Google "Chromebooks" launch
These are not typical notebooks. With a Chromebook you won't wait minutes for your computer to boot and browser to start. You'll be reading your email in seconds. Thanks to automatic updates the software on your Chromebook will get faster over time. Your apps, games, photos, music, movies and documents will be accessible wherever you are and you won't need to worry about losing your computer or forgetting to back up files. Chromebooks will last a day of use on a single charge, so you don't need to carry a power cord everywhere. And with optional 3G, just like your phone, you'll have the web when you need it. Chromebooks have many layers of security built in so there is no anti-virus software to buy and maintain. Even more importantly, you won't spend hours fighting your computer to set it up and keep it up to date." These systems have Linux inside, of course, though one would be hard put to tell from the announcement; LWN reviewed a ChromeOS system in January.
Posted May 11, 2011 20:06 UTC (Wed)
by loevborg (guest, #51779)
[Link] (15 responses)
I'm not saying that Google will be successful or that stripping down Linux to a minimal scaffold to support the browser is a good idea. But I'm very curious how the strategy will pan out.
Posted May 11, 2011 22:09 UTC (Wed)
by b7j0c (guest, #27559)
[Link] (5 responses)
not sure what difference it makes if it is on the "desktop"...linux has been a part of consumer's lives for years now
Posted May 12, 2011 5:31 UTC (Thu)
by pr1268 (guest, #24648)
[Link] (4 responses)
> meh, millions of people already use "linux"...tivo, android etc Yes, but those millions weren't using a computer, but instead a DVR, smartphone, etc. While what you say is true about Linux being part of the consumer landscape for years now, there still seems to be this general perception amongst the masses (or at least most everyone I know) that all desktop computers and standard-form laptops will have Windows. Or MacOS. While OLPC has been around for a few years now, it was never targeted to the masses (despite their G1G1 campaign). Regardless, I do see this as an opportunity for Linux to gather yet more momentum in the Desktop (er, laptop) arena. It's already starting to happen with these "pad" computers (e.g. Motorola Xoom). We'll see...
Posted May 12, 2011 13:13 UTC (Thu)
by jzb (editor, #7867)
[Link]
"Yes, but those millions weren't using a computer, but instead a DVR, smartphone, etc." See "The Computer in My Pocket" by Benjamin Mako Hill. You are talking about a computer when you're talking about smartphones -- and one that's going to be used by a lot more people than just PCs/netbooks/laptops. It's really important to think of these as computers and not just 'devices' if you care about software freedom.
Posted May 12, 2011 16:44 UTC (Thu)
by sorpigal (guest, #36106)
[Link] (2 responses)
If you want to look at it that way neither will the users of chromebooks. A desktop is as much "not a computer" as is a DVR if, as far as most people can tell, it's not a general purpose device. Certainly your android phone is more of a computer than a chromebook will be.
Posted May 14, 2011 1:12 UTC (Sat)
by pr1268 (guest, #24648)
[Link] (1 responses)
While I agree with you (and with Zonker's comment, above), the point I was making was that, from the perspective of the "millions of users", a computer is either: Again, I agree—a desktop (and standard-form laptop) are just as much a computer (or not) as a DVR or smartphone. And, yet the DVR and smartphone have substantially more computing power these days than a typical Pentium-90 from 1995. And I'll also admit that the above two definitions are passé.
Posted May 16, 2011 20:17 UTC (Mon)
by jzb (editor, #7867)
[Link]
But the Smartphone has become a pretty important "computing" device (for some values of computing) and is only going to become moreso. I think there's danger that the millions of users you mention won't notice this - and will expect less out of their phones than their PCs, especially in terms of what rights they have over using these devices.
Given your point - that these devices have more computing power than PCs from just a few years ago - plus the central role that they're playing in our lives - it's really important to point out "hey - these are computers" when talking to those users.
Posted May 11, 2011 22:11 UTC (Wed)
by wahern (subscriber, #37304)
[Link] (5 responses)
Still, I may just buy one or two of these for family members. The biggest selling point (other than Linux and low maintenance) is the 12.1" screen and thin form factor. Any other laptop in this price range is either teeny-tiny or monstrous.
Posted May 12, 2011 10:43 UTC (Thu)
by robert_s (subscriber, #42402)
[Link] (3 responses)
The more widespread impediment to the ARM Chromebooks I expect is the old no-ARM-standard-platform-do-we-use-device-trees-etc issue that Linario are (to some extent) trying to solve.
