All Chromebooks will also be Linux laptops going forward
zdnet.com
zdnet.com
Chromebooks reach "end of life" after a few (edit: ≤ 6.5) years, effectively becoming software-defined garbage: https://support.google.com/chrome/a/answer/6220366
You can install Linux on some Chromebooks, but it's often a lot of work to disable the "press Space to erase your operating system" prompt. It would be better if all EoL Chromebooks received an update to disable secure boot, because secure boot stops being secure when it boots you to an unpatchable OS.
It might make sense to have a the ability to enter a UEFI key that would disable the dangerous “press to erase” prompt, but I don’t think it would ever make sense to make such a modified machine boot completely silently and “out-of-the-box like” (unless you don’t believe they should have secure boot as a design goal in the first place.)
Probably the most burning in a UEFI key would do is change the “this is a dev-mode laptop” warning to a “this is a customized deployment; if you were expecting a device direct from Google, you are being attacked!” warning.
This looks like a job for QR codes!
6.5 years is not what would usually be described as "a few years."
I still use a lenovo t420 that is almost 8 years old. I bought it with the fastest processor available back then, and it is still plenty useful as a Debian desktop.
My T430 (one generation later) received a BIOS update in February and I expect more to come.
As someone who still has functional PC hardware from the 90's, calling 6.5 "a few years" sounds about right...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ar9WRwCiSr0
Old hardware can often be repaired. If you told a C64 user back in the day his machine would break in two years, he or she wouldn't shell out the $$ on it, but today people buy $400~$800 cellphones that turn into garbage.
I wouldn't put money on that. A C64's starting price was $600 in 1982 dollars. For $154 in 1982, quite a few people might have been willing.
Unsurprisingly, there's even a few hacks out there for upgrading old C64s with newer/better components, too, if you want to get another couple decades out of it. There's even new manufacture C64-compatible enthusiast boards being produced [1], although I believe you may have to supply your own SID chip. The latter doesn't count much for this topic, but it illustrates there's some interest. Further, the parts that are likely to break over time are fairly trivial for someone with soldering skills to replace. I know of at least a couple people who preemptively replaced capacitors on old C64s they bought and refurbished.
[1] https://icomp.de/shop-icomp/en/produkt-details/product/c64-r...
That was pretty much expected. Hardware upgrades were just as fast and furious as they are now, if not moreso. Backwards compatibility with years-old systems at the consumer level was a byproduct, not a plan.
Chromebooks are designed to preserve data. The hardware is presumed vulnerable to failure.
They are basically modern version of a dumb/dumbed down network terminal. Chromebook experience is tailored for doing everything in the browser.
For fsck's sake you have to print through the "cloud": https://www.laptopmag.com/articles/how-to-set-up-google-prin...
You have to trust that Google will preserve your data in its cloud.
This is much better than getting an elderly relative off Windows XP.
There are several companies currently making new (more stable, more reliable) power supplies for C-64's.
And you still can, you just won't be getting updates. Just like Apple IIs and C64s from decades ago don't get any updates.
It's not like 6.5 years after release it just immediately refuses to power on anymore, it still works
You can "update" a C64 long after its manufacturer is gone, but these devices are literally designed to lock you out.
Is 6.5 a magic perfect number? No, I'd like to see more like 10 years honestly (which matches what Microsoft supports with Windows). But let's at least use the actual numbers and not easily confused vague terms like "few"
The Apple policy also only explicitly applies to hardware (repair parts), although software often falls not far behind (maybe supported for a year or two longer)
This kind of forced phasing out of devices is really unfortunate.
Performance for file transfers is also way faster and more reliable using `adb pull /sdcard/DCIM ./` than with `scp -r phone:/sdcard/DCIM/ ./`
I use termux mostly just run my own ruby scripts or SSH to cloud servers and stuff.
Mind if I ask where the conversation is? (if it's public). That sounds like something I'd enjoy :-)
Ah I see. Yeah I use USB when I need to, but I neither always have enough data to warrant the speed (often just a handful of pics...), nor is it true that I only want SSH for file transfer. =P
I think I like the Nokia 6 (not the more recent models) as a replacement.
It will sadly have to be replaced at some point.
(I used the same MacBook, replaced the battery a couple of months ago, and have no plans to replace it anytime soon.)
That said, it is against the Hacker News guidelines to comment about voting/down-voting and generally only results in further down-votes.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
"Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading."
Have fun running brand new Android on a seven year old tablet.
Also, you are still within your 7 years :)
There appears to be some debate online as to whether turning off secure boot on T2 Macs allows Linux to work. It should, but there are some reports online that it does not, at least if you want to use the computer's internal storage. https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/a4thsc/the_actual_fu....
