Hacker News Reader

Comment by whodidntante | Hacker News Reader

Chromebook users.

I loved my Pixelbook, fantastic piece of hardware. When that ended, I went with an Acer Chromebook. Works fine, just not the same.

I would go for a Mac Air or Neo, but only if I could install ChromeOS.

I will most likely get a Googlebook, and would be more likely to do so if it was not named Googlebook and did not have Gemini built in.

View on HN

> I would go for a Mac Air or Neo, but only if I could install ChromeOS.

To each their own, but this is absolute insanity.

ChromeOS is a very competent, fast, and easy-to-use operating system. For my family, it's basically perfect. It's virtually unbreakable and anyone can pick it up quickly.

Windows is a hot mess and frankly I wouldn't recommend it to anyone outside of gamers. For the technically competent, there's nothing to gain on Windows, and it will just get in the way. For the those less technically inclined, Windows means complexity and viruses. Also most Windows laptops suck major ass.

MacOS is better, especially if you have an iPhone. But even MacOS is a bit too complex for the less technically inclined. If you have an android phone, then a chromebook is 100% the way to go for those people. Also, chromebooks get crazy software support these days, on par with macbooks.

> ChromeOS is a very competent, fast, and easy-to-use operating system.

It also locks you into the cloud services of an advertising company that loves harvesting your data to help find new ways to sell you things.

That’s no better than Windows (without a lot of effort and a constant game of cat and mouse only achievable by technical users). At least Google’s cloud services tend to actually be good, if you made peace with the tracking and privacy concerns.

I see this too often. But, realistically users do not care about the harvesting as it is unseen and behind the scenes. Most people just want get stuff done in a competent, fast and easy-to-use operating system.

>It also locks you into the cloud services of an advertising company

this is pretty much any company these days. microsoft is guilty of the same.

>But, realistically users do not care about the harvesting as it is unseen and behind the scenes.

Like them I think I am also surprised not because that isn't the case, but because it's wild to see that take on HN, which skews way more towards privacy/owning your compute.

I've been working in the privacy space for ~4 years now and have worked across, homomorphic encryption, Federated Learning and finetuning.

I've also run multiple user studies on privacy during my time doing a master's in privacy at CMU. almost 10/10 times users will choose, easy to use and accessible over complex and more control over their data.

In fact, for one of the Mag7 we proved that, users only want to have the feeling of safety and don't really care what gets done with the data.

very unfortunate, but this is the world we live in.

Users absolutely care, what a terrible comment. Users have ZERO choice. Tech companies are not regulated, tech companies abuse their monopolies at their users detriment, and tech companies do not have consumer councils to help mitigate these issues.

What it actually appears to be is we have a market where undemocratic business leaders are deciding the direction of technology in a country that only seems to benefit them and not the population.

What a terrible mindset to have and I sincerely hope you never have any capacity to yield power in your life.

They do have a choice, they just don’t want to a) pay for anything or b) be cut off online society

Man you clearly need to talk to people outside of Google. I'm glad the vast majority of Americans hate tech companies and their leaders if this is the mindshare they purport: "you don't have a choice, fuck you."

Great attitude that goes well with voters.

How did I not describe a choice? If you don’t want to be tracked and manipulated, don’t drink the free beer. Turn off JavaScript. Pay for a search engine. Run your own mail server. Host your own fediverse node. Accept that life will be harder. Don’t be so naive as to think for profit companies aren’t going to milk everything they can from addicts who can’t quit their “free” services. Go start a co-op or something if you want to change it, but you can’t compete. And the reason is because they offer it for free and hide what you’re really trading for it in the EULA.

If you think I’m not mad about it, you’re not reading between the lines. I’m just a realist. This is what Peter Thiel meant by “free email was not enough”.

Until your google account gets locked for some unknown reason and you there is 0 support and recourse. And now you can't even log into your own computer.

The is so rare. Such things can happen even with bank accounts (if you are a foreigner in many countries).

If you use your own Ubuntu/Debian or even RMS certified disro same can happen. An upgrade and you see only a xorg blinking cursor.

>If you use your own Ubuntu/Debian or even RMS certified disro same can happen. An upgrade and you see only a xorg blinking cursor.

This can be fixed yourself, whether that's hopping into a TTY or having to boot a live environment and chroot in. You aren't at the mercy of some major company's support people.