Additionally, embedded graphics processors still have very poor Xorg support. Especially compared to pineview atoms.
Let's hope Chromebooks work as an incentive for ARM licensees to get their acts together.
Posted May 12, 2011 17:35 UTC (Thu)
by Aissen (subscriber, #59976)
[Link] (1 responses)
They have the Exynos chip, which is shipping right now in Europe in the Galaxy S II. And it's already beating every other phone in benchmarks.
Posted May 12, 2011 20:58 UTC (Thu)
by robert_s (subscriber, #42402)
[Link]
Posted May 20, 2011 19:13 UTC (Fri)
by BenHutchings (subscriber, #37955)
[Link]
Posted May 19, 2011 18:28 UTC (Thu)
by daniels (subscriber, #16193)
[Link]
Posted May 11, 2011 22:50 UTC (Wed)
by hollis (subscriber, #6768)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted May 12, 2011 7:12 UTC (Thu)
by loevborg (guest, #51779)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted May 12, 2011 18:25 UTC (Thu)
by dlang (guest, #313)
[Link]
the text mode during bootup is easily fixed (if anyone cares enough about it)
the wireless problems you are having are fixable only by not using a wireless chipset that has those problems.
if you are Apple, you only have to support a half dozen models, and you can decide that they all use the same wireless chipset.
since this hardware is being build specifically for linux, they should be able to address all the driver/chipset issues, and the rest is relativly easy to deal with.
Posted May 11, 2011 20:31 UTC (Wed)
by boog (subscriber, #30882)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted May 11, 2011 21:04 UTC (Wed)
by linuxjacques (subscriber, #45768)
[Link] (1 responses)
Does Google count as largish?
Posted May 12, 2011 10:34 UTC (Thu)
by Klavs (guest, #10563)
[Link]
Posted May 11, 2011 22:03 UTC (Wed)
by b7j0c (guest, #27559)
[Link] (13 responses)
remember three years ago when netbooks (particularly running free software) were supposed to make traditional laptops obsolete? all of those users are using ipads today. the linux-inside thing won't sell systems either - anyone using linux on a traditional computer is probably looking for more access to the system, not less
google should end-of-life chromeos as a useful experiment into how far they could push the browser into a traditional computer and call it a day, they are developing a reputation for weak, abandoned, conflicted products
Posted May 11, 2011 22:09 UTC (Wed)
by boog (subscriber, #30882)
[Link]
Posted May 11, 2011 22:17 UTC (Wed)
by wahern (subscriber, #37304)
[Link] (4 responses)
You're also discounting keyboards, although with wireless keyboards I agree tablets might just hollow out the netbook market eventually.
Posted May 11, 2011 22:41 UTC (Wed)
by nicooo (guest, #69134)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted May 12, 2011 3:33 UTC (Thu)
by AndreE (guest, #60148)
[Link]
Posted May 12, 2011 3:38 UTC (Thu)
by b7j0c (guest, #27559)
[Link] (1 responses)
and while the ipad is slightly more expensive than this, it is wildly more desirable, having access to the full gamut of apps on the app store etc....and the sex appeal of a tablet
Posted May 12, 2011 9:37 UTC (Thu)
by fb (guest, #53265)
[Link]
Can you update the iPad software without iTunes? Do you expect non-techies to go regularly to an Apple store to get the latest iOS updates (read: security updates)?
A simpler computing experience also means avoiding extra (unnecessary) steps to get software updates.
FWIW Apple has been doing a lot better than Google WRT making sure their users do get OS software updates. But Android devices will at least "auto-upgrade".
Posted May 11, 2011 23:57 UTC (Wed)
by martinfick (subscriber, #4455)
[Link] (5 responses)
(Emphasis mine)
Funny that you think the solution is to having too many abandoned projects is to abandon the project, no? :)
Posted May 12, 2011 3:41 UTC (Thu)
by b7j0c (guest, #27559)
[Link] (4 responses)
chromeos should be terminated and the resources rolled into android
Posted May 12, 2011 11:20 UTC (Thu)
by dion (guest, #2764)
[Link]
Posted May 12, 2011 11:32 UTC (Thu)
by nye (subscriber, #51576)
[Link] (2 responses)
One person's "abandoned" is another's "stable".
Reader does get fairly frequent updates though.