I would have expected this to be sorted out by now, but that doesn't appear to be the case. If anyone knows more, please share...
It wasn't until the last ~6 months that I noticed a drop-off in battery performance. Not sure if it was from streaming football/hockey games or my tendency to throw it into sleep mode thinking "I'll have time later tonight" while keeping my server/db/container processes still running.
It is essentially a Hackintosh, albeit a legal one, as the hardware is Apple hardware.
I do dev work on it, though it is ruby and/or javascript, not a lot of true compiling happening. But it works well.
I'd love it to be officially supported, but I mean you have to draw the line somewhere.
Edit: I forgot to mention the SSD I put in it, or the RAM I maxed out. (I did the upgrade work, I was not about to pay the premium for Apple to do it.)
Edit: added link
If you’re talking about what I think you’re talking about, this is a feature and you can turn it off by disabling “Recent Apps” in System Preferences.
Where did you purchase the battery from, and how is the performance, if you do not mind me asking?
I also use a mid 2009 Core 2 duo, but lately I have struggled to find a source for a battery that will last more that 1.5 hours in typical usage. I assume the issue is that any authentic Apple battery must have been manufactured so long ago that its capacity is severely degraded after having been stored (at non-ideal temperature) for so long, and it seems like even many third party batteries available are old and had inferior capacity to begin with.
I bought the battery from iFixit[1], and I am back to the original of 4ish-5ish hours.
[1] https://www.ifixit.com/Store/Mac/MacBook-Pro-15-Inch-Unibody...
https://www.cultofmac.com/162823/linux-creator-linus-torvald...
Apple doesn't always make things easy, but they do have a highly-uniform component set, which can simplify configuration so long as all elements are supported, and senior Linux devs running kit is an incentive to solve hardware issues.
I'm not implying either that all devices are supported (I don't know which are/aren't, though I've had success on Apple kit myself), or that Linus still uses an Apple laptop (he seems to have moved on). But some well-established Linux users have turned to those devices and ben satisfied.
I’ve installed OpenBSD on a 2007 MbPro and works like a charm. (I put an ssd like 8 years ago though).
Unfortunately, my Mac Pro 5,1 refuses to die!
Glass half-full I guess.
So, every move made by MS and Google on their popular, mainstream platforms is a step in the right direction. Neither is a full glass yet, but if these moves prove popular, both companies might decide to take even bolder steps toward desktop Linux.
This will make me rethink chromebook purchases in the future. I feel sorry for the people who bought into pixel.
That's not what this article is about.
Yes, you can put the Chromebook in dev mode, disable secure boot and deal with that prompt.
But today you can install Debian or Ubuntu or other distros in a container without enabling dev mode, and without disabling secure boot.
Containers were only available on selected Chromebooks until now, and they'll be enabled on all new devices from here on.
You can easily share files between Linux containers and the ChromeOS filesystem, with USB and SD cards, and with Google Drive. There's one-click backup and restore of containers.
Linux apps like Firefox, LibreOffice, Gimp and VS Code are fully integrated into the ChromeOS window manager side by side with ChromeOS apps and Android apps.
All we need that is currently missing is for end-users to be able (by law) to sign their own boatloaders, by entering their own public key into the most minimal inspectable ring infimum bootloader...
Otherwise it's just a long and slow road towards either fab at home, or alternatively blind computation on the host, and encrypted communication with a minimal IO system attached to the host...
On the contrary; Linux continues to have pretty darn good support for hardware that's 10 or even 15 years old.
Linux support for the hardware of the notebooks was never as good as Windows. Experienced users, to be sure that they won't have problem with hardware, tend to buy either Thinkpad or Dell notebooks. Everything else is a lottery. From three non-Dell, non-Thinkpad notebooks that I've bought since 2000 only one had enough hardware support to be even usable for more than five years.
Moreover, the first one, an AMD-based Sony (also not cheap) worked better under Linux under the versions which were less than 5 years old than the model's introduction. Only since that point the problems with the drawing on the screen became so bad that it was not usable at all for anything but being used headless. I was installing every new Ubuntu version every 6 months there, and the hardware support for the video card came to be progressively worse. I've reported the bug behavior but was never contacted to help the investigation, the bug was closed unsolved eventually.
Recently, only two months ago, my Dell notebook, 2 years old, after an update stopped working with an external monitor under kernel packed in the 18.04 LTS Ubuntu (where everything worked for a year before that). It took only days to fix that, but the bug was wide spread enough to strike most users of external monitors.
