Hacker News Reader

Comment by i386 | Hacker News Reader

This is a terrible page and the product manager of this thing should be ashamed.

The inmates are truly running the asylum. The technical specs are completely irrelevant to the interests of the majority of consumers. This page needs to show what this is capable of without the foreknowledge of what Chrome OS is or is capable of or what Googles other offerings are.

Sell me a story! Tell me why my life is going to be better with it.

What most people going to ask: Can I use my social networks? Can I do my internet banking? Can I get my photos off of my camera and share them? What about my music? Can I watch movies? How about spreadsheets and word documents?

View on HN

https://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/devices/features-key.h...

Is that better?

edit: To explain, I think how they expect you to experience the website is: http://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/devices/ (from www.google.com/chromeos)

http://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/devices/features.html

http://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/devices/features-key.ht...

http://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/devices/features-device...

http://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/devices/chromebox.html

So, we're looking at a relatively deep link, which assumes the reader has been shown the main OS features and is looking for which specific product to buy. That said, I agree that this page doesn't do much except show pretty pictures and throw out a few tech specs, and won't sell the product on its own.

> Intel Core Processor

Why not specifying what processor and hardware is in the box ?

It's marketing. The emphasis is on the simplicity of the product.

That being said, it's a 1.9ghz Celeron CPU. That can give negative connotations since Celeron is Intel's cheap line of processors.

Good to know. I just got a quad-core desktop for US$377. The Chromebox w/ Celeron would have to print gold to compare to that.

I'd be curious to compare your time from power off, to viewing a web page.

They're very different machines, with very different goals. If you compare the components, then yes, it probably doesn't make any sense for you to get a Chromebox. If you look at the features they both have, then it might make more sense.

If I were buying a machine for my grandmother, I'd buy the Chromebox over your $377 desktop, in a heartbeat.

I have a chromebook with 1.66 ghz Atom CPU. ChromeOS is lightning on it.

Most likely, your desktop would have to print gold to make up for the difference in your power bill compared to a ChromeBox too. My desktop needs a couple hundred watts; my Google TV box needs closer to 10. Running a full-size desktop where you don't need the power is equivalent to a voluntary subscription fee versus a one-time payment.

At least it informs that it's not an ARM processor, so it should be a magnitude faster (more like a PC than a phone).

It's easier to switch parts if you don't specify them.

It's still not good enough for me, though it is a million times better.

"Go fast". The set top Androids are also pretty fast. Also, as someone said, who reboots these days? (though it's a selling point for a media player replacement)

"Stream HD movies without a hitch", ok, that's a selling point, though my cheap Android phone does well enough on "good enough" quality, so I'd expect the Android set top boxes or equivalents to do just as well.

"Go straight online to creating, sharing and enjoying. Chrome devices come with built-in apps for editing photos, creating documents and presentations, and video chat, so you can get everyday tasks done right out of the box."

Ok, though the Android boxes do that too.

"Google+ Hangouts. You can also integrate multiple chat accounts with apps like imo or eBuddy. "

Not a selling point for me (what is a Hangout?)

Edit: I tried explaining myself. Why the downvote instead of a rebuttal? (I can accept those)

Why are you comparing this to Android? Also, I've never heard of an Android set-top box.

I'm comparing them because the form factor and use case look to be exactly the same (heck, the UI looks very similar too, both being made by Google).

Examples of Android set top boxes (the first one has 4 GB):

http://www.dealextreme.com/p/google-android-2-2-hdmi-tv-set-...

http://www.dealextreme.com/p/mele-1080p-android-2-3-internet...

They were featured recently by a local supermarket chain.

What, because they're square? By that measure, an Apple TV, Mac Mini and Airport Extreme are all in the same category.

From a consumer's perspective, isn't an Apple TV or a Mac Mini a substitute product? Especially at the 400 dollar price point of the Chromebox.

I mean, the sales pitch for the Chromebox is: surf the internet, stream movies and use some apps...

The Mac Mini - yes, the Apple TV - no. I don't think there's a lot of consumer confusion between set top boxes and desktop computers.

My point was it's like saying you don't understand why Apple sells the Mac Mini when the Apple TV is only $99.

> Also, I've never heard of an Android set-top box.

Google TV (aka Logitech Revue, Sony Internet TV, LG Smart TV). They've been at your local Best Buy type store for years.

They're Android 3.0 STBs, or in the case of the Smart TVs starting to come out, built into the TV.

