Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


Chrome's mission: Making Windows obsolete

Some people are already convinced that Google will fail with its Chrome operating system. Others think that Chrome can't possibly be a threat to Windows. Both groups are so, so wrong.

First, for those who think that Chrome is simply a failure from the word "go", their reasoning is pathetically flawed. They argue that Chrome will fail because it's based on Linux. What century are these people from?

The specific complaints, such as "From power management to display support, Linux has long been a minefield of buggy code and half-baked device driver implementations." reveal that they're coming from people who know nothing whatsoever about Linux. Linux is tried and proven.

You don't have to believe me, though. Just look at the world around you. Linux rules on devices from your TiVo DVR to your Droid smartphone to you name it. Linux kicks rump and takes names on supercomputers, where nothing else is even competitive. And Linux rules stock markets, where failure is never an option.

The only place where Linux hasn't been a strong competitor has been on the desktop. There are many reasons why desktop Linux hasn't done well: number one has been Microsoft's desktop monopoly. With Google's backing, however, Chrome avoids the Linux desktop's real problems.

The other compliant, that somehow the Web interface isn't sufficient, also flies in the face of reality. Google has been showing us for years now that almost everything you can do on a computer, you can do with a Web interface. So what if the interface itself isn't groundbreaking?

What is revolutionary is that Google isn't trying to fight with Microsoft in a mano-a-mano battle for the desktop. No one, especially not Google, is claiming that Chrome OS is a direct competitor to Windows 7. At the high end, where power users use applications like Autodesk or Photoshop, Chrome simply won't play.

Instead, Google is saying that, for most users, most of the time, Windows is obsolete. And it's not just Windows: Google is telling us that we don't need Office, Outlook, and all the other day-in, day-out Windows applications, either.

Google suggests that inexpensive Chrome OS devices, not Windows PCs, are all that most people need for most of their home and office computing. With Chrome OS devices and Web-based services, you won't need to pay the Windows tax or buy Microsoft Office.

It's a radical approach. Google is saying: sure, go ahead and use Windows where you have to — but keep in mind that, for your second computer, or if you don't need high-end PC-specific applications, Chrome OS is all you'll need.

I can see this working. Chrome OS is faster, safer and cheaper. In addition, unlike Windows PCs, Chrome laptops won't require monthly maintenance to keep them running well. In short, Google is trying to make Windows, and all the software that goes with it, obsolete for most users, most of the time.

I like this plan — I like this plan a lot. Rather than trying to take Windows head on, Google is using 21st century technology to reinvent the desktop operating system and question just how important the 1980s style desktop is today. You'll know it's working even before the first Chrome OS netbooks appear if Microsoft revamps Windows 7 Starter Edition to make it more fully functional and cheaper. Keep your eyes on Chrome OS and Microsoft's reactions against it. I'll be very interested to see how this plays out.

What People Are Saying

ChromeOS is just another

ChromeOS is just another Linux disro, but one with lots of features locked on. No power user will be satisfied with it. If ChromeOS finds any fans, it will be just those who use their computers for the most basic needs. A smartphone might still be the better option for those.

CHROME OS will be the bigest

CHROME OS will be the bigest linux failure

You'll put my data on the Web...

...when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers. Make AT&T the link to my data, instead of the bus on my PC, the USB cable to my external drive? Ha-ha-ha. Thanks for sharing.

A long way

It will be a long way to beat MS. But is it necessary? Everyone who wants it can use Ubuntu and has a stable and efficient system. Yes the majority of PC-Users will use windows, but I am happy as long as I can use Ubuntu.

I'll be happy

...when you can go to Staples and have a choice of operating systems on your PC.

Google rules

Google Chrome will kick Windows 7 out of my laptops for sure. People argue like it is some kind of failed OS, but for me, an average user with average computer needs is perfect. Sending mail, surfing, some games is all i need. And yes, you can play windows games on a Linux, you just need to do a little searching.

Well, I think that time will

Well, I think that time will prove that which one is more effective but I am still not convinced that Chrome OS will defeat Windows.

The real issue.

The real issue with this article is it is poorly written, poorly thought out and regurgitates old concepts as if they were new ones. It really is an editorial, but for some reason online magazines don't feel it necessary to make people who post articles with the blessing point disclose when it's an editorial.

This is one of the cons from the mass communication ability of the Internet- anyone, qualified or not (often not), can post an article.

most of the time?

"Google suggests that inexpensive Chrome OS devices, not Windows PCs, are all that most people need for most of their home and office computing"

OK, but "most" isn't all. What are those people supposed to do when they run into need that Chrome OS can't handle? Perhaps have two computers - one with Chrome OS for "most" things and another with Windows for remaining jobs? But isn't it better to have just one with Windows that can do all they need? Therefore noone really needs Chrome OS.

Linux needs more games

I think one of the problems Linux has in competing with Microsoft on the desktop is something business users might never encounter in their daily lives: high-end video games. Sure, solitaire and mah-jongg work in various Linux distros, but what about the games played by high end gamers? (You know, the ones who are the REAL target market for the high end video cards that you claim to need for rendering 3D images in that presentation.) Until there is a consistent enough platform (i.e. across multiple distros) for developers to release games that are in demand by the "bleeding edge" gaming crowd, Windows will have a substantial advantage on the desktop.

Disclaimer #1: I know that there have been some of these games that can run (quite nicely) on Linux, but there need to be more of them.
Disclaimer #2: Don't say the game developers won't do it - if Blizzard can support Windows and OSX (often with each version on the same disk) then so can other developers.
Disclaimer #3: As per #2 above, if games for Windows can be ported and/or cross-developed for OSX, then Linux isn't too far off... get cracking, open-sourcers!