So no, Linux won't magically work on a machine which is not continuously directly tested by enough developers. It will also even less work after 6.5 years of machine's introduction, again, unless there was a constant work to keep it working. Linux is not a magic pixie dust, but a product by humans that also needs active contributions to even keep working with the old hardware.
On the contrary, I also have direct experience with notebooks across a wide variety of makes, models, and eras (though most were from the Windows XP era, since a lot of my Linux installs were from migrating folks off XP).
> Experienced users, to be sure that you won't have problem with hardware, tend to buy either Thinkpad or Dell notebooks.
Well yeah. That tends to hold true regardless of operating system. The laptops that still manage to be terrible on Linux (which in my experience is constantly shrinking, even - and especially - for old ones) - were typically worse under Windows.
> So no, Linux won't magically work on a machine which is not continuously directly tested by enough developers.
Of course not. My point is that once it is working, it's typically unlikely that it'll regress all that much unless there's an explicit push to deprecate old hardware. The old laptops ain't popular now, but that doesn't mean they weren't popular enough 10 years ago (or similar enough internals-wise to popular notebooks from 10 years ago) to end up getting enough attention by Linux driver devs to still be usable to this day. Maybe someday bitrot will set in, but my experience with Linux support on old laptops suggests that to be relatively rare.
I gave already a direct counterexample, a Sony notebook. No problems under Windows for 10 years, unusable after 4-5 under newer Linux versions.
The example I haven't given: the Samsung notebook where touchpad never worked properly under Linux. The only response from community was "use an external mouse." Also the WIFi card on that Samsung never worked under Linux. Again the answer as "switch WiFi card or use an external one."
> once it is working, it's typically unlikely that it'll regress all that much unless there's an explicit push to deprecate old hardware.
For that I have 2 examples: Sony notebook graphic drivers regressed to make the notebook unusable. The Dell notebook regeressed with the LTS, it was fixed only because the bug stroke too much notebooks at once.
But hardware support does break in Linux unless enough of effort is made.
And some issues are totally broad. Last year I've bought a box with the APU which can't play videos under Linux without stuttering. No problem under Windows.
Nobody who claims that "Linux always works" seems to have an actual experience with notebooks which aren't intentionally pre-selected as "known to work." I don't know why would such claim be even controversial, it's widely known.
https://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/linux-laptop.html
"Wireless 802.11
Another hardware device may not work at all; if you do not pay attention to wireless devices. Most laptops comes with on-board 802.11 (a/b/g/N) wireless cards. Not all card supported so make sure you get Intel Pro series card such as 3945 or Atheros based cards. My advice is use Google to search for your driver or use specialized databases (a more or less complete listing of wireless devices with information about the chipset they are based on and whether or not they are supported in Linux) to search for your laptop card."
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Touchpad_Synaptics#Touc...
Not to mention the graphics problems even on the Dells:
https://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux/comments/8lbf4o/arch_gnom...
https://askubuntu.com/questions/1105528/ubuntu-18-04-video-s...
For instance, I have a cheap asus notebook from the Windows 8 era. Windows 8 is EOL, so I upgraded it to Windows 10. Windows 10 takes literally half an hour to boot in the best case, which is after spending a whole day in the update-reboot loop, making sure the system is fully updated. (I do this every quarter or so.) So I dual boot Arch. Arch boots in 30 seconds.
And that's not to mention the stack of Thinkpads going back to 2002, all of which still work flawlessly. (But of course they work, because if Linux ever had a target laptop platform, it was 2000s era Thinkpads.)
The whole context of this thread is me responding to the answers to my initial claim (still hard to read, so let me repeat):
> One should always be able to sign one's bootloader. If it's only 6.5 years later it can be that not even Linux support for that hardware would exist then?
And your response finally, the way I see it, confirms exactly that: if you have some notebook for which Linux can't be normally developed and maintained, after 6.5 years the Linux won't "magically work." Which is what I claimed from the start. Full 6.5 years after the introduction, it can remain a non-target. Not as a notebook, but as a set of hardware parts which aren't openly supported. Like all non-Dells and non-Thinkpads for years were, as you also confirm. Being able to install VMs before 6.5 years are over is also not enough.
A few weeks ago I tried to run Debian and Ubuntu on an older Chromebook with Crouton (also a container solution).
Systemd failed booting, because the last published Chromebook kernel for that device had an incorrectly applied backport of some patch, which made nonexistent system calls return garbage data instead of erroring out.
You can read the details here:
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/11974
https://github.com/dnschneid/crouton/issues/3914#issuecommen...
This kind of stuff took me many tens of hours to debug, and I am relatively experienced with tasks like that.
If you want to have an easy time with Linux, better run the kernel provided with the OS. Containers don't do that.