Even without fixing it you should be able to get at the files on the drive for use on another machine, or backing them up if you're gonna reinstall.

Keep boot live environment? You always carry USB? Learn security. Chroot?

You don't learn or understand modern bootc?

It can’t happen to my macbook.

This happened recently to my kid and it was a nightmare of a week trying to resolve it.

I’d rather tie my identity to an org with customer service.

this does not mean anything logical. Billions use android. Some will be affected due to any company or ID etc.

Pretty sure you can visit your local apple store and see many people asking for shattered screen or lost iphone. They did lose their accounts.

Moreover even if you use macbook - if you lose google or apple ID situation is same. (for the majority) appstore is important. See your comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48111545#48123885 you are happy to give everything to iCloud but don't like Google?

I can also store all my data in hetzner cloud. Use chromebook only as a hardware. If Google account is blocked then use Guest session. No account needed. Your turn?

Shatters screens and lost iphones don’t affect your apple account. Sign in to your new device with your apple id and your stuff is there.

Moreso, there’s no google store to go to for help if your google account gets locked.

Of course you can store data on a thumb drive (or hetzner cloud) and use that without a google id. Good luck with that. And it’s not scaleable for billions of users.

Again, apple provides support, google does not. I don’t want my livelihood dependent on a google id.

they do. You do lose 2FA with shattered screen.

Android phone can be used without google account (I do it). You cant even use Apple iPhone without.

They don’t care because they don’t understand, or don’t want to. It’s a scary thing to confront the fact that you are psychologically and demographically profiled so that people can manipulate you to extract as much of your money and attention as possible.

So is Apple. Went to the Apple store recently. To buy something they told me scan a QR code. The code popped up

"Get Start and Personalize Your Apple Store Visit" and a big button "Share Now"

Under the button in small text was a link to "customize" which said they were going to harvest your contact info, your carrier account, your phone model and applecare info, the list of all devices you own, the list of all your subscriptions, your purchase history, your reservation history.

They said all of it was for ads (to make more customized recommendations)

So much for "Apple = Privacy"

> I see this too often. But, realistically users do not care about the harvesting as it is unseen and behind the scenes.

And when it's brought up where people do know, there's always these attempts at gatekeeping by speaking for the average user like a priest would speak for God.

The person who asked that cares, and didn't ask "the average, realistic user", because you can't ask an abstract concept questions.

Apparently you can create a local account on a chrome device [1], although I can't vouch for the process; otherwise cloud auth is tied to Google, yes. You could use a guest account for everything, if your really want; but then you lose out on persistence.

But as long as you accept that everything you do is in a browser; which is reality for the vast majority of computer users, there's no real lock-in. You can just as easily use the browser version of Microsoft Office as the browser version of Google Docs.

You're certainly locked into Google for the browser and for updates, unless you do a lot of work. But it's been a while since it was common to get commercial OS updates from a 3rd party.

[1] https://www.xda-developers.com/how-use-chromebook-without-go...

So does Windows. macOS locks you into a company that hoovers up your data but pinky promises not to sell it and will fight tooth and nail to have prevent others from doing the exact same thing on their operating system.

If you care about privacy, Linux and BSDs are the only options, but actually good out-of-the-box Linux laptops are few and far between.

Except for Chromebooks, of course.

Big difference is that you can use macOS without a user account. Can't do that with Windows without some hidden terminal magic.

MacOS doesn't have to force it, users will gladly sign into their iCloud account. Virtually nobody uses the Windows Store, but the Mac App Store is a necessity given how restricted 3rd party apps are on macOS now.

Since when is the Mac App Store a necessity? It's still possible to download DMGs straight from the internet and install the .app by dragging it to /Applications

The only restriction to 3rd party apps are unsigned apps. Very rare these days, mainly small hobby projects. You can still activate them through the System Settings.

Unsigned apps are a pain, but you can have your app signed without being in the macOS App Store. Nearly all my apps are signed and non-App Store. e.g. Homebrew requires Casks be signed, so anything you can install via Homebrew is a single line to install without additional restrictions.

Though if you want to get rid of the persistent nag on your Dock to log in to your Apple account, that's a significantly higher level of magic than what it takes to use Windows without an MS account.

(I just installed Windows a week ago without an MS account, and it was a 30 second step during setup to skip an MS account. The steps to get rid of the macOS nag are daunting enough that I just live with it permanently.)

