Hacker News Reader

Comment by bowlofpetunias | Hacker News Reader

My wife got to test-drive Chromebooks for work. She's not exactly a power user, but found the limited functionality and restrictive environment incredibly frustrating.

Her conclusion was that computers should do exactly what the user wants to, either because they are incredibly well designed withing specific constraints (iPad), or because they simply do as they're told (PC's, Macs).

The Chromebook is neither, it basically does what Google thinks people should do, without any of the depth and sophistication of Apple's opinionated user experience. They may hit the sweet spot for some, but it seems to me to be a very small niche.

The end result was that my wife was ready to throw the thing out the window, and handed it over to me with the words "see how long you last before you want to smash it".

View on HN

My wife got to test-ride these new Ford Auto-Mobiles for work. She's not exactly a power equestrian, but found the limited off-road capabilities incredibly frustrating.

Her conclusion was that horses should do exactly what the rider wants to, either because they have been trained, or because the rider knows how to ride them well.

The auto-mobile is neither, it basically does what Mr. Ford thinks it should do, without any of the depth and sophistication of a purebred. They may hit the sweet spot for some, but it seems to me to be a very small niche.

The end result was that my wife was ready to drive the thing off a cliff, and handed the keys over to me with the words "see how long you last before you want to smash it."

</snark>

The problem I think your wife had was that her work environment isn't designed for Chromebooks (like having the infrastructure like gas stations for cars). If someone uses Google Docs and GMail for all of their business communications, and Hangouts for chatting, and Chrome Remote Desktop to access remote machines, and Chrome Web Printing to print, etc... then the Chromebook is awesome.

And to be honest, many (if not most) workplaces will never make the switch.

This is true, but at least when I buy into the M$ ecosystem I can still use my machine for whatever silly other things I'd like--Windows (for now, anyways) is still not solely devoted to content consumption and walled gardens.

You think "the web" is a walled garden? Or is solely devoted to content consumption?

I can create YouTube videos from my Chromebook, for instance.

I'm never getting rid of my Windows desktop machine. Like, never. But I'm never getting rid of my Kindles, either. They're totally, completely different from each other. My Chromebook fills its own niche, too.

You do appreciate that, by posting videos to YouTube, you are sharecropping someone else's walled garden?

We're debating the capabilities of a Chromebook. Using purely web APIs, I can upload a video to YouTube. Any other web page could use the same APIs, and then you're not in a walled garden.

I wouldn't use the term "walled garden", but Chromebooks are almost perfect for me. The only thing stopping me getting one is my terrible Internet. (Which will go in 2 or so months). Once I have no Internet I'm not sure I can do much with a Chromebook. Unless I've put some other Linux on it. But at that point I may as well screw an RPi to the back of my monitor.

>M$

Are you twelve?

(that was a joke for the clever reader)

(you'll note the dissonance between the nickname and the actual position of the company which is being admired)

(the company having gotten such ire [and that silly nickname] is actually quite open in all the relevant ways here, which is funny)

You are making the same point as bowlofpetunias (albeit prepending it with a strained metaphor.) The vast majority of work environments aren't designed for Chromebooks, which means that Chromebooks aren't suitable for the vast majority of work environments (even if the Chromebook is exceedingly great at its narrow use cases.)

Once again, that's very much like saying "the vast majority of work environments aren't designed for Email, which means that Email isn't suitable for the vast majority of work environments."

It's flawed logic. Work environments changed, and Email became nearly ubiquitous. In my experience, moving to browser-based workflows has really improved my workplace, and my ability to get things done, well, quickly, with my team mates.

I think the logic is circular because popularity is circular. I.e. popularity is a positive feedback loop. In order for the Chromebook to earn widespread acceptance, its utility will have to marginally surpass not only the utility inherent to desktops, but also any advantages derived from the incumbents' maturity.

imho, I don't think the invention of the Chromebook was a bad idea. But gaining acceptance will naturally be an uphill battle.

