Why Google's Chrome notebook will succeed
msnbc.msn.com
msnbc.msn.com
Besides, most people I know, would pay 100$ for the ability of running a "real" OS.
Is this worth an extra $40? It feels like it is, even if I rarely use any of these features. But there's probably also some value in being able to say, "This device is only for the cloud, period". But I feel like I'd rather get a tablet device (the Nook Color is already a mere $249).
And be their support guy forever?
For friends and family, the support I provide is almost never about state or ramifications of state. The most common set of questions are actually around printing (why does it print the webpage name at the bottom of the page? I don't want that. Or the computer says it's out of ink, but I just put new ink in it). Chrome just complicates this.
The next biggest set of issues is hooking up the laptop to TVs. Nobody did this a year ago, and this holiday season I've already gotten like three calls on how to do this.
Windows and MacOS have gotten sufficiently mature that a lot of the old issues just don't come up any more (or we've past that stage where there were a lot of adult complete computer neophytes... even my parents are decade old computer users now).
Anyway, if page setup and connecting external screens are your worst problems, consider yourself very lucky. Most of us have to deal with the occasional malware infection (luckily, I don't). The horror stories are often amusing.
I ran w/o any virus protection until about 2005 on a PC and never got any malware. Lucky? Maybe, but I see so little malware amongst "my users" that I wonder where the ruckus comes from. In any case, I do now have everyone on MS Security Essentials.
ChromeOS doesn't complicate page setup, but it printing. With printing you need to have a "server" computer hooked up to the printer. Now there are issues around the other computer being turned on, and diagnosing issues at the host computer rather than at the machine their doing the print job from. Basically take every problem you have today, but then add another computer in the middle.
I mean, if you're comparing running a Chrome browser under Windows 7 Starter with running the Chrome "OS" on top of Linux, it seems to me the biggest difference will be the option of persistent storage, not the polish of the user experience.
That said, I have two netbooks and both are dual-booting Windows 7 Starter and Ubuntu 10.10 desktop.
I think the biggest problem I have with it is that -- barring a revolutionary cheap price point -- there seems to be no Unique Selling Proposition or compelling use case that distinguishes it from the capabilities of existing netbooks.
Think about that for a second: A $99 'laptop' that you don't need to worry about upgrading or going out of date like a regular PC, that has a much longer battery life, is lighter, smaller, and 'just works' for it's intended purpose better than a PC.
It sounds nuts, but after having used one of these for the last week, I am more convinced than ever that Microsoft/Intel is in big trouble unless they do something pretty radical and perhaps painful to their immediate existing business.
*edit -- I've just read that Cr-48 runs Atom. I was told it was an ARM chip. Certainly the chipset requirements factor into my argument here.
Asus differentiates its wide range of netbooks with price point variations based on different battery specs, hard drive size, Bluetooth, etc.
The only variation I can see for commercial roll-out would be in, say, the 3G module added by a particular service provider. Given what has happened with the added "features" of some Android devices, I'm not sure that a Verizon-specific Chromebook would be a big seller. A vendor-specific would seem to lead to contracts and account personalization details that would kill the anonymity focus of the device.
Alas, Google TV fell apart because it didn't have great app support, and more importantly, that content owners didn't want their content shared through the browser.
(I am not a Google TV user.)
Google whiffed in making a play for the TV space and their competitors are not going to give them an opportunity for a second chance.
3rd party Android apps aren't supposed to come out until Q1, but I'm not sure they are going to hit that date considering the "don't show anything at CES" stance Google has recently taken.
While it may not interest a broad demographic, it definitely serves a purpose.
- A computer does not cost as much as a car, so it's not as expensive to buy more than you need.
- It can't be cheaper enough than ordinary PCs to accept the restricted functionality it offers, because ordinary PCs are already available at the bottom of the pricing barrel.
- Most people need wireless connectivity not more than once or twice a year.
- The cloud is overrated.
1. Not if you don't have the money for a computer in the first place. My grandparents would really like to get online, and the difference between a $400 laptop and a $200 netbook is significant.
2. Not if all you need is the basic functionality this device offers.
3. This is just all sort of wrong if you don't live in a metropolitan area.
4. That's your opinion, and a valid one, but I love the cloud. I'm moving everything I can to it. Of course, I don't personally concern myself too much with security, but I still think it's a great tool for a lot of casual computer users.
2 > Maybe, but there's also a question of the quality of that functionality. The cloud equivalents of almost any piece of software are significantly more limited even for non-power users.