There’s a pretty big difference as Apple can’t access the data stored in iDrive. Only you can locally.

Big difference from google and microsoft where everything you type and do is being tracked and fed into ads.

wild that we're talking about which OS locks you up more w.r.t an apple product.

Yes, this is true, and I myself am degoogled. Mostly, except YouTube, but I am off Gmail and stuff these days.

But, we need to pick our battles. For most people the reality is they have a Google account anyway, and they will log into and sync on any device. So, it makes no difference.

Does it matter?

Your friend using Android or iOS may have typed your exact address, phone, signal id, gps, etc on her Google/apple account. And now?

If you fly to use you are giving more info.

Are you running your own bank? Pepper are you? What happens when you join job (tons of papers?)

I used to think so too, but when my extremely-non-techy mother's Chromebook died, she was able to switch from chrome OS to Ubuntu with minimal fuss. Chrome OS has some specific features, but if you just need a web browser Ubuntu works fine.

You say this only because she hasn’t been ransomwared yet, which is impossible on ChromeOS.

It's also very rare on Linux. On Linux, 99% of software comes from trusted repositories. The odds of randomware existing in the Ubuntu repos is low.

It's not the wild wild West like Windows. There are structural reasons why Linux desktops are less susceptible to malware, as well as the obvious marketshare issue.

It's also a non-issue if you use Ubuntu like chrome OS. She doesn't have any data stored locally.

More generally, this feels roughly equivalent to saying "it's better to live in a tent than a house, because a house will crush you when an earthquake happens."

I support a lot of old folk on laptops that are less technically inclined. All they want is Windows because familiarity, despite Microsoft making things unfamiliar every release.

Counterpoint. I use Windows and MacOS daily and they are both awful (and occasionally wonderful) for different reasons. Windows on a laptop sucks simply because I can't close the lid and put it in my bag without it catching fire, but apart from that I don't care too much either way.

I use Linux CLI all the time but every time I've tried to use a Linux desktop as a daily driver, it's stopped working one day for reasons that are beyond my ability to care enough to figure out.

MacOS is too complex? What web site even is this?

Sorry, I mean for some users who can barely use computers as it is, so mostly the elderly. For us obviously it's not too complex. But for some, it is, and it's also largely overkill because some groups don't want to run software anyway. They just need a file browser and web browser.

It's the only OS for my 93 year old mother. I can manage it remotely, too, and she can't mess it up.

My mother (80+) runs Fedora, and I believe she is incapable of messing it up, even if she did have the root password. Doubleclicking random exe files off the internet is almost uniquely a Windows problem. I dunno about Macs - its users are usually technically illiterate, but Apple has done a pretty good job of locking users out of their own machines.

> Doubleclicking random exe files off the internet is almost uniquely a Windows problem.

Tell that to my partner's grandfather, who managed to find and install malware chrome extensions on his chromebox.

Gosh I can’t believe how lucky I am. I’m not technically illiterate and I haven’t been locked out of my machine.

A computer filled with great hardware that gets its hands held behind its back by shit software sounds like the soup de jeure for apple.

I used DOS,then Windows, then Mac for a total of almost 40 years. I think using Windows and OSX are insanity, but to each their own.

I now have a machine that boots almost instantly and just works without maintenance, upgrades, or compatibility issues. I can throw it in the river, and for $300 get a machine that will be up and running in about one minute. I can use multiple machines (small/cheap to bring on a trip, laptop for casual working, larger machine for more serious work, even at the same time. I have full access to everything from my iPhone, or access to some computer anywhere. I use remote VSCode via Crostini to do development work (terminal, vi, Codex, Claude Code) on a bunch of beelink boxes and Hetzner servers.

I cannot run installed software and I am dependent on Google for email, files, photos. For the latter, I have backups of my email and files (photos are not as easy).

Life is simpler this way.

You can use Google services on a Macbook and have installed apps.

Not for $300, you don't.

I take more risks with my Chromebooks than I do with a MacBook, such as mountain-biking with it or leaning it in a car when visiting sketchy neighborhoods. Chromebooks offer a good-enough on-the-go, full-Unix experience, with an all-day battery. Sure, M-series Macs have higher performance and >20h batteries, but those nice-to-haves re well in excess of what most users need, most of the time.

I think Google is alluding to the fact that they'll continue Chromebooks but they aren't promising anything right now, or even clarifying much outside of the specific reveals.

