Now that we’ve all actually seen Chrome OS, the immediate reaction that most are jumping to is that it won’t be killing Windows anytime soon. Obviously. But that doesn’t mean it won’t hurt Microsoft, and apply long-term pressure to the dominant OS. In fact, Google’s positioning for Chrome OS reads like a page out of Apple’s playbook, only from the opposite direction.
Google is aiming Chrome OS right at the bottom of the market. That is to say, cheap computers, netbooks. Apple, of course, takes the opposite approach, targeting the high end of the market with their high-quality and high-margin machines. If Google is successful with its Chrome OS netbooks (let’s call them ChromeBooks), what we could see is the squeezing of Microsoft, an idea I first laid out a month ago. With attacks from the top and bottom, Windows will be relegated to the middle. And ultimately, if Google has its way, marginalized.
There are a number of problems with being in the middle. First and foremost, the middle is average, boring, bland, etc. There’s nothing particularly wrong with that, unless you’re a company like Microsoft with an image problem. After years of taking hits, Microsoft is trying to revamp its image with expensive ads, new stores, and a new OS, among other things. But the middle is hard to sell. It’s neither the cheapest nor the best. It’s the thing people have to settle on.
Microsoft, of course, is also in the netbook space with Windows XP and now Windows 7. But after being a sector on fire for much of the year, signs point to a slowdown in sales. While you might think that would be bad news for both Microsoft and Google, Google’s ChromeBooks are really a new category altogether. As Google said during its event, they’re working with specific hardware manufacturers to make machines set to a certain standard. This means that they’ll have larger keyboards and trackpads than most netbooks, among other things. In other words, they’ll be better, from a hardware perspective, than most netbooks.
And they potentially serve a different purpose. A couple days ago, Daring Fireball wondered if the real key for Chrome OS (and netbooks) may be to serve as your secondary computer. But there’s really no need to wonder, Google’s VP of Product Management, Sundar Pichai, said as much during the Q&A session. “This will be a secondary device. It may be a primary device in terms of time spent on it, but we expect people to have other computers too,” he said when asked about more powerful editing software not being able to run on Chrome OS.
People aren’t buying $300 computers with the expectation of running Photoshop (which costs $700) on them. They are buying them mainly to get an extremely portable machine that can surf the web. Google’s promise with Chrome OS is the fastest way to do that.
And that’s what a lot of critics are missing (but we’ve been saying since July). Google isn’t trying to compete with a standard OS, they’re trying to help users realize that for the majority of computing they do, they don’t need one in the first place. Maybe you have a desktop computer at home for those few tasks that need dedicated native applications, and maybe that runs Windows or maybe that runs OS X. But maybe the machine that you use most of the time is your cheap, fast ChromeBook.
Though they get criticized a lot for not making a netbook, Apple also competes in this highly mobile space — their “netbook” is the iPhone. While unlike Chrome OS, the iPhone can run native applications, it speaks to a similar point: Increasingly, for most of your computing, you don’t need Windows.
The point is that consumer computing is shifting to a place where speed and mobility are paramount. The reason people are so excited about products like the CrunchPad and Apple’s tablet isn’t because they can run Photoshop — they can’t — it’s because they offer an easy way to use the Internet. Same thing with the iPhone. Same thing with Android phones. And it will be the same thing with Chrome OS and the ChromeBooks.
The difference is that these ChromeBooks will be the first devices that actually look like the traditional computers we’re used to. They will look like they could be Windows machines, but they won’t be. That’s a powerful stereotype to break. And if Google breaks that at the bottom of the market, with Apple continuing to break it at the top of the market, Microsoft will begin to feel squeezed.
another MG style post.
Mac OS has been out there, and still 5% marketshare.
Chrome will have to be there as long as Mac OS to get another5%, but still Windows will have 90%.
