Google's Chrome OS: A Wispy Desktop Adversary?

TechNewsWorld ^ | 07/09/09 11:39 AM PT | Erika Morphy

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Google's Chrome operating system may initially have modest aspirations -- to allow speedy Web-surfing on low-cost, lightweight netbooks -- but with the migration of a vast array of computing services to the cloud, there may be reason for desktop OS developers to get a little queasy.

Google's (Nasdaq: GOOG) announcement of a Chrome operating system, coming just nine months after its launch of the Chrome browser, has the tech sector buzzing over the possibilities. Google is targeting netbooks, claiming to have agreements with several OEMs already inked.

How will the option of a Chrome OS be received by the desktop-using masses? Are they ready for a PC experience that will rely heavily on applications hosted in the cloud? Or would they rather stick with the tried and true desktop model, be it Windows, Macintosh or one of the many flavors of Linux?

Google makes the case for the cloud very compelling: Desktop systems were designed during the pre-Web era -- certainly long before Web 2.0 took over.

This is something anyone who has grappled with a glitch-prone OS (I'm looking at you Vista) can understand.

Another potential Chrome plus: Security may wind up being better. Right now, Internet security is entirely dependent on user behavior -- whether someone installs a patch and keeps the AV or firewall updated. Such maintenance, though, can be handled easily from the provider side in a cloud-based scenario.

The Tradeoffs

Nothing, though, is free -- not even on the Internet. An OS running applications primarily hosted in the cloud will entail certain tradeoffs.

[Still Thinking]

Well, it does mean it's not ready for me. If it doesn't serve all my needs when there exist products which have done so for a decades, it's not ready. Doesn't mean it's not ready for someone else. And the recent docs thing isn't a chocolate/vanilla thing where I'm having a hard time learning a new paradigm. It's objectively not as good as Office's implementation. All the apps have a limitation on how many recent files they can show on the list. Why waste entries on files for a different app, thus cluttering and shallowing the list of applicable files? Would you want to see a list of recent spreadsheets mixed in when you open your word processor? Why?

[MortMan]

Cloud computing is an ITAR nightmare.

[perfect_rovian_storm]

Well, it does mean it's not ready for me.

So, say that then. Just because it's not ready for you doesn't mean that it isn't absolutely perfect for a lot of people. I hate working in Windows Vista, but I wouldn't dismiss it as 'not ready'.

I agree on the recent documents. It's silly and should be changed. I wouldn't go plunking down cash to buy Office because of it though.

[Still Thinking]

Well, one could make the case that it’s not ready till it replaces all the features of its competition. I guess you’d have to come up with two definitions of “ready”. “Fully ready” meaning anything Office can do, it can do just as well, and “ready for most people” meaning that it’s just as good for what a large segment of the population does. So when I said “not ready” I meant “not 100.0000000% as polished and complete as Office”, but even the current state is an impressive accomplishment in a free product, and one much younger than Office.