Posted May 12, 2011 14:42 UTC (Thu)
by dgm (subscriber, #49227)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted May 12, 2011 16:07 UTC (Thu)
by nye (subscriber, #51576)
[Link]
Posted May 15, 2011 13:27 UTC (Sun)
by rich0 (guest, #55509)
[Link]
I disagree.
Tablets have been created for the type of user who mainly consumes content. Browsers are often used to consume content, so there is a correlation there, but it is the net-consumption of data that a tablet is suited to.
Laptops are more suitable for users who create content. Right now that usually happens outside of browsers, so again there is a correlation. However, it is the creation of content that laptops are suited to (and desktops or docking stations even moreso).
Who tends to buy tablets? Consumers reading facebook and typing the odd sentence or hitting like, and managers reading emails and presentations and replying with "looks good" or "you're fired" or whatever. You won't see the person creating the presentation using the tablet, typically, unless it is later to playback the presentation.
Google is looking to promote cloud solutions for content creation, Google Apps, and all that. They're trying to break the mindset that the web is mainly about content consumption.
I'm typing this comment on a CR-48 - there is no way I'd type this on a tablet or phone, even though I could have read the comments to this article just fine on either of those platforms.
I know of a lot of small businesses that use Google Apps. They usually pay consultants to maintain their PCs (or volunteers if they are non-profits). ChromeOS is a great way for a small business to greatly simplify their IT infrastructure - almost all of your cost is in the pricetag of the machine, vs the traditional model where probably half or more of your cost is on people.
ChromeOS isn't ideal for programmers, or engineers, or many kinds of scientists (though it could be great for taking lab notes). However, most businesses are full of people who use Outlook, Word, and Excel, and rarely anything else that couldn't be web-based. If you only eliminated the desktops for these classes of users you'd wipe out 90% of your desktop-support payroll.
The Chrome OS product is clearly immature, but I wouldn't say that it lacks potential.
Posted May 11, 2011 22:38 UTC (Wed)
by ejr (subscriber, #51652)
[Link]
Posted May 11, 2011 23:12 UTC (Wed)
by dowdle (subscriber, #659)
[Link] (13 responses)
Using the Intel (or clone) arch means that it should be fairly easy to make it dual boot. I think most laptops should ship with a thin-OS in firmware and a full OS for those who want more. If I get a device that can only be the thin-OS, it should be cheaper because I can do less with it... but so far they look as expensive as traditional laptops. Perhaps that will change.
I'd also like to see ChromeOS made into a distro you can install (perhaps that's the job of Chromium OS?) on any commodity hardware... or as an app you can install inside of an existing OS. Having to buy special hardware for Chrome OS sounds stupid. If you want the world to switch to it, it has to be brought to the hardware they already have in addition to the new hardware.
Posted May 11, 2011 23:55 UTC (Wed)
by smoogen (subscriber, #97)
[Link]
Posted May 12, 2011 0:25 UTC (Thu)
by mjg59 (subscriber, #23239)
[Link] (5 responses)
Posted May 12, 2011 5:40 UTC (Thu)
by sonnyrao (subscriber, #11351)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted May 12, 2011 12:30 UTC (Thu)
by bawjaws (guest, #56952)
[Link] (1 responses)
Is it just to reduce engineering costs for Google, or is there some thinking that these could have a secondary market for people wanting to run some other kind of Linux on them (whether hobbyist hackers, or say educational institutions, maybe even the Googlers that choose to run Linux internally)?
When I last bought a netbook for Ubuntu I had to do a fair bit of shopping around, and my choices were apparently constrained by spec limits that Microsoft placed on netbook vendors in order to get cheap XP licences. I didn't particularly enjoy rewarding them for this market interference.
I don't know how big a market this would be, but it seems like even if you underestimate then the cost-benefit would work out well for the vendors since they're basically doing all the work anyway.
Posted May 12, 2011 15:54 UTC (Thu)
by olof (subscriber, #11729)
[Link]
Why would it not be a goal? People should be able to tinker with their devices, including replacing the kernel and other things. Having the support in an upstream kernel makes that easier for everybody.
> Is it just to reduce engineering costs for Google, or is there some thinking that these could have a secondary market for people wanting to run some other kind of Linux on them (whether hobbyist hackers, or say educational institutions, maybe even the Googlers that choose to run Linux internally)?
It wouldn't reduce engineering costs significantly, rebasing the patches is trivial when we update underlying kernel versions.