I am not big fan of windows, but you have to accept the realities and wake up from your fanboy dream after all.
i should hope so, i wrote it. we’ve been over apple’s market share before, see:
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/11/11/while-rivals-jockey-for-market-share-apple-bathes-in-profits/
google is different here. this is a major step in what they believe will be the future of computing. as i said, won’t kill windows anytime soon of course, but will apply pressure.
Come on MG – did you and Scoble eat from the same bag of bad take out food? I must commend you for presenting a (slightly) “more balanced” perspective than Robert. He says Killed, you say Squeezed. Sounds like a bit of an anti-establishment WWF tag team folks…
You are incorrect to suggest the middle is not where you want to be….that’s where the volume is, that’s where most of us are sitting…and make no mistake, Google is NOT HAPPY that Microsoft has finally “Got It” with Windows 7. So they come out and announce Google OS is…coming….Christmas 2010?
Lame. Lame. Lame. Read my post. Engage me on Twitter, here or anywhere in-between. -Pedro
http://www.itworldcanada.com/blogs/makingitwork/2009/11/21/why-scoble-is-so-wrong-google-os-is-the-unicorn-of-tech/52516/
Google is only trying to apply pressure to keep the world moving to a web centric paradigm.
Windows 7 is not a threat. ChromeOS will help Microsoft / Windows 7/ IE9 become more web focused.
Diverse operating systems make open web standards even more compelling.
ChromeOS is a means to an end, a cattle-prodder even.
I agree with you. What Google ultimately wants is that they will be more devices with internet access and more people sitting on internet for a more time, seeing their text ads and clicking on them.
This isn’t a fight between OS’s.
“Google is only trying to apply pressure to keep the world moving to a web centric paradigm.”
So perfectly said!
“You are incorrect to suggest the middle is not where you want to be….that’s where the volume is, that’s where most of us are sitting”
Tell that to Walmart’s competitors in the middle. Oh, wait, they’re all gone. All that’s left is the bottom and the top.
The middle is a dangerous place to be. People buy cheap or they buy quality. No one thinks “Hey, I’m going to buy something mediocre.”
pssst. in your article, pedro, everything you are talking about — reader vs. twitter or wave vs. facebook — all the “real” things people want from their os?
um. yeah. those’re all on the web.
you might want to change your opinion to reflect something more like gmail vs. outlook or docs vs. office. as it is, you’re just makin’ the case for a chromebook.
“nobody wants a chomeos because everybody’s using facebook! duh!”
just sayin’, ya know?
m3mnoch.
Wow! text ads soon as you boot the system in less than 7 seconds. Now that is progress.
But this web centric paradigm has to be Google walled and Google controlled.
Why would I abandon my Laptop that allows me to use any Web Browser of my choice for a Google centric ChromeBook which contradicts that choice.
Hopefully Apple’s Tablet and the Crunchpad will both launch before fall next year and show Consumers just how pointless a ChromeBook really is.
Spot on. I mean look how difficult a game changer like the iPhone is finding it to gain marketshare. I don’t know anyone who has one.
Oh, wait.
CrunchPad with Chrome OS anyone?
bob gets it.
“People aren’t buying $300 computers with the expectation of running Photoshop (which costs $700) on them.”
Huh? And where did this one-sided subjected opinion erupted. There are times that you need to consider that things wouldn’t be as easy as dominating. especially if we are venturing to just “netbooks” not that I don’t believe google. But come to think of it. “Microsoft aren’t blind people, are they?”
see the Chrome’s detailed review: http://bit.ly/google-chrome-os-best-or-worst-judge-it
so much for my one-sided opinion too
Does anyone know what the hell he just said?
+1
Conquistador – exactly what I was thinking. You made me lol
Sarah Palin on TechCrunch!
Google ChromeOS should be called Google ChromeOScuker, it is just another attempt to suck it all! Google wants to suck it all! To be all the internet, to own all information! And fanboys are cheerleading this giant beast!
There is a Silverlight3 OS that was launched months ago and it is ALREADY better than CromeSucker! And yet, the hysteria of the blogosphere and the irrationality of microsoft bashing is prevailing!