They've won the netbook market and they'll have existing contracts and education market to always account for. With messaging that the ChromeOS experience will change and may have some things removed to refocus it I think the assumption is that it continues within it's specific use currently.

I don't get how life is simpler.

We are way out of context window, occupied by OS chores.

Life was simpler when we were dumber, but now, no. Stop lying.

Do you not want to be able to develop while being offline?

No reason that you can't. ChromeOS has supported Linux containers for over a decade.

I am retired, and don't need to - I have a couple of beelink's (just need my home wireless running) and a couple of VPS if I really want to do things away from home, which I don't

I cannot remember the last time I wanted internet access but could not find it. Cell coverage is pretty good and reliable these days.

also - I do not like developing on my personal machine. I got into this habit a long time ago - I would always use a remote Linux box, and now with LLM's I ride them bareback (or maybe they ride me). If I trash a machine (which has not happened yet), I just rebuild it or find another box.

With AI dependence, unless you are a holdout, offline development isn't really a thing anymore. Perhaps to do some code reviews, but actually producing new code?

That is sad.

Somewhat, it's a tradeoff we are making willingly

I haven't made that tradeoff. I still code myself without agents from time to time.

Nothing changed. You can still code the old way. All those 100x productivity gains are probably closer to 10% productivity gains after you account for all the added debugging and steering.

You totally can, I got Linux+VSCode+Docker running on my new Chromebook in less than 15 minutes, without doing any funny stuff.

But for optimal DX it can still be preferable to VSCode tunnel into your big powerful dev box that has everything configured just right.

I feel like we are of a similar age. This is great advice. My small company is growing and i'm thinking this is the path so I don't need an IT helpdesk.

Do you still use vi or were you meaning vi(*) and actually use something else? I've been on vim for a while but happy to go back to vi

actually both. vim for "real" work, but also vi when I am moving though different machines that have minimal tooling (production or production support machines, which may not have vim installed). I have been retired for some time, so I am programming for fun, and have recently gotten into it a lot more with Codex/Claude. Before I retired I also used more visual editors with debuggers since we were on Macs in addition to vi/m. I have found that I don't need those fancy editors with the LLM's as I am just editing markup/config files and browsing code.

While I think Chromebooks are great, I would consider that if your company grows, not everyone is comfortable with vi/m, and a Mac does give you some nice options for higher end dev systems.

I'd love to read more about your setup. I'm doing about half of what you have.

It is very simple:

I have multiple Chromebooks and an extra monitor, and use Google for files, email, photos. I can grab my cheap Chromebook and throw it into my backpack, don't bother with a case. I have learned to live without using installed apps.

I have a couple of beelink boxes at home that I stash in the corner of a room, connected to my home wireless. I use Crostini to remote into these boxes to do any development. I treat these boxes the same way I treat my Chromebook - disposable. I have scripts that will reconstitute my dev environment from GitHub and my backups.

If I trash a chromebook, I grab or buy a new one. I can do pretty much anything (except dev work) from my phone if needed. If I trash a dev server, I use another one. I also have some virtual machines at Hetzner. I keep my backups there, as well as any apps I want public.

My only concern is my Google dependence. That is the trade-off for being 100% cloud based and treating my devices as disposable.

you can do the same with mac os and also have a great user experience; perhaps not the cheap replacement but doesn't feel right optimizing for replacement given that my devices last around 5 years anyway

The first party integration is the difference. You won't have your files and photos instantly there when you login and you'll still have to download and setup those apps.

Yes, you will.

MacOS has idrive and iphoto with all your files in the cloud.

If I walk over to your mac and log in with my appleid, I have all my stuff instantaneously.

I work across a bunch of machines (all macos) and all my stuff syncs across them pretty seamlessly.

Costs way more than chromebooks, though.

I work for organizations that spend thousands per year on MDM to turn macOS running on Macbook Airs into effectively ChromeOS.

For certain use cases, a computer that can do nothing whatsoever except run the absolute latest version of production Chrome is better than any other device.

Please refrain from making claims like "absolute insanity" without backing it with some sort of commentary on the claim. It really isn't worthy of HN.

see guidelines https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

The HP Dragonfly Chromebook is pretty good. The Asus models are also very nice. The Acers are hit or miss; quality is iffy on those and there's a zillion models so it's impossible to find a specific one.