It's misleading to people who haven't been in the ChromeOs ecosystem before to compare your Crouton setup to Termina. Crouton is not an officially supported Linux on Chromebook solution and requires you to turn on developer mode on the Chromebook which warns you that you are in unsupported land and things may not go as planned.
If you know how Debian works, the new solution Google has for Linux on Chromebooks should work fine for most people. There's only a few gotchas at all anymore. Snaps even work if you know what you're doing.
This is far far from the title's promise of being a "Linux laptop"... you might as well also claim all Windows PCs are now Linux PCs because of WSL.
I know I'm not alone when I expect a computer that claims to support Linux to mean running it on the hardware, without a hypervisor, outside of a container or any other kind of virtualization.
For me I won't mess with a Chromebook until they've consolidated Android and ChromeOS into a single platform (likely Fuchsia). Until then I don't expect any real support for edge cases to be adequately addressed. It will always "kind of but not really work" because Google's already working to replace it with something different.
For example, I can edit images using Linux GIMP and write with LibreOffice Writer while looking at pictures using Firefox on Linux and simultaneously check my Gmail in Firefox on Linux. It's all good.
Faster Gapps? Kinda. The explorer is better for drive files, for sure. Can unlock with my Android phone. Cool, I guess?
Can't think of any other reason to boot to ChromeOS.
I'm running normal Fedora 30 now and tried Silverblue during the Fedora 28/Fedora 29 release cycles. I hear it's getting better but I'll give it another year or so.
Also, I love Chrome OS for my kids laptops because I don't have to worry about viruses or malware. In the case, I purposefully want a less feature rich OS.
It's a great OS too to give your parents who only need it for web browsing. Less maintenance and tech support.
It's not your threat model but it's someone's threat model and a chromebook does that better than anyone else, and your mom can do it.
Now you can even use an alternate Android or Linux browser instead of Chrome.
You can have a second account that is empty that you log into and isn't connected to anything.
My mom can still do both of those.
Doesn't matter, you've protected your clients, that's what matters.
The worst case scenario is they seize it and prevent entry, which can happen with a blank or non-blank machine. Better it happens with a blank one.
> They would probably make you log in and sync before they let you enter the country.
This would be where you just don't enter the country. In the other scenario, you don't get in and they get to keep the machine anyway.
30 minutes to restore the same environment or 1 day to install something totally new and learn about it. Probably the latter.
To me, that is one of the single largest value adds of being in the Google ecosystem on this one- peace of mind.
She's old and tends to believe anything a computer tells her, from "YOU HAVE A VIRUS CLICK HERE TO REMOVE!!!!" to "Click here to claim your prize money!", so her Windows box was basically enough of a fetid cesspool of disease to approach supervillain powers on its own.
This is how I use my Chromebook: any important configuration gets checked into Git. Granted, I don’t use it as my primary computer, but it does decently well as a device I can carry with me and wipe when necessary.
I think my last install was about five minutes. SSD drives are surprisingly fast. The older laptop surely took a lot longer than that.
But, my /home partition was not touched, only the root partition was formatted. Don't tell me this was not allowed in your mind experiment.
I use a Pixelbook now as my primary dev machine and compile a decently heavy Rust codebase in the linux env all day long and the battery doesn't die. If I move compilation to a cloud-based IDE, it'll last even longer.
We're comparing Linux to Chrome OS, not Mac. I wiped my CB and loaded Gallium OS and have yet to see any significant battery depletion.
At most I'm sacrificing some battery for a whole host of other tools, so it's a pretty decent trade.
What sort of optimizations can they do for ChromeOS that they can't do for Chrome on Macs?
It's also sort of a "home base" in the Chrome development world.
That said, finding a good USB-C to HDMI adapter is tricky (can't use the apple ones cause they're actually thunderbolt). I have a USKY one, but it has an annoying tiny fan that makes a high-pitched sound when power is plugged in but the laptop is unplugged, and it heats up quite a bit.
While using Linux, I may not be able to access my organization's Exchange server from Linux ( at least not without running quite a few hoops ) OR I can install one of the myriad suite of enterprise apps for Android that let you access your enterprise exchange.
Similarly, 2FA token generation apps for the enterprise are not all made for linux but you can install an android app for it.
Idea is: use linux for your workflow, android apps for connectivity to your organization's walled garden.
The privacy and convenience Firefox offers me over Chrome, to start. Containers, etc.
Programs that run as programs but not Chrome Apps (Signal, Email, ETC)
Functional hardware accelerated video playback is a pretty big value to have (neither firefox nor chrome supports hwa video decoding on linux, see https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Hardware_video_accelera... ). It also has a much better system compositor than X11, actually shaking off the broken legacy cruft that Linux distros seem determined to cling on to.