Fort the Silverlight (experimental toy) www(dot)yazilimevi(dot)biz this toy is better than Chrome Osucker and I challange anyone to find any reviews of it!
If political journalist were like tech-journalist they would be all Rush Llimbaughs!
Go outside….
damn, chromebooks.com is taken
The best thing about Chrome OS is that it’s going to make Windows even better for me!
Just struck by Bing passing 10%. No threat to Google but MSFT keeps them distracted/concerned around their core revenue stream. This could just be the same tactic in reverse. If yes, is AAPL and Linux the YHOO and AOL of this equation? Ie doesn’t Chrome OS impact these players more than MSFT?
Don’t confuse pricey with “high-quality”.
Apple computers use the same crappy components everybody else uses, manufactured by the same crappy companies and finally put together by the same sweatshops in China.
As for Apple’s Tablet. People aren’t “excited”. It’s you, “journalists” that are creating the hype for them.
Seriously, Michael. What were you thinking when you hired this guy? All his posts are a pro-Apple masturbation session.
Yep. No one excited for the Apple Tablet. 0 people. How could I get that so wrong? You’re right.
By living in Silicon Valley. It’s understandable.
reminds me of the silicon valley hype talk leading up to the iphone. no one bought it. 0.
It’s not even 1% of the mobile market.
Now that I think more, if all you want is a browser, e-book readers seem to be more of competition than a PC or a Mac.
Moreover, Kindle comes with free internet access, you don’t have to pay $20/- plus per month for 3G access with GBook.
@Dave, a research report from October found that 39% of people inf the US own a smartphone, and that 11.6% of people planned on buying one in the next 90 days.
Apple has over 30% of the smartphone business now, and so your 1% marketshare figure is probably not close to accurate.
http://www.investorplace.com/changewave-alliance/articles/smart-phone-market-aapl-palm-rimm.html
MG is a great writer.
What Apple does is takes those “crappy components” and configure them together in such a way which works best with each other. I always say my iMac is the best hardware computer I ever purchased and it runs Windows XP and Vista the best I have ever seen Windows run. That is until Windows 7, which I must admit runs with the same quality as the Mac on every machine I have it on.
I am a Windows fan first, but I buy into Apple because they just make good products. The APple Tablet will be better than any of us could imagine it, Apple has done this time and time again with game changing designs, I don’t expect them to stop this now. Also, I am hoping this tablet machine has the full OS X going so I cant possibly run Windows on it.
These things are just machines guys, they do not have feelings.
Why do people have to be fans? It’s like it’s impossible to use a piece of hardware or software without being a raving lunatic or someone else being convinced that you’re a mindless zealot.
I like my MacBook Pro. Not because it’s Apple, but because it doesn’t look like ass, and I’m not worried about it exploding on contact with a moderately hard surface. You could slap an Asus sticker on it and I’d still like it.
I used Windows for a number of years. Does that make me a Redmond storm trooper? No. I think Windows sucks and is full of absolutely archaic garbage that should have been pruned years ago. I hate OS X too, just slightly less. Does that make me an Apple “fanboi”?
probably the best comment i have read on techcrunch in ages……
hahaha
yeah i think google chrome is a flop too 
Here is why:
http://thesharath.com/2009/11/26/google-os-might-be-a-flop-here-is-why-i-think-so/
for me…win7 is still the winner…its more simple than ever…
Sara
http://www.isopurewater.com/
No doubt I’ll maintain a Windows 7 system, too (I also have a Mackbook Pro). But this Chrome OS sounds neat – in a portability sense. Right now, I use my Macbook – I take it with me all around my house, reading websites, doing stuff on facebook, twitter, gmail, etc. If I get myself a ChromeBook, I can easily see myself “docking” my MB Pro for this, to do the exact same thing. I’ll use the MB for iTunes, my iPhone and other apps I still use on it. But for general web work – ChromeBook would beat it.