I wish Framework would keep supporting ChromeOS but alas. You could put ChromeOS Flex on one - it doesn't have Android apps, which is fine for me, and it does support the Linux environment, which is excellent.

Why would you want ChromeOS and not Linux?

ChromeOS is linux. It's a Linux distro that works correctly out of the box, setting it apart quite strongly from all other Linux distros.

Then why do people install Linux in Chrome books?

The number of people who have "installed linux" other than ChromeOS on a Chromebook is probably in the low single digits, while the ChromeOS installed user base is in the hundreds of millions. For any given thing someone is going to try to put linux on that thing, but it is not a common use case for Chromebooks that we need to discuss.

I was genuinely asking. In “my circles” a Chromebook is a cheap laptop that one can install Linux on. As in, “oh, I just picked up this used Lenovo Chromebook and installed Ubuntu on it”.

You'll get a more informative answer from them. I couldn't speak to their motivations. But I certainly wouldn't advise doing it. ChromeOS has better security and performance than Ubuntu, and it automatically updates things like peripheral firmware that Ubuntu isn't even aware of.

It feels like the wrong tool for the job in both directions. If you wanted a host platform for Ubuntu you'd choose something else, and if you wanted platform software for a Chromebook ChromeOS is the right choice.

> ChromeOS has better security and performance than Ubuntu [...]

I'm going to need a citation on that, especially performance. Doubly so if Crostini is put into the mix.

> [...] updates things like peripheral firmware that Ubuntu isn't even aware of.

Like what? WiFi cards, etc.? Isn't that generally in kernel already? What kind of updates do you think are not done by Ubuntu or another Linux distro?

Last I tried ChromeOS was on the Pixel Slate way back when. A buggy, unstable, clearly not properly tested, unperformed mess that I would not wish upon my enemies. Glad to see it has improved to usable now, but that it is better than any other Linux distros, I can't say how considering even being on par with e.g. Fedora would have been a miracle not to long ago.

Happy to admit that purely on the UI/UX, ChromeOS is very solid in my opinion, arguably and subjectively the most consistent and user friendly designed desktop environment I know. Far more consistent than anything MSFT or Apple have provided in quite some time, everything looks like it should, placement is easy to grasp and reliable with a clear identity. Consistency wise, only Gnome can hold a candle to the strictness with which the ChromeOS team execute their vision, though there is the clear divergence in the Gnome team pushing new UX innovations and concepts even if they are controversial and may need to time to learn, whilst the ChromeOS team seems purely focused on the most clearly easy to master approach one can take.

> I'm going to need a citation on that, especially performance

Multiple reasons. ChromeOS ships an optimized, platform-specific kernel, built using LLVM with LTO and AutoFDO. No other distro even attempts this. The only one that has even considered it is CachyOS that offers optional LTO, or Gentoo, where you can DIY LTO, but neither supports FDO.

Another reason is that Chrome GPU acceleration actually works on ChromeOS. IPU webcams work, too. On Fedora, Arch, and others you'll be patching and rebuilding kernels to get IPU.

> Like what? WiFi cards, etc.? Isn't that generally in kernel already?

This is another aspect where the ecosystem is the advantage, not the technical details. Chromebook makers are required to furnish firmware updates. ChromeOS will update (silently, without user intervention or notice) everything in a Chromebook: SSD controllers, battery management, radios, touchpad, USB PD controllers, the Titan security chip, the CPU, whatever. This is very different from the situation on random Linux+hardware combinations where the only source for many of these updates, if they are available at all, would be to reboot to Windows.

> ChromeOS ships an optimized, platform-specific kernel, built using LLVM with LTO and AutoFDO.

Ok. How significant is the difference they gain from that? If this yields such major gains, there must be benchmarks showcasing it. At the same time, there must be reasons why something isn't widely adopted if it can provided tangible upsides. Would be very surprised if Clear Linux (rip) and similar in spirit distros didn't go far beyond those optimisations, if they can yield measurable benefits. Even then though, there are measurable performance tradeoffs for anything running via Crostini which I know for a fact any compile time optimisations won't make up.

> [...] where the ecosystem is the advantage, not the technical details. [...] SSD controllers, battery management, radios, touchpad, USB PD controllers, the Titan security chip, the CPU, whatever.

