Item #8 has me worried.
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| Ridcully May 13, 2011 2:48 AM EDT |
Everything I had seen so far suggested Google had a winner, but I did have a niggling concern and item #8 seems to confirm it. My present HP Compaq 6710b can access the web, but if my internet access goes down for 48 or more hours, I can still continue to work on my HP laptop because it can also function as quite a good stand alone computer and all my data and software is held on the machine. Item #8 seems to suggest that unless this Chrome laptop has internet access, and fairly good at that, it could be equivalent to a door stop. Am I missing something ? I'd dearly like to see this laptop challenge the Windows hegemony, and perhaps I am seeing mountains which are only molehills. PS......mind you, it IS aimed squarely at a business use which is a bit different from my application. Perhaps that is the crunch point and if this meets with business approval, that would be fantastic. |
| tmx May 13, 2011 4:19 AM EDT |
But I think if you were going to buy this for business purpose than wouldn't you make sure your business uses internet apps or Google apps? Otherwise you could use a regular netbook which is capable of you guess it.... Google Chrome, offline apps and SSD 2.5" SATA drives. Well that ties in with my other question which is does Chrome laptop allows installation of other OS or the BIOS is locked in similar to Sony laptop? It looks like there will be more than on vendors so I guess that depends on each of them. I assume that I can dualboot ChromeOS and also easily install it on an existing laptop? Sorry for my lazy and ignorant question, but what's the point of ChromeOS netbook beside getting spied on? As a consumer I am still confuses about the benefit that ChromeOS provies me. (Besides quick booting which Linux already provides.) I tried watching the ChromeOS intro video on YouTube, but the narator was an obnoxious guy who patronize me as an idiot: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QRO3gKj3qw |
| cr May 13, 2011 4:27 AM EDT |
Can it USB-boot into a more complete distro on a flashdrive? If so, you can get work done using the stuff on your LAN even if everything beyond the Net-facing router gets vaporized. If not, it's crippleware AFAIC. |
| jdixon May 13, 2011 8:33 AM EDT |
> ...does Chrome laptop allows installation of other OS or the BIOS is locked in similar to Sony laptop? From what I've read, they're implementing a trusted boot process, so installation of other OS'es or booting from a USB drive probably won't work. > Sorry for my lazy and ignorant question, but what's the point of ChromeOS netbook beside getting spied on? If you're already running Linux? Nothing. If you're running Windows, you're already being spied on by Microsoft, so why wouldn't you be interested in a better running, crash resistant, largely virus proof alternative laptop? |
| tracyanne May 13, 2011 5:24 PM EDT |
All Google Chrome OS offers is a different form of lock in that is more dependent on the reliability of your internet connection. |
| Fettoosh May 13, 2011 5:37 PM EDT |
Quoting:From what I've read, they're implementing a trusted boot process, so installation of other OS'es or booting from a USB drive probably won't work. I believe that is correct. This hardware restriction wasn't in the CR-48 pilot program. Does that remind someone of the MS Palladium? I think Google ought to be careful. Besides, why would anyone want this unit when it costs more than even better laptops but does much less? Whoever is interested in using ChromeOS, they always could install it on a comparable laptop and don't have to be concerned about restrictions. |
| JaseP May 13, 2011 6:22 PM EDT |
Quoting: I think Google ought to be careful. Besides, why would anyone want this unit when it costs more than even better laptops but does much less? Your 1st point,... Early adopter tax... Sometimes being first stinks... But leading into... Your 2nd point,... Some WANT users to have less control.... I foresee Chrome being popular as a corporate thin client. Run the stuff only your boss wants you to run... & you hold NONE of the data. I think Google has their eye on this possibility. "Hello, Chrome,... Goodbye IT department..." |
| Fettoosh May 13, 2011 6:45 PM EDT |
Quoting:Your 1st point,... Early adopter tax... Sometimes being first stinks... But leading into... True, but in this case, there is nothing to justify the extra cost and could backfire at the product acceptance. Quoting:Your 2nd point,... Some WANT users to have less control.... I foresee Chrome being popular as a corporate thin client. Corporate is a very diverse environment and many won't hand over control to an outside entity. Besides, you are assuming the corporate users don't have small apps they run locally on their PCs, that is not the case in many enterprise level firms. The company I work for (oil ref) has over 500 little applications, engineering and otherwise. Good luck handing control over to Google. One other thing, How come MS couldn't sell the idea to their corporate customers? I wonder. |
| BernardSwiss May 13, 2011 11:09 PM EDT |
This could be very nice, if it is fairly sturdy, if I can install my choice of distro on it, and if I can swap something larger in, later down the road when my data-needs have grown (and SSD pricing has shrunk) -- 16 GB of storage isn't really that bad; I don't expect a SSD-equipped netbook to hold all my music and or a lot of video. But there's no way I'm going to pay full price (any price, for that matter) if I'm going to be locked-in to Google and ChromeOS via some "trusted boot" Tivo gambit. That's even worse than getting a locked phone from a cell-service provider. Especially considering the privacy issues. I still remember when Amazon retro-actively changed their privacy policy -- and got away with it, despite some publicity. As Sony recently reminded us -- even sweet hardware can turn all mealy and bitter, when the covert, true owner chooses to assert their power over it. If it turns out to be root-able by the owner (that's me!), I might reconsider. |
| dinotrac May 14, 2011 9:19 AM EDT |
@Fettoosh -- I think you are missing a potentially lucrative opportunity for Google: Licensing the technologies to corporations to run in much the way they run intranets net. Let corporate HQ essentially become Google. Better still, create a hybrid server that let's Google be Google and the corporation to add what it wishes, all transparent to the ultimate user. |
| Fettoosh May 14, 2011 12:18 PM EDT |
Quoting: I think you are missing a potentially lucrative opportunity for Google .... Let corporate HQ essentially become Google. When they do that, which I believe they will since Google is not a control freak, they will have the lucrative market you talk about. Not only that, it would be a sucker punch in the face of you know who. I recall few years back, Google had "Google Search Appliance" GSA, a turnkey server which crawls to index all documents on a corporate Intranet. I don't know how successful this has been but details are here http://www.google.com/enterprise/search/gsa.html |
| cr May 14, 2011 7:43 PM EDT |
At least this update of WebTV won't get bought out by MSN. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!