You can get some of this on "regular" linux with projects like https://github.com/intel/ozone-wayland but the state of graphics & video support on Linux continues to be a joke (relevant xkcd from 10 years ago https://xkcd.com/619/ )
Actually I'm pretty sure there are many Android apps that offer functionality unavailable on Windows and OS X.
Also, it's nice to have the possibility to mess around with Debian in the VM, yet always have a browser available and with the best security.
But it won’t be secure, because the whole point of Chrome is to feed your data back to Google.
Being able to wipe the disk, install some other Linux, and run an (ephemeral?) android emulator in a sandbox would be nice though.
For other people, Google having some access to your data is no more a security breach than your bank seeing your bank transactions or Kaiser having your medical records. (Internal controls do matter for defense in depth, but that's different.)
I trust Google more than other companies to handle my data with care. Pragmatically speaking, I think it's more likely to get hacked with a ransomware on Windows or OS X, than to suffer of <something> because of the data Google has on you. I'm not even sure what this hypothetical something is?
Also, the amount of data Google gets specifically from Chrome OS users is negligible, compared to what they get through other means such as GMail (which Chrome OS users presumably use already).
As a user without control over your device, there is nothing you can do about it.
I didn't think to try Chrome at the time, though.
Edit: Thanks for pointing to this. I have been wishing for this for a while.
Android apps are run directly in a container (and each Android app runs in a sort of container, whether on smartphones or on chromebooks). See https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/platform2/+/mas...
I'm not judging you, as you are not the app developer, but I don't use software where the developer is my adversary.
I also recognize most people aren't me, but still I wonder "Why would I want to run software that's intentionally crappy?"
If you weaken "turnkey" a bit to include installation you'll find that most Laptops on sale today will run the popular Linux distributions flawlessly.
When a raving Linux evangelist publishes a fawning article about how it's actually a "good thing" that GIMP has lost its User eXperience (UX) maintainer, is that really a sign that GIMP is finally on the right track for "an ordinary Jane or Joe" to easily use?
https://www.techrepublic.com/article/the-gimps-bad-news-coul...
>The GIMP's bad news could be good news
>The GIMP has lost its User eXperience (UX) maintainer. Jack Wallen thinks this could be good news for one of the most powerful open-source image editing tools.
>This month, the GIMP lost its User eXperience (UX) maintainer. This is important. Why? Because, over all, the UX of Gimp has always had a very bad rap. People don't like it. I should preface this by saying 99% of the graphics that I do are done in GIMP (all of my TechRepublic images, all my book covers... everything). I've always been a big fan of the platform. That being said, it can't be denied that an overwhelming majority of people do not find the GIMP experience to be positive.
I love this spit-take worthy quote, showcasing the author's extreme case of Stockholm Syndrome:
>"GIMP is really just a proper UX maintainer away from graphic design domination"
Look out Photoshop! As soon as GIMP finally finds that one proper UX maintainer with infinite patience and leadership abilities and free time (and a trust fund to live off of), who manages to convince all the GIMP developers working for free on their own time to stop bickering and fucking around and for the first time in history drop the pet projects they're doing and follow the UX genius's innovative new directions and disruptive sweeping designs to make GIMP easy to use, Adobe's doooooooomed I tell you!
With Linux in ChromeOS, this thing now runs basically 3 OSs (Chrome/Web PWAs, Android, Linux) in one environment. What this means is that I open my app drawer, and I see app icons I can launch. I don't know or care what actual OS those apps are running on! It could be a PWA or an android app or a linux app and it works and runs the same as any of the other apps. All without compromising on the security isolation benefits of ChromeOS.
To install a Linux application, you explicitly have to open the Linux container command line (which is Debian Stretch) and run the install commands.
Ex: If I run 'apt install firefox', Firefox will be installed in the Linux container, but will be available to run from the ChromeOS app menu.
Edit:
Also, currently you need to explicitly go in the ChromeOS settings to download and install the Linux container. I'm not sure if this will change or not, but it is not currently included by default.
[1] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.steadfasti...
For my parents' generation, TVs were a big deal. For me, I can hardly distinguish between a TV and a Radio and a Microwave and a Washer/Dryer -- they all have existed as long as I remember. But I can definitely tell the difference between an app written against User32/GDI/WinForms/VB versus one that uses the Android toolkit versus one in GTK+.
There's been a lot of work over the years to make most applications agnostic to the underlying toolkit and OS, including React Native, Flutter, Unity, Adobe Animate (formerly Macromedia Flash), and so forth.