I just checked and I think you are confused. ChromeOS uses fwupd [0] for those things, literally the same toolset and even sources (LVFS) to e.g. Ubuntu [1]. There is no difference in ecosystem, there is no advantage for ChromeOS here. I have to also point out that these are not "silently, without user intervention or notice", Google says so themselves [2] (except for UEFI/firmware but that was the only one you excluded in that list). Fortunately too, you wouldn't want ChromeOS (or any OS really) to do such major changes silently for many good reasons.

The "technical details" are important here. They are the same, they are not automatic, they can't be superior one way or the other. It is really neat that these solutions are so robust and reliable users of ChromeOS can start to think they must be some special secret sauce, when in fact they are just FOSS solutions we have had for a while. Heck, even the verification/testing isn't unique to ChromeOS.

> [...] random Linux+hardware combinations where the only source for many of these updates, if they are available at all, would be to reboot to Windows.

This does both Chrome OS and the FOSS projects it is built around a disservice and is not true. And not just because I can tell more than one instance where using Windows on a newly released laptop during the early Renoir days yielded driver issues which were unresolvable because Windows Update found it necessary to force a faulty AMD driver onto my system every time I provided a network connection, even after I manually tried to suppress that specific update and had already installed the proper driver, all while Renoir support in the then current Linux kernel was flawless out of the box along with Wifi, touch screen, etc.

It is great if everything feels polished and I feel the UX is great on ChromeOS, which may lead someone to think it is better than alternatives even where it can't be. But in regard to updates, how could they be, they are literally using the same solution with the ChromeOS team being happy to give credit and admit such.

[0] https://developers.google.com/chromeos/peripherals/fwupd-gui...

[1] https://documentation.ubuntu.com/project/SRU/reference/excep...

[2] https://developers.google.com/chromeos/peripherals/fwupd-gui...

> when in fact they are just FOSS solutions we have had for a while. Heck, even the verification/testing isn't unique to ChromeOS.

You answered it yourself (last paragraph). The main point is everything is in FOSS but not packaged like chromeos.

I strongly want bluefin/silverblue/bazzite etc to succeed but even installation is PITA. UI is not really that polished. Whether or not great one like proper integration (a.k.a like Apple) like passkey in Google Chrome/Android etc.

- Installer of bluefin etc takes super long - issue with btrfs - no idea. Dev says upstream issue - not us. - flatpak is still pain for normies - we wanted to deploy it to a large compter pool - ecosystem is controlled by Google. So fewer failures with hardware.

- And polish (like you say). Why can't <distro> make it so that uefi etc is hidden?

- Normies expect sleep to work. This is still not perfect with distro (not their fault).

Many including me - want OS to be like an appliance. Just works.

Have you tried configuring secure boot - with - every single protection on Ubuntu /any distro?

Just google: Mathew Garrett On The State Of Boot Security implement everything and comeback.

Maybe slate with android? If you disable android in ChromeOS it a dream to use. Everything just works.

And remember normal people (i.e outside USA) already have Android phone. They just login and use. All passkeys etc. synced and running. All these are a pain in fedora etc.

In the real world, Chromebooks are excellent candidates to install Linux. They are highly compatible, low power, excellent size/weight, and run great. You don't sound like a person who has any real world experience with this topic despite the authoritative tone in your responses.

Battery management tends to be best-in-class on Chromebooks, it's far from certain that you'll get anything nearly as good after installing 3rd party Linux on it. That's my #1 reason for not even considering it (despite having installed Linux on many different Chromebooks years ago when they were new and ChromeOS was still literally just a browser).

My <$200 ARM Chromebook got around 12-14 hours battery life new (though as with my M1 Macbook has degraded to probably 70% capacity after 2-3 years). It draws essentially no power in standby (ChromeOS will enter an ultra low-power hibernate-like state seamlessly after a while). I've opened it up a month after last using it and it turns on in <10 seconds having lost a couple percent.

Updates are seamless and add like 5 seconds to boot time when they apply during a restart (thanks to ChromeOS A/B update model there's no loading spinner or anything, you reboot and it's done. Update countdown extortion a la Windows isn't a thing either, you can stay on an non-updated Chromebook for months without a reboot and the most you'll see is the same passive "Click Restart to Update" button in the notification area.

I use the built-in Linux VM all the time, it runs GUI apps like VS Code without any issues, and my ARM Chromebook runs all sorts of regular Arm64 Debian builds for GUI or terminal out of the box. I turned off the Play Store for Android Support, in the past when Linux support was weaker and web APIs in general weren't as capable I needed it for some specific apps but don't really have a need at this point.