Did your wife have to support a perpetual international war to support the fuel for her chromebook? Was the chromebook responsible for thousands of deaths per month? Was the Chromebook that much better than the horse? Was your analogy glib but off the mark?

no, no, no and yes. Arguing for Chromebook is arguing for limitation. If the Chromebook actually was as much of an improvement on web-surfing as the car was to the horses, your analogy might start to gain traction. The fact that it just barely holds its own, for a similar price, with much huger limitations doesn't appeal to a rational mind.

Chromebook is moving the goalposts for a machine. "Just forget about running any software that's not a web browser and you'll be fine! <waves hands> My grandfather only reads the web, so it's fine for him."

Here's a tip: every platform starts off lightweight and accrues cruft. Even Linux (cough ubuntu) and OSX (cough 10.6). If Chromebook grows in popularity, they'll hit the same issues other major OS vendors have hit. There's nothing magic about them, except they've lowered the goalposts of acceptability criteria.

If you want a lightweight machine, put linux on a laptop with an SSD and it will blow your socks off.

I did put Linux on a laptop with an SSD, and I also switched my workflows to be either entirely online, or through Chrome Remote Desktop. That machine is a Chromebook.

The best parts for me is that my data is completely backed up, I have to use two-factor authentication to get into it, my machine updates itself, and I don't worry about viruses. Just switching to linux on a laptop doesn't do those things for me.

And by the way, no one ever won any prizes for pointing out that an analogy was flawed, if you took it too far.

I can have eight computers, and be working on the same document on all of them. Web-based document creation, for my workflows, is vastly superior to the old school way of doing things. And Google Docs is the best instance of it, for me, so far.

You'll try to destroy the analogy again, so I shouldn't bother, but once upon a time, you BOOTED your computer to a game disk. And people like you opined that people would never run their games from inside Windows, because the performance was BY DEFINITION worse, and why would you want to, anyway?

The cruft of a Chromebook is poorly designed web pages. And unlike other systems, which build their cruft in, Google has been keeping Chrome relatively clean - it's the minimum browser you need. The magic is they didn't build anything in.

My wife got to test-read your HN reply for work. She's not exactly a power viewer, but found your limited humour and restrictive mindset incredibly frustrating.

Her conclusion was that comments should state exactly what the user wants to state, either because they are incredibly well stated withing specific constraints (see other comments on this page), or because they simply do as they're told (see other comments on this page).

The comment is neither, it basically does what you think it should do, without any of the depth and sophistication of others' opinionated experience. It may hit the sweet spot for some, but it seems to me to be a very small niche.

The end result was that my wife was ready to delete the thing out the browser window, and handed it over to me with the words "see how long you last before you want to smash it".

Restrictive mindset?

Ha! I'm the one sharing the fact that I've creatively come up with ways to use a Chromebook that work great for me, and other people are saying that their world view will not change, and they won't even try.

I think you're pointing that stick in the wrong direction.

The problem I think your wife had was that her work environment isn't designed for Chromebooks

Which pretty much means the pundits are right.

Chromebooks are not suited to anyone who isn't letting Google own all their data for all their tasks. i.e: most people.

No, it doesn't mean that.

Most work environments weren't designed for email, but things changed.

And no, it doesn't need to be Google services to make a Chromebook useful. You don't even need a Google account to make a Chromebook very good at a lot of things.

Just to add a competing anecdote - my mother absolutely loves hers. She spends 6+ hours a day on it. She runs an etsy shop, keeps up with email, keeps up with social networks. She hasn't had to worry about anti-virus software, printer drivers, OS updates or backups. It's a huge win for her, and for me.

Conversely and factually rather than merely anecdotal, my Brother laser printer, Canon dye sub and big HP laser printers don't work if you plug them into a chromebook. Nor will it print to my print server. Windows 7, 8, 8.1 and OSX work instantly.

As it's a sealed featureless box, how would one proceed here?

Definitely annoying. I'd tell her to buy another printer before buying another computer though.

I wouldn't. I'd expect it to work. This is 2013, not the pre-GDI printer fragmentation nightmare of the 80's.

Chrome Cloud Printing.

You have a Desktop plugged in to the printer. You set up Cloud Printing, and now every time you're logged in to a Chrome Browser (or Chromebook), from anywhere on the planet, you can print to that printer.