My $1500 macbook pro that I bought at the same time got noticeably more sluggish over the years by comparison, and I've had to bring it in for repairs twice for hardware failures (once for hard drive cable, once for HDD itself) - I sold the MBP last year and bought a Lenovo.
Truly amazing. With this change, I could probably even get rid of the Lenovo and just have a single Chromebook for all my needs since all I really used the MBP for was the unixy CLI.
Considering that the Acer Chromebook probably has flash memory, I don't see how this is a fair comparison. I have a 2012 Macbook Air and Macbook Pro that have had no issues. The Macbook Air is my general around the house laptop and the MBP is used as a Plex box. Still do everything I need them to do and the only issue is the battery life of the Macbook Air since it's gone through way too many charge cycles.
I am doing a high level comparison between laptop computers. One has been fast and reliable, the other has not. One was 10x more expensive than the other.
I don't care if the MBP had a quantum drive from the year 3000. If my user experience with it is worse than a Chromebook, I'm not buying another one.
Chromebook users currently employ chroots to run non-Chromium userlands from Debian, Arch, etc. Ideally, they would like to run their own kernel, usually one they get in binary form from those public distributions such Debian, Arch, etc., but also kernels they compile themselves.
It is possible (=good) but still a pain to install one's own kernel on a Chromebook. The Google Corporation could, but is not, making that any easier.
Instead, what is happening here is that they are adding support for containers. Chromebook is still running Google's modified kernel.
Pure coincidence I am sure, but looking at how Microsoft is marketing using the term "Linux" we see the same thing. They like to use the word "Linux", but the user is still running a proprietary kernel. In that case, it is the Windows kernel.
Linux is a kernel. If you cannot compile it yourself and easily install it on your laptop, then whose "Linux laptop" is it, really? The issue is one of control.
It implies Google is working to make sure third party Linux distros work reasonably, presumably by backporting their fixes and mandating OSS drivers, and easy dev mode support.
From what I can tell, none of those things are true.
I tried to use this to reduce my dependence on a MBP, but found a number of these little gaps that just couldn't quite be filled. I'm hoping these get improved with time, but as of right now, it's promising, but not delivered.
I switched from the mac for my full-time machine a few months ago and have been blown away.
It does two things really well and securely: web browsers and linux. These are the two things I need to do my job.
One more thing to add is that they just added the ability for Linux apps to output audio in the latest stable release, so don't think recording would be too far away, although that has greater security issues of course.
It works, but it is brutally slow and clunky (this is on a 2018 entry-level intel celeron n3350 + 4gb ram chromebook) to run something like firefox. It is usable, but you'll get frustrated fairly fast.
Unfortunately the same can be said about the chromebook in general - have more than one browser tab open on a javascript heavy page (e.g. large google doc + gmail + calendar) and its really slow there too anyway so I guess I cant hope for much.
I feel like web apps have got significantly more complex, while the compute in the entry level chromebooks has more or less stagnated over the past few years. Just doesn't feel like there is enough power to make things comfortable and seamless to use. I've used a couple of intel i5/i7 chromebooks and they've been lovely to use with snappy performance, but the price for that performance is approaching/exceeding that of a "real" laptop (sometimes wildly exceeding the price of a normal windows laptop, or even a mac for the case of Google's chromebooks) so it kinda defeats the point in my mind.
I used to recommend chromebooks to all non-tech savvy people who asked me (parents, relatives, friends etc), now I hesitate to do so because the performance is just not there unless you really pay huge sums.
The only Chromebook I ever did this with was the original Chromebook Pixel, and flashing a regular BIOS onto it to let me treat it like any other computer required specifically opening the laptop up to remove the Write-Protect screw on the motherboard.
https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Remove+the+Write+Protect+Screw/...
You cannot tamper with Chrome OS or access user data without password even with physical access to the device.
None of this works with a 3rd party OS, so you have to disable the secured boot and possible re-flash a different BIOS (similar to unprotecting the bootloader on a phone).
Ooooh interesting, I'd love to read more about this.
Does this logic apply to iOS as well? (Can't evil maid an iPhone due to verified BIOS?) What about macOS?
Security against whom, i wonder. The narrative says, against malicious actors, but way more often than not, it ends up being security against the computer's owner.
For the vast majority of users, a secure by default laptop is a win.
To install Linux/Windows on a Chromebook, you have to flash this firmware, usually replacing it with Coreboot with the Tianocore payload, which is a bootloader capable of booting other OS's. (MrChromeBox supplies this custom firmware for lots of devices)
The major issue you'll run into is support for wifi, the proper keyboard layout and audio. The GalliumOS team has built a custom kernel for a range of Chromebooks, though. I believe a lot of their work will be merged with the main kernel in the future, but its not there yet.