The security model on ChromeOS means that untrusted scripts/installers running in the Linux VM are completely isolated from anything on the browser so you (or your proverbial Grandma) don't have to worry about credential stealers/ransomware/malware. You can copy files between the ChromeOS filesystem and the LinuxVM filesystem but a process running in Linux can't cross that boundary and are confined to the sandbox.

Plus, very much unlike my Macbook, I can actually install an app from Github or compile myself without 7 clicks and three different dialogs each time (as is the case with Apple's aggravating security hassleware on MacOS Sequoia). Proving you can have a heavily locked down, secure model without actively making the user experience as miserable as possible (to "encourage" use of the built-in app store).

It's easily the least intrusive OS experience of all the major OSes, and completely gets out of the way without drawing attention to itself. And sure, Google is an advertising company, I get it, but my Macbook advertises iCloud products and Apple TV shows to me more than anything on my Chromebook.

With the 10 year Chromebook support policy, I've got a crazy amount of life out of all of my Chromebooks. It really is liberating having an OS that de-emphasizes its own existence in a world where I have to fight ever changing MacOS deprecation and security restrictions and Windows bloatware being thrown over the fence in every other update.

Just use Chromebook via Crostini to remote access a headless Linux box. For me, the Chromebook is the right tool in both directions.

I'm not going to buy a machine just to remote into another machine when I could've just bought a proper machine in the first place.

Not sure I understand why you would not want to separate your personal machine from your dev machine. Even more importantly, I do not know what you want to tie yourself to a piece of hardware.

I like having multiple personal machines that are always in sync with each other. I also like have multiple dev machines that I don't care if I (or my AI) messes them up.

That does not make sense. Many people don't want 1TB RAM machines to carry around.

FWIW I'm one of those people. I have an old rotting pixelbook that I installed Linux on back-in-the-day thanks to Mr. Chromebox. It was a huge improvement over chromeos but I'd never buy a chromebook to install Linux on it again because there was too many small annoyances like needing to fix the keymap every time I did a clean install (the caps lock key was bound to super and I vaguely recall some craziness around the higher function keys), and sound didn't work.

Chromebooks make a pretty nice, Linux friendly machine. They're usually cost optimized given the market they address, but that's fine if it fits your needs. Sometimes they have "weird" hardware, keyboard/mouse controllers and stuff at least wasn't always "pc standard", audio controllers seem to be commonly outside mainstream as well.

It's nice to run Linux on a machine that was built to run Linux. No silly windows key, no fighting with firmware that was built for windows first. I have a Chromebox that was a great mini desktop and the pricing was nice. My first Chromebook ran FreeBSD pretty well once it was no longer needed for ChromeOS, etc.

You have to shop carefully, you want something that's easy to put a MrChromebox firmware on and doesn't have any known issues with the OS you want to run. It's been a while since I purchased a ChromeOS device and the current state is different than it was then; I'm not sure how easy it is to find reasonable options now, but there were plenty of good options in the past. You also want to be sure that it has enough ram and storage for you needs or that those are expandable, but I think soldering ram and storage is pretty common across the range.

Crostini is kind of a joke, but I use it to remote into real Linux boxes. For me, best of both worlds.

"Works" is kind of generous. Try connecting a printer for example.

Having very recently (and unsuccessfully) tried to connect a printer to "real" Linux, that's not really a relevant point against ChromeOS.

In the end, after hours of frustration, my solution was to print the document from my (amusingly, Google Pixel Android) phone.

This is actually the perfect detail to discuss. ChromeOS printing is literally just CUPS, so it has the same functionality as any other Linux distro. If you have a modern IPP printer on a normal home Wi-Fi, you can expect it to just work. This covers most people's needs.

Where ChromeOS shines is that it has never been affected by severe and numerous CUPS security vulnerabilities like CVEs 2024-47175 through 2024-47177, which were unauthenticated remote vulnerabilities, while Ubuntu and Fedora (and all other major distros) were affected. Why? ChromeOS sandboxes the hell out of these kinds of subsystems. CUPS runs in a PID namespace, network namespace, mount namespace, on a read-only filesystem, with seccomp filters. It cannot use the network, ever. It can only communicate over a pipe with a network proxy. The proxy is only active if and when a user tries to print. The proxy is also in a seccomp jail that prevents it from doing anything except enumerated network traffic and the pipe. The proxy is written in a safer language than CUPS itself, and protects CUPS from malformed, malicious inputs by validating both PPDs and print requests.