3 > Meh? Do people in rural areas lack wifi? Do they take their laptops out of their houses to places without wifi but with 3G signal much more often than people in urban areas? I doubt it, but maybe there is something about rural people that I am not aware of. :)
4 > I think the cloud has a lot of potential, but as it is right now I believe it has been oversold. But you're right, there are many valid opinions on this one.
At least in the UK, almost everyone uses wireless rather than wire connections in the home 73% of the UK population have home internet access, and 60% of the UK population use the internet every day.
I think there's a huge market for a personal home browsing device, which is a large use case of the ipad, available here at a much lower cost.
Where do you get this idea? Why in the world would I ever want to "wire" my house for the internet by running cat5 cables everywhere when I can buy a box that will do all the work for me?
I also don't have any numbers to prove this, but I'm fairly certain my download/upload speeds are faster on cat5 than wireless as well. It's really noticeable when I remote desktop another computer on the network -- on cat5 I notice very little latency, while on wireless I get constant fps lag.
# [These days] the only people who know how to take advantage of all [the functionality of their computers] are the people writing malicious code.
# If it's $199 or less, it'll be a big hit; likewise, if it's over $299, it just won't make sense.
Bad points:
# Even if it doesn't compete on price with iPads and Android tabs, it's going to compete for the same audience... if you have a tablet, you won't want this also.
# [People] are going to wise up, and realize that they've been paying for too much computer.
[we (Americans) have been paying for too much car for years]
I've always seen the main roadblock to computer adoption as the babysitting nightmare that is the Windows PC. 100 computers in a village or remote school are 100 headaches for somebody. Now a good percentage of those issues are irrelevant. Sure there will be other problems, but this is a huge improvement.
Need to figure out a way to get dropbox to somehow work and would like to get a command prompt to be able to SSH into the server.
You can also flip the developer switch in the battery bay for more control.
Thanks
As for their OS, it's Chrome-the-browser with a login page and a few more hidden about:config style pages, no frills. I think my wife will love it when she gets home. All of her computing use cases are internet based, and we were discussing buying her an iPad, but she'll probably try to steal this for her couch computing usage. SD slot and file management seem a little iffy right now (downloading a PDF from google docs worked, uploading a picture from my digital camera didn't).
As for the command prompt, you can hit ctrl-alt-T to get to the console, but it's very limited. SSH is password only, not key based, which is practically a deal breaker for me.
The Verizon wireless setup was painless, and when connected it shows you how much data you have left in the context menu which is really nice (although you do have to create an account with Verizon and provide a CC number, even for the free service. I figure it's stored for immediate plan upgrade options since they don't have overage fees).
As someone else mentioned, I think a Google hosted VPN service would be really nice for this. More of the "no worries OS" since 100mb is very little wireless data and I'm not all that tempted to be daring and hop on public wifi and access any personal data.
Android, by comparison, is the Microsoft Windows of mobile operating systems. It requires customization, maintenance, and care. If I recommended an Android device to someone I am certain I would be paid regular visits as the designated mechanic. And I'm certain I'd have a checklist of stuff I'd have to do before even handing it over. I've used one. I see how people here are constantly fiddling on their significant other's behalf.
I think people here discount ChromeOS because they can work around Android's quirks and are happy hackers. They can't see how software maintenance is more like incomprehensible house chores than playing with Legos.
For many this has been a key selling point with the iPad. But this one also has keyboard and Google Docs...
This requires nothing but an internet connection. Just turn it on and go. (in seconds)
Like what?
For example your company would have to run entirely on web apps already or kiss all of your existing infrastructure goodbye (shared drives, word documents, excel documents, externally received word/excel, Lotus Notes, Exchange, etc.)
Also if your company depends on using any other sort of software it's a no go, anything installed like AutoCad, Photoshop, Development tools, etc. I think many industries have one key piece of software that they can't exist without that must be installed.
And how does working in the cloud make an organisation more nimble? If anything it makes them more exposed to risk and of unintended downtimes when their internet connection plays up.
For example one of the companies I'm contracting with uses manymoon. Aside from being a bit poo, every now and then it stops working. Sometimes it's their servers, sometimes it's our wifi, sometimes the internet connection. It's not a key piece of software, but it makes you think of the kind of risk you're exposing yourself to. What if tomorrow google apps was shutdown due to a court order or bankruptcy? I know google won't go bankrupt, but there's no saying your other providers won't. Or a patent war which shuts down a key part of the system?
Obviously there are massive benefits like not having to run your own infrastructure, but it's still a risk.
All can be virtualized. You'd be surprised how many large companies are (legally) running Office and productivity applications on say, a Citrix server, and already treating full blown (expensive) windows clients like "dumb terminals"
The difference can be imperceptible, even to someone whose tech savvy. (Local desktop icons, no noticeable decline in performance, etc)