I run Gallium3-Beta (Xubuntu 18.04) on an old Toshiba Chromebook 2, and it runs like a dream (considering the hardware) with around 8 - 10 hours on the battery.
https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/chromiumos-design-docs/...
It'd be nice if Google opened up their actual bootloader so you could do the same with Chromebooks without needing 3rd party tools.
In a 3 OS ChromeBook, what does ChromeOS bring to the table that Linux and Android don’t already cover?
edit: (government didn't have access to the data)
Edit: I understand you don't want Google to have your data, that is fully your choice. I'm just curious what risk you are concerned about.
There's a point for the government. Google is basically beyond my influence. They can do whatever they want with nearly no public oversight.
Google might leak my data. Just like countless other private companies have leaked my data.
> what do you think google will do with it
god only know but the government already has all my sensitive information as it is. Warn about leaking SSN or tax information or addresses...but the government knows all that already. It's nothing new to them
That is untrue of the government.
Admittedly I haven't installed Linux for a few years and don't even have my own computer now so maybe the situation has improved.
*online. You don't really need to keep anything with google other than a log in. My kids have chromebooks, and a google account for logging in and machine control, but then once logged in, they have access to entirely non google resources. (outside of the browser).
- Working hardware and driver stack - including HW video decoding/encoding and graphics acceleration (there are laptops that work with Linux well, but even the verified ones can be hit and miss at times - e.g. wierd Dell XPS issues with USB-C).
- Very good support for high-res retina screens (Linux is getting there but font rendering is still better on CrOS).
- Reliability - it's really hard to break a ChromeOS device (software-wise). It can almost always just be powerwashed and your next login completely restores it back to how you remember it. Don't underestimate this for less developer use-cases.
The last point is especially useful for schools and companies- having laptops which you can easily replace within minutes is very useful for many employees. Especially since CrOS comes with good enterprise management suite.
There's developer mindshare, but I'm not convinced there's much of a business case. I'd say the intersection of high-end Chromebooks and users who'd do gaming/video editing/etc.. on one, is asymptotically small.
There are also lots of CAD/CAM tools that do not, and likely will never, run in browser.
I’d love a web-based version of IDA.
We’re still a ways off; 90% there is still a half day of work each week that I simply can’t do on iOS/browser/ChromeOS. For that stuff I need a “real computer”, and will for the foreseeable future.
It would be nice if iOS got a yellowbox, for example - running a desktop os x sandbox on my iPad Pro for the stuff that won’t ever switch would be really useful.
ChromeOS adding Linux in a VM was a brilliant move.
I'm definitely excited to see how this goes.
They are as “niche” as image editors, or compilers, which is to say: not at all. Pretty much every object in your current field of view was likely designed with CAD, unless you live in an old house or have vintage furniture.
Maybe someone can get Ghidra running on the web using one of those “Java on the web” shims?
Linux for Chromebooks, (A.K.A Crostini): Secure Development
presented by Sudha Broslawsky, Tom Buckley, and Dylan Reid at Google I/O 2019
Some technical details:
* Container: Crostini (default is Debian 9)
* Guest: Termina VM: LXD [1], Linux Kernel
* Host: CrOS: crosvm, Linux Kernel
Drivers are run in "minijails" to minimize exposure.
Files are shared from container to OS via 9P [2]. Google is calling theirs "9S"
Edit: I think this in-depth document may be up to date: "Running Custom Containers Under Chrome OS" https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/docs/+/master/c...
[1] from Canonical, see https://linuxcontainers.org/lxd/
Debian (and all other userspace-run operating systems) are in a container.
It's really vague. But yes sounds like a container with a seamless window manager via Wayland.
I used Arch Linux on a Toshiba Chromebook 2 as a primary laptop for about two years, but eventually moved away from it because my bootloader got un-blessed due to the battery zero'ing out, and I didn't want to deal with it.
I guess Chromebooks are back on my radar!
I had better luck with booting FreeBSD on an Acer C720; but I think Mr. Chromebox's bioses keep getting better and better.
I unfortunately decided to install RW_LEGACY years ago when I set it up. It's now in a weird state where it has SeaBIOS installed but legacy boot is disabled. From what I've read, I need to boot into a Chrome OS recovery to enable legacy boot, which should allow everything to work. But I haven't been able to find a simple Chrome OS recovery shell image for me to boot into, so I'm kind of stuck rn.
[1] https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/chromebook-recover... instructions here: https://support.google.com/chromebook/answer/1080595?hl=en
Title should read "All Chromebooks will also run linux on demand". They aren't linux laptops.
