Amazon's top selling laptop doesn't run Windows or Mac OS, it runs Linux

It was the opposite for me. I've been using it for some time and stopped due to the constant crashing.

Each new update I had hoped the stability would improve, but it seems they're for new features only the new models could flawlessly run. Alas, I gave up a month ago. It's sitting in my pile of netbooks.

I think this is a true statement and I agree completely, but only because Joe Averageuser doesn't think about OS's _at all_.

I think this very much does signal a sea change in the way people use their computers.

There will always be folks like you and me who want to get down to the nuts and bolts of things and start tweaking, but most people just want to check their email/facebook and work on that spreadsheet/document for the boss.

For years we have all been talking about what moving 'to the cloud' would mean for computing as a whole and now it's happening. Your data goes with you wherever you go and your computer is a super cheap and nigh-disposable way to access it.

The writing is definitely on the wall. In fact, at this point, it's been there long enough that it's starting to fade a little.

Microsoft is a lot larger than is readily apparent. That's because in the enterprise they're about as entrenched as can be.

Take away excel and the impact would be about as bad as taking away google would be (or maybe even worse).

MS will be around in some form or another for a long time. The question is more whether or not they'll be able to leverage the remains of the old into something new. My guess is not as long as Ballmer is still around.

Chromebooks might just be for you...

http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Cell-Phones-Accessories-S...

Additionally in an office full of software developrs there are multiple people who are looking to pick one up or have already done so ( Myself included ). I think the "not very tech savvy" crowd would be buying the name brand laptops with Intel processors and Windows since that's what we have trained them to do for 20 years.

> Amazon's top selling laptop doesn't run Windows or Mac OS, it runs Linux

That's not necessarily true with UEFI secure boot.

Stallman, on the other hand, is remarkably consistent and sticks to his principles. I doubt he'd be happy with the Chromebook

Ecosystem. This is a limited function device, which is bad, but anything you can do on it you can also do on a full Linux distribution. Which means that anyone who can get by with such a device will have no barrier to switching if they are ever inclined to do so.

That is the difference from a Windows machine. Because if you have Windows then you start accumulating Windows apps and you become accustomed to their interfaces and your files are in those formats, etc. etc. Windows locks you into Windows. ChromeOS doesn't lock you into ChromeOS; you can switch to a full desktop Linux distribution whenever you want and everything still works.

Not for $249 and not on ARM.

The part about logging into your Google account is definitely questionable, but it's a cloud device and that's what you're buying in the end... the fact it has a developer switch is what makes it more like a PC in terms of control and not like a tablet or phone where installing your own OS has a few hurdles.

It's a matter of perspective, really.

Windows has been Public Enemy #1 for so long they've got tunnel vision, that's how.

...and the claim in the body text: "True, there is Linux under the hood but you have to go out of your way to find it."

So, huzzah for another great victory for Linux (like TiVo, Android...) made possible by hiding Linux as much as possible.

Google's NativeClient gives you native apps.

The great thing about Chromebook running Linux is that more work is put into Linux kernel, Linux harware supporting and Linux software support.

Linux is not GNU. Locked down devices were explicitly allowed when kernel devs opted to keep GPLv2 instead of moving to v3. They don't care about openness of devices but about the source code.

Perhaps not for consumer freedom, but think about it in this way: You're getting a laptop largely subsidized by a corporation which is somewhat more guaranteed to successfully run your own brand of Linux. If you buy a PC with Windows and use only Linux, you are paying a lot for something that isn't even tangentially useful for you.

Do you mean Win RT? In which case that's much more locked and you can't run your own binaries or alternate OS's on it, or did you mean Win 8, which isn't really locked at all?

I agree it's not that 'open' for the average consumer, but the very existence of a developer switch makes this substantially more open than RT devices.

Just to set the record straight, I was at the last Linux Crowd™ meeting and nobody was cheering over some inaccurate link-bait title of an article in zdnet.

* Linux gains from having many people using it, what is effectively happening when a lot of people are buying Chrome Books. So ARM support is likely to become even better, and hardware manufacturers are going to build something more "linux"-friendly

* You can do whatever you want with it if you turn on the developer switch, so that's a plus

* You don't actually pay for a license for windows 7 if you buy this chromebook, so you are not supporting "closed source software" with money

* Google as a company has done considerably more for open source software than Microsoft (or so I think)

These would be my points, why I think of the chromebook in better regards as Microsoft Surface. However, it would be kind of awesome if you'd have an open, touch-enabled platform (like the surface) and could use it however you want i.e. installing Ubuntu on it. In that case I'd probably be really tempted to even buy one, though it'd come from Micro$oft.

Dumbification does imply simplification though so I think it's generally a right direction and may be one factor that makes ChromeOS appealing (the problem there though is that it lacks a few fundamental features right now, but that's more easily fixable).

Everything is just "it's just like Windows and Mac OS, except it's not" and not always equates to "free, open source, no cost, no licence fees, customizable, faster, etc..." but never anything that was a true blue selling point.

To the users that have the know how to switch to Linux, all it sounds like is a slight upgrade over their existing setup with less software support.

I think Chrome OS is slowly getting attention because it gets out of your way completely. No setup, no worries about losing files, extremely low risk of viruses or malware, you already understand it, and it's the easiest to leave in case you don't like it.

Android and ChromeOS and TiVo and your embedded-Linux toaster don't have this problem. They don't need to run legacy X applications and have monolithic GUI's built from the ground up.

The lack of a real winner takes all windowing solution on Linux means everyone has their different flavor of desktop, all of which are slightly different everywhere. And not like Android different, far worse as far as fragmentation goes, especially sound (if you feel like pointing out sound isn't part of the user interface, I'm going to point out you're not the person who feels undeserved by Linux as is).

I predict Android on the desktop before Linux on the desktop, and if Linux comes to the desktop, it will come mostly from the work of VALVe saying "This is in" and "This is out" and pick the winners and merge them together into a cohesive whole.