The "LG Smart TV" box isn't (usually) Android, it's LG's own Smart TV platform.

(LG has announced GoogleTV/Android support, and showed samples at CES this year but AFAIK isn't shipping them yet).

http://www.google.com/tv/get.html

The LG TV with Google TV (Android) has been available for ~5 months at least. Amazon started selling it in February.

edit: To explain, I think how they expect you to experience the website is: http://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/devices/ (from www.google.com/chromeos)

When I search Google for chromebox the first result is the link that was submitted. I concur: it is a terrible landing page for a product. Consider the first page results for things like macbook, ipad, or mac mini and you can see where the failure lies. They do, after all, have control of search results, don't they?

http://www.apple.com/ vs http://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/devices/

http://www.apple.com/iphone/ vs https://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/devices/chromebox.html

I'd say Google's doing a better job.

Not sure how that's obvious from your links. It'd be helpful if you gave some explanation.

It's nuanced UI-related. There's a lot of psychology involved to understand the holistic effects. You need to include things like someone's brand perception into deciding how effective a UI will be, such as trusted brands will let someone assume that what they are looking at is trustworthy - and therefore of enough value for them to care and look further into it / to get interested.

Hope that helps?

I'd say you should compare Apple's and Google's sales reports.

I'd say a lot more goes into a company's revenue than two single product landing pages. Don't use Apple's earnings as justification for all it's actions.

McDonald's sells the most burgers in the world, that definitely means it's the best in everything burger-related right?

The two products are incomparable. One is unknown, the other is known by pretty much anyone who would be interested in buying a smart phone.

It's the brand of the company that matters; It's the foundation for what a user will expect, and will let them trust what they are seeing in front of them as valuable to them - prior to even knowing anything specific about it.

Yes, Apple shows that showing specs is not necessary: http://www.apple.com/macmini/ </sarcasm>

If specs help sell the things, by all means Google should include them. Whether they are "relevant" or not.

Also note that the info that it is _not_ an Intel Atom CPU is highly relevant IMO, because the Atom is slow as molasses.

But Apple's page doesn't give nearly as much focus to the tech specs as Google's does. Most of the page "above the fold" is given over to a description of what it can do and the details they do give are more about relative improvements (2x faster, etc.) than raw numbers. The specs are available and it's clear where to see them but they're not the first thing the eye is drawn to.

Perhaps they should change the emphasis. But IMHO they should change it in the way that maximizes conversions.

What I took offense at was the suggestion that the specs are irrelevant and by consequence should not be shown _at all_.

(Also note that on my screen, the "fold" is below the Core i5/i7, Radeon HD and Thunderbolt blurbs. Meanwhile even above that, it emphasises "2x faster processors", "Thunderbolt I/O", "upgradeable memory", as well as physical size and software.)

This https://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/devices/chromebox.html is equivalent to that: http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html

This http://www.apple.com/mac/ is equivalent to https://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/devices/

You have to click "Explore", then the "Devices" tab and then on the Chromebox image. Or you have specifically click "Chromebox" in the top-menu.

Using a deeplink and complaining it provides no general information about the whole ecosystem is imho a little bit silly.

Let's talk about the base url: https://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/devices/ that's bad. It should have its own domain.

Apple spends time on different kinda of specifications.

Instead of listing how much it can compute, they talk about how big it is (x inches by y inches by z inches), relative speed improvements (which aren't useful since the consumer may have no idea how slow or fast the prior one is), lots of specs around the price (price is a specification), what kind of I/O it has (thunderbolt), the processor (just not the Ghz), the graphics part (just not which model, but strangely they list the CPU speed over there -- and of course it's the rated speed for the more expensive model) then some generic statements about which Apple software you can run on it.

But because some people still want to have an idea of what it can compute they still offer

http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html

I'm not particularly interested in either device, but it's clear that Google's sales page is almost a copy of Apples page.

Good spotting. But I think Apple's desktop OS is already quite familiar to most people. Chromebox is offering quite a radically different experience that needs to be communicated.

I really would like to know 'what' a Chromebox does as opposed to 'how' it does it. Whereas with a Mac product I'm more interested in the 'how'.

Agreeing with you here.

Apple is great at identifying context. A lot of people don't realize that Apple does "sell specifications", because they're mostly exposed to Apple's advertising, which rarely uses specification. However, when you get to their website, they recognize that you're probably looking for more detail. That shows an understanding of context.

There's another contextual difference they play as well. Have a look at their pages for traditional computing hardware, then have a look at their pages for iOS devices.

