobody is going to discontinue the SSD in my laptop due to its failure to meet some corporate weasels profitability expectation any time soon and the same goes for my backup disks.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not unless you expand the definition of thin client to the point where its meaningless.
Nothing requires Chrome apps to store data on a remote server (and there's even less reason for them to do so exclusively.) Obviousl
Who's pushing these articles? (Score:5, Interesting)
Every few years there seems to be a push to get people to accept these ass-backwards computers. Apparently the software companies love the concept of users being held captive to them and requiring their permission just to run the simplest application. "Renting" software on a per usage basis is like their wettest dream.
I remember back in the day, Oracle was pushing these "Net Computers" or NCs as being the future. Nobody needs to run software from their own hard drive, you can just get everything from the Net! Except for the fact people's hard drives were 4 orders of magnitude faster than their internet connection (and will continue to be so for any foreseeable future). Nobody ended up buying this shit and it went into the dustbin of history.
But looks like they're trying it again, except now it's been renamed "cloud computing".
Re:Who's pushing these articles? (Score:4, Insightful)
I got a Nexus 7 with 16GB memory. Half a year of daily, even constant use, and several large apps and games (Final Fantasy III for instance; and Dungeon Defenders) and I've used up all of 4.5GB.
Storage is important, I agree, and we all use our devices differently. But don't make the mistake of blindly believing that you always need more. I've noticed on my desktop too, that storage has actually outgrown my needs for it for years now. It surprises me now to remember a time when I'd actually have to uninstall a large game or app in order to install another one; have to actually select what Linux packages to install or choose one desktop over another in order to save space.
Re: (Score:2)
I purchased a Nexus 7 (and then a Nexus 4) because these were the devices that, despite the hardware limitation you mention in terms of SD cards (which hasn't been much of a problem to me. I can run everything from large games, to media etc... I don't need to carry a HUGE amount of my entire collection; I'm fine with being able to sync - manually, and on my terms - what I want, when I want it. If I want to use "the cloud" I can decide which vectors are my preference, such as an OwnCloud install etc.
Nexus
Chromebooks need to be cheap (Score:2)
PC manufacturers may try to corral Chromebook, much like Netbooks, by setting frustratingly low hardware expectations.
...because unless Chromebooks are significantly cheaper than a regular computer running Windows/OX X or Linux, where's the point? When/if almost everything has moved to the cloud, Chromebook-type machines will make a lot of sense. In the meantime, a regular computer gives you the best of both worlds - you can run native applications and fire up a browser to use web apps.
Chromebooks should be most useful in corporate environments where the cost of maintaining hundreds of individual OS installations is a bi
Re: (Score:2)
The point is having a relatively locked down device for my retired mom to use. Point, click, automatic updates, automatic backups of data, and relative immunity to hacks.
Simpler and more secure has value.
Re: (Score:2)
yeah.. until it starts doing something she doesn't like, or stops doing something she does like..then she calls her son who cannot do a thing about it. Yay for consumer powerlessness!
Re: (Score:2)
My mom, and many other users, have limited needs that google will more than cover, even when they make changes. They do this for a living, and seem pretty good at it.
I would probably find it too constraining for everyday use, but I've been using computers for a few decades now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Except the Chromebook costs half as much and has a real keyboard. So you buy a $500 iPad, a stand, and a keyboard? Why not buy a real laptop for that money?
Re: (Score:2)
For many users, the simplicity and low maintenance overhead of ChromeOS's browser-centered design, and the easy hardware replacement (no concern about transferring files and programs) of the cloud model have value. Sure, for other users, the flexibility and independent local storage model of a traditional OS have more value, but not all users are alike.
history repeating (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly, the trend seems to have reversed in the past decade. :(
Look at facebook and pals. People seem hell bent on throwing their privacy into the hands of shysters for something shiny. Apple is already on the way this direction with siri, which is exactly this kind of application. (Siri runs on servers owned by apple, the app is just an interface to the big iron.) I don't imagine apple will find siri's adoption "discouraging".
Just turn the heat up slowly instead of all at once, and people will cease to reme
Siri (Score:2)
Siri is genius. Saves battery life for some bandwidth usage which is less of an issue over time than battery life. Audio recognition will eat up as much CPU cycles as you can throw at it and the software is still evolving. Placing such a feature on server farms and mainframes ensure the best experience and trouble free seamless upgrades. Eventually, it'll work well enough and fast enough to run locally.
The intelligent features that leverage your personal information will provide an excuse to hand that i
Re:history repeating (Score:4, Insightful)
The Chromebook isn't intended to be a "crippled terminal type computer", and its concept is new.
The reason people keep getting this wrong is that they think of it as an OS that is "just a browser", but refer to an outdated concept of what a web browser does that misses the entire point of Chrome (not just ChromeOS, but Chrome more generally.)
Re: (Score:3)
You can try and dress it up and engage in flimflam all you like, we will still recognize it (Chrome) for what it is.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I remember when those other things you are comparing C
Re:history repeating (Score:4, Interesting)
A large portion of consumers have repeatedly stated the Chromebook is exactly what they want. It's cheap, handles basic computing needs (word processes, etc), handles online streaming, and is nearly virus proof with little to no learning curve. There is also no slow degrade of speed over time as your not installing any software. For a lot of non-techies, it's a dream come true.
Looking forward to getting a few more bucks saved up to get my wife another as she's used her old Chromebook into the ground (the monitor is literally held on with tape as it was a beta product and she's a rough user).
You may not agree, but I find it hard to believe you formed your opinion on the realities of what the common computer user wants.