I think it's more like "we'll make it really easy for you to have a nice chroot". Replacing the kernel will still require hoops to jump through.
It is a bit dishonest to call that "linux laptop" on equal footing with a conventional PC that allows you to trivially wipe the whole disk and replace it with your own kernel.
(Or if you like having separate VMs for separate stuff, support Qubes?)
This is cool and a step in the right direction but I'd still prefer to Just Run Linux
Thanks I did not consider this point. Being able to trust your device is important.
I'd love to read more if you know of any resources - evil maids remain the chink in the armor for even the most privacy conscious :)
I often think of getting a more muscular Intel-based Chromebook as a general-purpose development box.
It is never necessary, and always inelegant, to write or say "going forward". Also, it stinks of corporate-speak.
The English language already has a future tense, and this bit of redundancy makes sentences sound more contrived and clunky. Simple rule of style for writing: if you can remove something and keep the meaning intact, remove it. No regrets. "Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication".
I remember the first time I heard this cretinous locution used by a fellow countryman (rather than an American corporate type from whom you'd expect no better). I was gobsmacked and ignored the rest of what he said.
"Going forward" means "from now on, but not including the past". Going forward is a much easier way of saying "from now on, but not including the past". I'm willing to accept that there is a better way, but I'd like to hear what that is. And it can't just be dropping the words "going forward", for the reason I've already explained.
Adding "going forward" does not remove this ambiguity. You just happen to know the correct answer. I still assumed that existing ones would also be Linux-ready, until I read your comment.
> "Going forward" means "from now on, but not including the past".
No, it just means "from now on". It has the exact same meaning as the future tense.
Your comment confirms something I suspected: unnecessary linguistic mannerisms and corporate clichés are a symptom of confused thinking.
Going forward, I will add this to my list of arguments. But not in my past discussions.
EDIT: s/container/vm/
Disappointed they agent just really good Linux laptops where we can wipe chromeOS off of.
Previously a company could issue Chromebooks to all employees and know that employees can't run arbitrary binaries on their Chromebooks.
There's definitely an increased attack surface inside the VM, but that's kind of unavoidable if you want to have a development environment (what this is marketed for). At least Chrome OS offers a secure way to isolate your development environment from your email/banking/etc processes.
Such a step was already necessary to disable Android apps.
Hmm...
Chrome Has a Malware Problem, and Google Needs to Fix It (https://www.tomsguide.com/us/chrome-extension-security-probl...)
Chrome Extension Malware Has Evolved (https://www.wired.com/story/chrome-extension-malware/)
How Malware Keeps Sneaking Past Google Play's Defenses (https://www.wired.com/story/google-play-store-malware/)
New Android Malware Infected 2 Million Google Play Store Users (https://thehackernews.com/2017/04/android-malware-playstore....)
It all worked out fine with fyde os(chrome os flavor by a chinese company recently acquired by neverware) but with some tinkering to reset language to English and to disable fyde os sync/login with google.
I have stopped using chrome due to privacy concerns and would never use chrome os with a google login. It was just an engineers itch to see how i can break free from restrictive hardware platform and get it working.
This same charade is being done by Microsoft with WSL2.
In both cases it serves to usurp future Linux-on-metal users by giving them a convenient virtualized Linux environment, and we all suffer as a result while Linux's hardware support rots away.
It will only be a matter of time before nobody can run Linux directly on consumer machines, and there will always be a proprietary hypervisor in control and your privacy and security compromised.
Resist this and insist continuing to run Linux on bare metal, retain control over your general purpose computing.
I honestly just want a cheap reliable laptop that I can install the Linux distro of my choice (usually Kali for doing pen-testing).
Like on a normal computer.
This is coming from a person who has had to open up his Chromebook and unplug the battery internally when it inevitably crapped itself from OOM and was nonresponsive to any key press.
Another is that most chromebooks have 4gb of ram which isn't much for running a VM on top of an OS.
Am I correct? I can't imagine I'm not since there's no way ChromeOS's security model would work otherwise.
On the other hand, Chromebooks are cheap. So it might be a fun exercise to post a script on github that installs my development environment packages.
Unfortunately I couldn't get crouton to work on a chromebook I bought recently; after switching into a chroot the screen would freeze. I think the issue might be that my chromebook has an AMD APU and an older kernel.
Recommending Developer Mode is never a good idea.
If so, any hope to see Google drive proper support for regular Linux?
Sounds like progress.
Can someone chime in on the viability of Chromebook/Linux as a replacement for not just dev, but common computing tasks as well as creative work? (Photoshop, After Effects, editing etc.)