Chromebooks don't replace desktops, not for most people. They enhance the crap out of them, in my opinion. Chrome Remote Desktop is awesome.

It doesn't work with my dye sub printer or HP network laser. I tried. Documents never arrive at the printer.

Windows has had remote desktop since 1997. It's had remote assistance since 2002.

I've spent 7 hours a day, 5 days a week for 5 years working over remote desktop sessions with shared sound, disks, printers and even recently USB devices. That's awesome.

Google has two-factor authentication and does the tunneling for Chrome Remote Desktop for you, so you don't have to set it up. From my Chromebook, I can remote control a Mac or a Linux box, too.

You've tried setting up Cloud printing on your desktop, printing to your HP network laser, and then using it remotely from another Chrome, and it never worked? Your experience is the opposite of mine - it works great.

Remote assistance requires no configuration. It doesn't do two factor authentication though. I have PuTTY which is pretty good at remotely controlling my OpenBSD machines. I don't use OSX.

That is correct. Nothing at all happened.

I can remote into my home desktop right now. I believe with Remote Assistance, someone has to set it up on both ends, correct?

I wouldn't be surprised if your workplace is blocking Cloud Printing. That's a bummer.

That is correct. I wouldn't want it any other way. Two-factor or not,a compromised google account is a lot of eggs in one basket. Normal remote desktop is available to my desktop machine via authenticating with the firewall first.

It doesn't. My workplace is home and I am the network administrator.

Why wouldn't a tablet be suitable for this usecase?

Perhaps now. Prices are getting cheaper and tablet multitasking is getting better. Keep in mind my mom is a "non-technical producer" which means a large amount of typing and multitasking. A built in touchpad/keyboard and a tabbed OS is a bit more optimal than a touch interface with optional external keyboard.

>Her conclusion was that computers should do exactly what the user wants to, either because they are incredibly well designed withing specific constraints (iPad), or because they simply do as they're told (PC's, Macs).

The iPad and other Apple products are designed specifically to do what Apple wants, not the user.

Seems to be a big leap in this argument between the "Chromebook doesn't fulfill my needs" to "it only does what Google thinks people should do". Someone who is frustrated with the Kindle Fire or iPad could make the same argument. Throwing around flowery buzz words like "opinionated user experience" doesn't really make this argument hold more weight.

I purchased a chromebook with no intention of using ChromeOS on it, but tested ChromeOS on it for a weekend to get a feel for it and see if it were the sort of thing that I could recommend to family members. (Traditionally my go-to advice has been "Get a Mac", even though I do not use a Mac, but they never listen to me...)

Anyway, I knew going into this weekend experiment that it would not satisfy my needs, but I was surprised at just how shit it was. Typical tasks that my mother performs could mostly be done, but none of them could be done well. I could browse images from a camera flash card, but the image browser was absolute rubbish that anyone would hate. I could similarly view video files... most of the time, depending on the format and encoding. My mother uses VLC right now on windows, she doesn't know the difference between an encoding and a container (indeed probably doesn't even know that there is a difference), nor should she. Google has built software that can play local videos, has build hardware that can play arbitrary videos (Using Debian, mplayer or VLC run just fine), but have put together a product that has arbitrary technical limitations that my mother would not understand.

And no, the standard ChromeOS apologist shit of "You just don't understand the use case" does not apply here. Google has built a product that does provide the functionality I tested, it just does it poorly. If you are going to do it, do it well. If the OS had just flat out refused to provide me with ways to do those things, that would have been one thing, but that isn't the situation with ChromeOS.

Many of the problems with ChromeOS are not a result of limitations with the concept of ChromeOS, they are the result of a shoddy implementation of the concept of ChromeOS.

(Specifically, I purchased a Chromebook Pixel, and used the most recent ChromeOS sometime early in June of this year.)

I agree with your conclusion. I gave my wife my chrome book pixel that I got at Google I/O and she did not like it. Her needs were pretty basic most of the time (Spotify,gmail,Facebook) but the few times she needed to venture out of that it was a pain. And the Spotify "app" sucked and so did the battery life.

Switched her to 13inch Air after about 2 months of using the pixel, and she loves it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com