Traditional computers:

http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/

http://www.apple.com/macmini/

iOS:

http://www.apple.com/iphone/

http://www.apple.com/ipodtouch/

http://www.apple.com/ipad/

Notice the difference in pitch? There are even identifiable differences in the iPhone/iPod Touch and iPad pages. Which one is closer to a traditional computing device? The iPad. Which page is more specification oriented? The iPad.

A lot of lip service is given to Apple's avoidance of specification, but I think too many people treat it as a black & white scenario: you either do talk about specification, or you don't. Like many stereotypes, this focuses on the wrong distinction. It's not a matter of do or don't, but a matter of when and why. Specification isn't the best way to get customers interested in your product, but once the customer is in the door, you do need to be prepared to communicate the specifications clearly and in a relatable way. Apple is very adept at identifying that transition and guiding the customer on their way to a sale.

I love it how one of the titles for iphone is simply 'Mega megapixels.'.

"What does your phone have?" "Oh yeah, it's got Mega megapixels."

Most consumers don't even know what an Intel Atom CPU is. A large portion might have some vague brand awareness of Intel, though, so mentioning Intel is good in general. For a consumer product to succeed you can't sell it and market it to only people who know the difference between different processors. That's a very small group of people.

Intel "Core" is a brand that's got nice soft rounded-rectangles and friendly blue lettering. It's designed to appeal to consumers. They don't have to know what it is exactly, they just have to recognize it and buy it.

No one thinks the iPad 3 is too slow and any modern Atom processor is quite a lot faster so it shouldn't be a problem at all. These machines are extremely limited by the OS so hardware limitations are a distant concern in my opinion.

It's still early (in the life of this device).

Early adopters will be techies. It's OK to be geeky at this stage.

They can dumb-it-down later.

Ummm, I'm pretty geeky. But I haven't been following Chrome in detail, so I don't have a clue what this box is for or what it actually does.

Reminded me of this: http://www.theonion.com/video/sony-releases-new-stupid-piece...

You weren't immediately aware that this was a desktop version of the Chromebooks that you've probably heard of?

Chromebooks?

Is that what it is? That's certainly not clear from the "landing page". I assumed from the form factor that it was some sort of Home Theater PC (HTPC). Honestly.

no, I had assumed it was an HTPC from the landing page.

I've completely forgotten that Chromebooks even exist because I've never heard of anyone buying one.

Not at all.

But the complaint (and a legit one I feel) is that this page is the opposite. This page has very little information that techies want (as seen by all the complaining here.)

I think he's agreeing with the parent...

... Oh! I did not read it that way at all!

Lol, yeah, it wasn't very clear but I don't think they can dumb page down any more at a later stage, lol

Are we reading the same complaint, or is this more a catch-all of complaints? The root of this thread says-

Sell me a story! Tell me why my life is going to be better with it.

Those are not details that techies want. It is clearly extolling the mythical Apple advertising (the one where they aren't talking about quad core GPUs and retina displays and 5MP "iSight" cameras) that, supposedly, is lifestyle focused.

The Chromebox is a fast, compact home or office device.

The first sentence describes this as a device not a computer. This seems like a poor choice, as is that the page mentions the word 'computer' not once.

And "device" without context is as appalling word without context. When I was an editor I always banned it without context, telling the writers "Would you use the word 'thingy'? Because that's what you've just called it."

I can't even figure out what it is/does.

"The Chromebox is a fast, compact home or office device." That means nothing to me.

> "The Chromebox is a fast, compact home or office device." That means nothing to me.

Fast, compact device used in homes and offices. A microwave maybe? Or maybe a novel type of stapler?

The inmates are truly running the asylum

Exactly, this is why I always tell people that if you let technical people run companies you'll run into huge failures like you see with companies like Google and Facebook.

That's not the first page of the site, It's a link to a spec page comparing the different models available. IMHO, it doesn't differ significantly from this page: http://www.apple.com/ipad/specs/

I disagree (mostly). Technical specs do tell you what a device is capable of.

However, putting the specs up front and not under the specs tab (which is strangely almost empty) is poor. The overview should be pushed up to the top and expanded upon a la Apple's products pages.

Even with all the specs, there's one I care about that's not on here, how much can I store on the device? All the USB ports aren't doing me any good if I can't jam my photos or some movies onto it.