No, it's done because it's the right thing to do, and because there are no strong reasons not to do it. The amount of code is not large and fairly well-contained (but it needs cleanup before it's upstreamable which is why not all of it has been done yet).
Posted May 12, 2011 6:27 UTC (Thu)
by olof (subscriber, #11729)
[Link] (1 responses)
The verity pieces are needed to use the checksumming rootdevice, but you can bypass it and use the underlying regular device (easily done especially if you're rebuilding the whole OS image from source).
There are plans to upstream pretty much everything in our kernel tree in some form or another, main reason it hasn't all been done yet is lack of time, not lack of interest or ambition.
FWIW, a few words about what's in our kernel tree:
For my own sanity, I have split up the kernel in four branches when I've done the last few rebases from upstream:
* Base Chrom{e,ium}OS patches: EFI and chromeos firmware interface, some core drivers that are getting crufty, build infrastructure.
As of a couple of weeks ago, the base branch had 67 patches, some of them cruft that would be squashed when upstreaming. Verity had 21, same thing there w.r.t. squashability.
So yeah, it's not perfect, but it's also not out of control at this time.
Gitweb for the 2.6.38 kernel tree is at:
http://git.chromium.org/gitweb/?p=chromiumos/third_party/...
Posted May 12, 2011 7:21 UTC (Thu)
by MKesper (subscriber, #38539)
[Link]
Posted May 12, 2011 3:41 UTC (Thu)
by b7j0c (guest, #27559)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted May 19, 2011 15:14 UTC (Thu)
by stevem (subscriber, #1512)
[Link]
Posted May 12, 2011 6:43 UTC (Thu)
by olof (subscriber, #11729)
[Link] (3 responses)
This is one of the purposes behind Chromium OS, yes. With some restrictions to "any" -- it will require a reasonably modern system to run smoothly, including working 3D drivers. Not all platforms are enabled at this time either, i.e. drivers (kernel and X) might not be configured for all hardware, etc.
Note that there are no official builds of Chromium OS (just as there are no official builds of Chromium), but there are a few people who have been providing builds for quite a while (Hexxeh, et al). So you can either find a build they have done, or download and build it yourself -- it's not hard.
Posted May 12, 2011 18:10 UTC (Thu)
by kh (guest, #19413)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted May 14, 2011 19:50 UTC (Sat)
by dtlin (subscriber, #36537)
[Link] (1 responses)
Ctrl-Alt-T brings up urxvt with a restricted shell (crosh), and you can launch a full-featured shell after flipping the developer switch.
Every Google Chrome OS device sold is required to have a developer switch. (There's no such guarantee on others building devices using the Chromium OS sources, though.)
Posted May 15, 2011 20:08 UTC (Sun)
by loevborg (guest, #51779)
[Link]
Google "Chromebooks" launch
Google "Chromebooks" launch
Yes, but
Yes, but
Yes, but
Yes, but
Yes, but
Google "Chromebooks" launch
Google "Chromebooks" launch
But AFAIK Samsung don't yet have a Cortex A9-equivalent core. They went down their own hummingbird line with the A8s and I don't know where that's left them with regards to future designs.
Google "Chromebooks" launch
Google "Chromebooks" launch
Google "Chromebooks" launch
Google "Chromebooks" launch
software polish
software polish
software polish
Google "Chromebooks" launch
Google "Chromebooks" launch
Google "Chromebooks" launch
dead in the water
dead in the water
dead in the water
Keyboards?
dead in the water
dead in the water
dead in the water
dead in the water
dead in the water
dead in the water
Reader is what now?
dead in the water
dead in the water
And I would not call something that receives frequent updates "stable", but "stabilizing".
dead in the water
dead in the water
Google "Chromebooks" launch
Google "Chromebooks" launch
Google "Chromebooks" launch
Google "Chromebooks" launch
Google "Chromebooks" launch
Google "Chromebooks" launch
Google "Chromebooks" launch
Google "Chromebooks" launch
* Verity (the dm module for checksumming): Currently being cleaned up for upstreaming.
* Misc backports of drivers from more recent upstream (or staging, in the case of some of the SDIO wifi drivers).
* Tegra/ARM stuff (lots of not-yet-upstreamed stuff, some inherited from android, some our own/nvidia's).
Google "Chromebooks" launch
Google "Chromebooks" launch
Google "Chromebooks" launch
Google "Chromebooks" launch
Google "Chromebooks" launch
Google "Chromebooks" launch
Google "Chromebooks" launch