I think there is a long way to go before they challenge Windows OS..
Though Ubuntu and other Linux versions are good as windows but they do n’t have that many applications as Windows (Independent applications like Games etc.,)
Today’s Ubuntu feels like Win98
i think the real money maker will be chrome os on TV or media cenetrs like playstations or eee keyboard, and tablets.
If you had an XBOX you wouldn’t have said that, Media Center integration between Win7 & Xbox is AMAZING, and the experience is just right
Worth a debate, but looking only at the OS market for consumer machines.
How is Windows being squeezed in the enterprise market (where large volumes of Windows PCs get bought and upgraded continuously) by Chrome OS and, dare I say, Apple?
yep exactly consumer market. well unless businesses start moving to google docs en mass in the coming years.
businesses have started moving to g-docs. not en masse, but all our start-up clients are using it and it’s making inroads with more established companies.
for the latter, migrating existing docs is impractical, so expect a very slow parallel-running migration
the catch for chrome OS is that all businesses have at least one or two custom apps. if they’re new and lucky, they’ll be web-based. but most are old and require windows client apps… expensive to rewrite… etc. this stuff is likely to be a big drag on chrome OS adoption
And as companies switch to G-docs or other online office tools, how long until we see an iMac-ish monitor+computer combo running ChromeOS? For a subset of users in the company that could be an attractive low cost alternative to Windows on every desktop… Trivial to swap out if there are issues, almost zero IT management. IF (big IF) all of the needed apps are available online I would certainly consider it for some percentage of office staff.
The enterprise users I deal with here in NYC do not like anything cloud based. They always prefer to keep their data on the storage servers in their IT room somewhere. When your dealing with highly sensitive data such as legal documents and corporate secrets, the rule of thuimb is to keep this information localized at all times.
You tell THEM what they want. If cloud works for you then push cloud at them. If they complain…don’t be afraid to hit. Most fussy users will shut up after being slapped a few times.
new poof in marketing: “I need a really expensive Mac to do my dumb job”.
me: :: smack :: No…this iMac from 99 that we found in the closet left from the previous tenant is good enough :: smack ::
poof: whine whine pout fuss
me: :: smack :: :: smack :::: smack :::: smack :::: smack :::: smack :::: smack ::
Hahahaa…your post made me laugh.
I think this whole brouhaha about Windows vs. Chrome is a misnomer. Chrome OS’ REAL competitor is not Windows but smart phones.
What use is portability without constant connectivity?
I have a netbook but I hardly ever use it.
- If I want power, I use my Windows 7 desktops.
- If I want to work on my sofa, I use my Windows 7 laptop connected to my desktops via Mesh so I’m working off one set of files.
- If I want to surf the Net, I just use my iPhone 3GS. It’s still a bit slow right now, but no doubt the next generation of phones will be fast enough that there’s no reason to use a Netbook that isn’t good for anything else except surfing the Net.
There’s simply no room for such a device in my life.
Consumer, indeed, for now. However, in 5 or 10 years? The world will be much different – especially if this actually picks up within the consumer market. In my world, the consumers are the ones that pressure businesses to update/change.
(well, at my work – I tell [*cough*pressure*cough] my bosses what software direction we should be taking
Now, imagine this: a business moves to Google Docs, in-replace of Outlook and MS Office. What’s stopping them from moving towards a ChromeBook in-replace of these full fledge laptops, for business uses?
Naturally, there will always be applications a people will need; they can be handled through exceptions. When the cliche “majority” is just Word and Email – nothing is stopping them from going to a ChromeBook (especially since it’ll be 1/3rd the price of the laptops).
Usual BS from MG!
Let’s try to analyze your logic (if we call this BS as logic!)
1. High end market to Apple : yea sure show me where in the world outside SV so called “high-end users” use MacBooks – is it able to dent any significant share from Windows – NADA! ZERO ZILCH!