16 GB SSD. You can find it on amazon -> http://goo.gl/oFXeA

That's seriously underpowered. My phone holds more than that and considering the expectation that they've set (not mentioning cloud storage at all) horribly low for what looks like a home computer.

Its also about half the "price" of a smartphone.

ok, 32gb ipod touch.

No, technical specs tell you what a device might be capable of. Only the software defines what computer-like devices can actually do.

how much can I store on the device? All the USB ports aren't doing me any good

I think you're completely missing the point of ChromeOS. You're not supposed to jam photos or movies onto it. It's a web browser in box. Google Docs/Drive, Youtube, Picasa. These are all available on the first boot. Ford doesn't advertise how far their cars can go when driven off a cliff because it's a car, not an airplane. You can't fault them for that.

Lets face it the technical specs are needed because you are just going to hack this baby and turn it into a media server or something.

I wont lie, turning it into an HTPC was the first thing my mind went to.

You are assuming that mainstream consumers are the target audience. I think the audience is actually A) Businesses B) tech savy users.

I suspect both of those users care a little bit more about the tech specs than an average user.

Come on, it's clearly aimed at tech geeks. Nothing to be ashamed of.

As tech geek it's not clear to me what the "device"'s capabilities are. Is it running Linux? Can you install your own OS? Is it a PC? Is it a console? Is it a TV with with browsing capabilities? The page is very vague on that.

The only clear thing is that you plug mouse/keyboard/monitor in it, but that's it. I'm not sure what exactly that "device" is and does.

> The Chromebox is a fast, compact home or office device.

Oh, I see. It must be a printer.

Printers are either fast or compact, but not usually both. So that would be quite innovative.

I bet it makes a mean espresso, though.

If it's aimed at tech geeks, what does it do that we're not already able to do with our myriad of existing devices?

I noticed that it conveniently comes with a remote desktop utility.. you know, in case you want to do something other than use Gmail or Google Docs with it. And you're too comfortable in your chair to just go to your real computer.

Indeed.. Why would I buy this instead of, for example, a MUCH cheaper Android set top? (as in, four times cheaper).

Does it do anything different?

I'm in tech and I don't know anything about Chrome OS, and I wouldn't buy even if I had disposable income (and I do want a media player/home theater PC someday). Heck, I could probably buy an equivalent Windows-based HTPC for a similar price.

See http://s.dealextreme.com/search/android+set+top or alibaba prices.

Edit: once again, why the downvote? Also, I showed it to my coworkers, one of them was quite receptive to the Chromebox.

DealExtreme is kind of a crapshoot, quality-wise, IIRC... and this should have a larger community of English speaking users, in terms of community support.

Whilst I agree to an extent, it is still useful to have some idea what the machine is likely to be capable of.

For example, does it have enough USB to accommodate a mouse/keyboard as well as an external disk and a digital camera?

Can I plug it into my Monitor and my HDTV at the same time?

Or does it have sufficient oomph to run HD video or graphically intensive games?

At this point google will be targeting early adopters who will be more tech savvy, and also hoping that they recommend it to their family and friends.

Until we can offload close to 100% of our computing to the server, specifications for client side machines will still be relevant.

It reminds me "HP Invent" motto. One thing that Mark Hurd made very clear during his tenure was that "invent", at that point, was less than "sell" (or "market", maybe). Hurd's point was that people were spending too much time on the lab and less time talking to customers. "If innovation is fuel, selling it is oxygen".

The imagemap to the right of the specs is horrible as well, you have to hover over their tiny "+" icons to see the quick selling points which are actually of interest to consumers. Saying "boots in 7 seconds" is great, but only if the user can see it right away.

At this stage in its life, the Chromebox is most certainly geared to people who very much care about specs. It is not going to be Sally Average who's signing up for one, and really if they did they would likely be disappointed.

Every ad doesn't need to ape Apple, you know.

With advertising and spec sheets like this, you're right. But if they tried a little, their demographic could be massive.

Come on Google, use an ARM processor, make it a dongle with a HDMI plug that attaches to the majority of cheap LCD displays, and price it at $99 or free with the first year (per seat) of a Google Apps Enterprise Account. Now add a local ActiveDirectory proxy as a stadalone router-like box and hit Microsoft where it hurts. (Before Larry does).

No, no, that just makes too much sense to actually happen.

Add bluetooth to the dongle and add a wireless keyboard/mouse for $25

They already have a bluetooth keyboard and mouse set for the Chromebox, though I've not seen it priced yet.

Here's an image:

http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/electronics/samsung/sam...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com