Until you've seen it, I don't think its safe to make those assumptions.
Yes article, I am looking at you: "it should be faster", "Google is promising boot times measured in seconds", "If Google can come up", "we might just have the ultimate", "Google may use these"
That is: should, promising, if, might, may. Not a single bit of concrete data at all, just pure speculation.
I know Google has released quite a few solid products, but aren't we giving them too much credit on something yet to be delivered? Google may know how to run servers and write web-apps, but why are we assuming they know anything about how to build a decent client OS?
If Microsoft was to release anything like this, with just as little data, the entire tech press would be up in arms about how this was going to fail.
I guess I'm getting about as tired about the Google-hype as the iPhone-hype. I use both, but that doesn't mean I believe in magic before I see it.
For good reason. They have ample precedent of huge Microsoft failures. Google, not so much (yet).
I believe Google will pull this off, because it entails repackaging and refining software that's already well on its way.
I wouldn't believe Microsoft will pull this off, for 2 reasons: (1) they don't want to threaten their Windows cash cow. (2) business partners (Intel) don't want netbooks to become an acceptable replacement for full-fledged laptops.
None of the reasons is technical.