2. and now about your low end market – sure chrome OS will be great for light weight travel and little toy computers but it will squeeze Windows ! Give me a break Siegler! I do other stuff than internet – I do not trust with my personal files on Google cloud! and about speed oh yeah – Chrome can boot up in 7 seconds clap clap! Wait a min only on SSD! Windows 7 boot up in comparable time on SSD too!
Stop your fanboyism! We’re getting tired of this shit!
too many exclamation points.
Is that your lame attempt at humour? Try out at local bars or something – life would be better spent than writing mindless drivels like above.
what am i trying out for a local bars or something?
I have not seen any other writer so vigorously defending their stand on TC or anywhere else. You seem to take things too personally, for a writer/blogger.
Go outside…
Wow…M$ must be really hurting… or scared… or something. The paid goons are getting more angry and violent by the day.
MG, you had to realize that you’d be a honey pot for these paid posters… didn’t you?!
Keep the faith… those of us not being paid by M$ enjoy reading your articles.
I would have gone for the weird spacing and inconsistent capitalization, myself.
did you say “clap clap”? lmaooooo
I love that crazy $M fanatics call apple users fan boys. You’re ready to suicide bomb apple, who’s the fan boy? Dude. Calm down. It’s a computer. All of these companies are evil corporations. We all just dump our money at them and then defend them. We’re all wrong. That being said, Apple rules, Microsoft is worthless, and the only reason so many people use it is the same reason christianity is so popular, none of you can think for yourselves.
Why will people choose ChromeBooks over netbooks with Windows 7?
The Chrome machines have less capability in the same form factor.
If Google has hardware partners build a certain form factor, there’s nothing stopping any other brand from making the same form factor and running Windows 7 on it.
Windows 7 Starter edition only adds a tiny bit to the price of the netbook, and we all know what happened when name brands tried to offer Linux netbooks in stores… the return rate was huge because people didn’t understand the computer without Windows. What’s going to make Chrome OS not have the same exact problem compared to the netbook-customized Linux distributions?
because all chrome OS is (basically) is a browser, which everyone understands. for most people the browser really is the OS the majority of time these days, Chrome OS is the extension of that. will it be hard to break people from the norm (windows) of course, but Google has a shot.
“a browser, which everyone understands”
No, they really don’t. TechCrunch featured the video showing that 9/10 people on the street don’t know what a browser is.
They will power on these computers and go “Where’s my start menu and task bar????” just like when stores tried to sell them Linux netbooks.
right but they all use one, they just dont seem to understand the concept that it’s different from the OS. point being the majority of people interact with a computer most often now through a web browser, so google took the step and made that the OS.
They will quickly feel the advantage of a 7 second boot, which is what this is all about. Microsoft can counter this with a dual-boot where you have to reboot and wait 30 seconds if you want full PC functionality with hard-drive use, etc.
7 second boot = for the life of me I don’t get why people think this is so cool. how many times do you reboot your notebook a month? 2x? 3x?
this strikes me as “a search for a positive” because the alternative OSes crush Chrome OS on almost every other point.
What I mean is that Microsoft can offer the Chrome OS or their own 7 second booting browser OS – and let people who only want to use the web get on and off fast – basically flipping a switch. A dual boot function would allow people to reboot and wait as long as Windows 7 will take to load BIOS and all the kernel stuff required to save files on hard drives and run Windows applications, etc.
XP still loads as slow as molasses on a lot of computers, even if this might be the fault of the user (it doesn’t matter whose fault it was when your computer takes ages to boot up – you’ll be tempted to go buy a “secondary device” for 7 second booting to get on the web).
I agree with the boot argument – it’s what got me off Firefox and onto Chrome. I fired up FF, tapped my fingers, got bored in around ten seconds, fired up Chrome, went onto the website I was looking for (an online dictionary), found out what I was looking for, and closed Chrome again… and FF was still firing up.
Yes, it DOES make a difference… to me at least.