That sounds like some nice engineering.

b/c you don't have to think about the operating system and updates. I posted about my experience here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48051902

...basically, I have "nerd cred" and run linux on my desktop, but for my laptop I wanted: disposable (no leaky hard drive), zero maintenance (no kernel modules for sound drivers), battery-portable.

90% of the time I'm wanting `vim` + `git` + `ssh`, and 20% of the time i'm wanting to run some random stuff locally. Chromebook is basically zero friction and 1/10th the price (and 1/10th the capabilities) of a "very nice mac laptop", plus you can pop into a very capable linux VM (w/ passthrough GUI support) without a lot of ceremony.

Windows laptops are out of the question, and pure linux laptops (until only very recently) were of marginal support and low battery capabilities (especially "close it and stuff it in a backpack for 3 days").

> Windows laptops are out of the question, and pure linux laptops (until only very recently) were of marginal support and low battery capabilities (especially "close it and stuff it in a backpack for 3 days").

Dell has sold laptops with first-party Linux support for nearly fifteen years, to say nothing of other smaller OEMS.

As for the battery issues during sleep: that actually has to do with a combination of the BIOS settings + downstream ramifications of secure boot (and how the old-fashioned "hibernate" used to work). Unfortunately, that isn't specific to Linux. My MBP has the same problem, and so do the same laptops running Windows.

> (no kernel modules for sound drivers)

What century did you write this in?

In the year 2026, on my Linux laptop (T14, Linux 6.18.26) I ran the following:

  lsmod | cut -f 1 -d ' ' | grep snd | wc -l

And it responded: 53. Fifty three kernel modules are dedicated to sound. I, of course, never had to install any of them by hand, or take any other direct care.

Those modules are all in tree. The distro chose to build them as modules. You could have built them into the kernel. I don't think that counts. When I hear about manually futzing with "kernel modules for sound card" I think you're running out of tree modules in 1997.

https://github.com/pop-os/pop/issues/3961

"""last week: Pop!_OS 22.04: kernel 6.17.9-76061709 — module BTF validation cascade boots system to emergency mode #3961

Thanks for taking a look,

Quick update — I'd already recovered before seeing this comment. The path that worked: boot Pop_OS-oldkern, run sudo apt install --reinstall linux-image-6.17.9-76061709-generic linux-modules-6.17.9-76061709-generic && sudo kernelstub, reboot. 6.17.9 came up clean. The reinstall's postinst hooks ran update-initramfs automatically; /boot/initrd.img-6.17.{4,9}-* are both freshly dated 2026-05-06 (~11:44 / 11:46), and kernelstub copied them to the EFI partition. Verified: journalctl -k -b 0 | grep -iE 'btf|failed to validate' | wc -l → 0. """

With ChromeOS you get both.

I have used Linux for 20 years, but only for development, and I will only develop on Linux.

For everything else (email, files, photos), I want a browser. Used to be Mac/Osx, but got tired of being managed by it.

Just my preference. You can do everything on Linux, just never felt comfortable with it.

You want a browser for files?

Sure, but I'd never want that browser to be Chrome. Extensions, especially ad blocking ones, are important.

I agree I would rather have something other than chrome, but I need to trade that off with my desire for the benefits of a simpler system.

If Apple came out with a SafariBook equivalent, I would consider it. Might even do both if I could auto sync between them.

The Neo is the closest and the good thing is it has an actual OS to install apps onto. I'm not sure if via the Linux containers Firefox can be installed on ChromeOS.

We tried Chromebooks for our kids, and the instant I could buy Neos I did. It might just be that we're fully bought into the Apple ecosystem, but I had a hell of a time trying to get stuff like parental controls figured out on ChromeOS.

You don't need parental controls at all. Google will make sure they see exactly what they need to see...

You can install ChromeOS on a Mac: https://chromeos.google/products/chromeos-flex/

It's a great stopgap OS for older hardware.

> I would go for a Mac Air or Neo, but only if I could install ChromeOS.

Similarly, but I would extend that to mac mini/studio, but I would like Linux on it. I like hardware, but I hate the OS there.

As a linux desktop user, I would buy it only if I can wipe ChromeOS out of it.

> I would go for a Mac Air or Neo, but only if I could install ChromeOS.

Is this satire?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com