Re: (Score:3)
Why not use a harvard based system then? Seprating program ram from data ram would fantastically limit the options of malicious asshats attempting exploits. Trojan horsing an executable payload in the data portion of the stack and jumping execution simply wouldn't work on harvard.
Designing a device that can do all these things is not terribly difficult. There is really no reason for the "OMG! It has to have all the things, and ON der interwebz!" Other than becaue doing so eases central management. "Central
Re: (Score:2)
I'm more worried about the future of Androbooks (Score:2)
Android does everything Chrome does, plus lots more. At least for the consumer: I understand the need for .Corp , .Gov and .Edu to have dumb clients, but Consumers can benefit more from a more independent OS.
Re: (Score:2)
Next step (Score:2)
The next step will be HTML6 that can be downloaded and can run offline like a normal application. Then someone will start build a web browser in HTML6, and try to sell it as something "new" and in the "cloud". That will be a HTML6 extension HTML7.
No really, WTF? Finally we reached the technology that any mobile phone can be faster then anything 20 years ego. But noooo, now we need to put everything on the web. So it will run 100x slower, tied to a browser, and if the Internet connection goes down, so go you
Re: (Score:2)
Chrome is technology looking for problem to solve (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No one is "constantly controlling the apps you" are using on a Chromebook, any more than on a traditional desktop.
One thing here is for certain (Score:2)
The Chromebook detractors don't have one.
Re: (Score:2)
really? care to prove that certainty?
Not bloody likely (Score:2)
Our laptop standard is an 8GB quad processor barely sufficient to run Linux and Windows emulation.
I never understood the point of ChromeOS... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
ChromeOS is deeply tied into Google's infrastructure so they use the collected data to further their core advertising business. Android is too independent for that as it is possible to use an Android device without ever "phoning home" to mother Google. It was put forward as an impulse rush to get something to compete against iOS fast and maintain mobile mindshare.
Re: (Score:3)
2 major showstoppers (Score:2)
1) In North America the internet robber-barons have imposed monthly usage caps (i.e. max amount of gigbytes of internet usage). Uploading+downloading stuff to run the "Cloud Computer" model will go through your monthly usage quota in no time flat.
2) With all your data on a PC (and backups on USB drives), identity theft won't steal or wipe your data. However, if your data is in the cloud, identity theft can destroy your data http://apple.slashdot.org/story/12/08/07/0250248/how-apple-and-amazon-security-flaws [slashdot.org]
/. crowd != general population. (Score:2)
Most people are not like a typical slashdot reader. They have been plunking down cash for tower cases and expansion bays and 99% of the tower cases finish their life without the users ever upgrading/expanding anything. Most people use a puny 4 inch screen to get to the net via mob
Re: (Score:2)
Most people use a puny 4 inch screen to get to the net via mobile phone networks.
I remember arguing once with a cell phone salesman in the mall with something similar to this. This was back in the days when flip phones were the general fancy phone. Anyway, this guy was trying to sell me one of his service's phones and I asked him if I would be able to use the phone to get internet access to my laptop. His reply completely baffled me at the time (remember, flip phones). He asked, "Why would you want to get on the internet with your laptop when you could just browse it on your phone?"
At t
Re: (Score:2)
Netbooks still have a large core audience, check the prices on Ebay.
They were killed off because they ate market share from more profitable systems.
Oh hell, REALLY? (Score:3)
> It might be a year or two before Adobe delivers
> Web-only versions of its products
LOLOL. Fucking A. The day Adobe stops shipping native apps will be the day when the bandwidth between adobe.com and my house is as high as the bandwidth between my CPU and my RAM, and as reliable. Which is to say, FUCKING NEVER.
What MORON doesn't see much difference between between editing 140 MB images and reading 140-character posts? That's literally a million-to-one difference right there. (1,048,576 to 1, actually.)
In other news, the head of a company with a BILLION users said moving to HTML5 was his biggest mistake. [techcrunch.com]
just in time for MS to double up (Score:4, Interesting)
In reality, they have the money. They'll fire every other person in charge of UI design and planning and make something their customers actually want by Windows 10. I just hope, FOR ONCE, they learn their lesson permanently! Considering the every other cycle is since Windows 3.1, that's doubtful.
Look what happened to Netbooks (Score:2)
Remember netbooks? They got to be rather good under-$300 laptop computers before the industry killed them off for not being expensive enough and not requiring any expensive or intrusive "cloud service".
What are you talking about? (Score:2)
What are you talking about? I have a Samsung XE500C21, which is fast enough for surfing the web and running an ssh client (which is also all it does), has 8.5 hours of battery life, and is easy to carry.
It is a threat to everything except doing things by visiting websites or logging in to *nix machines to do real work, which happens to be what I and a lot of other people have been doing for years. It's also fairly close to what smartphones and tablets do.
I also see no signs of manufacturers making things wo
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with allowing offline applications, is that it totally negates the power inherent in the system to combat unauthorized applet use/development.
Eg, if there is a local cached copy of [superfantastical high dollar app], I can manipulate this cached copy, and then release it through less controlled channels. Allowing offline cached programs to be run permits users to run such pirated copies, and permits tinkerers to break the ecosystem further by circumenting the central control heirarchy in the sys
The Chromebook Concept (Score:3)
That's pretty much exactly the model for apps using the offline APIs that are central to the idea of ChromeOS's viability.
Offline apps and storage (Score:4, Informative)
Yes. That's rather the point of the variety of offline-related APIs that have been pushed as web standards by -- largely though not solely -- Google and which are supported by ChromeOS (and, for that matter, Chrome and a number of browsers on other OS's, too.)
Re: (Score:2)
So it will sell poorly with 1% of users, and will only be popular with the remaining 99%? Truly a recipe for failure!