Ok, I have loads of crap installed on my FF – stuff like tab management and dictionaries and stuff that I somehow don’t miss in Chrome, or it’s already in the box. I know that’s irrational… I know I could clear out the crap I don’t need in FF, but I’d miss this, that or the next thing and I wouldn’t be running a full FF.
But why would people chose an OS that cannot do some of the things that existing OS can already do? Windows 7, Mac OSX and Linux can do ALL the things that ChromeOS PROMISES to do.
– Fast boot? This technology ALREADY exist. Do a quick Google for that.
– Secure? Sandboxing and protected mode already exist on some if not all browsers.
– Sync your files to the clouds? Need I say more?
It really baffles me why there are articles insist that Chrome OS is the future of computing.
What baffles me why you can’t understand why many might prefer an OS that isn’t slow, bloated, buggy, and insecure. Maybe the “technology already exists” but you sure as hell can’t tell if you’re using a Windows machines today.
I use ‘Sleep’ feature, which gives me same, even less, startup time.
Always on, available anywhere internet connection is not a reality any time soon, which makes all data, apps on the cloud nothing more than a wish.
It may work 85 percent of the time, but I may miss it sourly the remaining 15 percent of the time.
Passing the point that I did not refer to ‘Windows’ as the only OS that CAN do this, you have certainly haven’t tried Windows 7!
I have a netbook (Asus EEE 901) and the way I have it currently configured is so that the taskbar autohides, and Firefox runs maximised without the menubar or title bar. This is because ALL I use it for is the internet, anything else I need I will use my desktop.
Now you will say what’s the point in Chrome OS if my setup can already do everything it can do as well as more if I wanted? The answer is simple, just because I’ve hidden all those features away don’t mean they aren’t still there, running in the background using resources and I can feel it slowing down my netbook, after all it’s a low spec machine.
This is where Chrome OS comes in, it only loads the necessary things to get the browser running, that’s it! Everything I want it do so is all it can do so effectively directing all my netbooks resources to the tasks I want it to do. I’m up for that.
You are DUMB-HEADED to think that offline and online computing are mutually exclusive! I mean really? When you use your computer online, you don’t need it to copy files from a network? Or edit a file locally? I can go on for this but the point us are you really that IDIOT?
You will trade all the other important things that you can do because you don’t want some of little things getting in your way? You’re f*cking unbelievable.
Linux was sold as a replacement for Windows. That was a failure. Google Chrome isn’t a replacement. It serves a purpose of its own.
Speed? Simplicity? Price? I already have a Windows 7 desktop (which I keep turned off, except for games). When I want to check my email, I either use my laptop (never off) or I would turn to this. I don’t use my desktop for email – takes too long to boot and get to my browser. Hell, 7 sec boot time to “www.google.com” is faster than the wake-up time on most computers… hell, it takes longer than 7 seconds for my laptop to even connect to my WiFi let alone get to “www.google.com.”
So, let me ask you this; if all your doing is gmail, or website surfing, why use a machine that’s not “built” for that purpose and grossly overpowered? Well, I guess you use MS Word to write a README.txt file. I just use Notepad.
great os.. a new world of computer Os has born…
Another thing to remember MG is apps run the show.
Developing for Windows is very easy with several frameworks to make it even easier. iPhone is extremely easy to program for and this is why you see a ton of apps for it.
Mac is a bit more tricky to program for because Apple are constantly changing their framework, such as their shotty Java implementation (and in SN they went 100% Java 6 which for legacy apps is a problem).
Chrome seems to be a closed application OS though the os itself is open source. It seems Google is introducing a new programming language and desire to create their own thing here.
There are many great Linux distros in which Google could have played “superhero” and spent the money to develop the driver base needed to mirror Windows. All a Linux dristo needs are the driver base and a powerful multimedia framework on the level of Quicktime and Windows Media, then Linix would instantly be a much bigger player on the home front.
Google could have went for it but Chrome OS computers will be more of a iPhone killer in the next few years in my opinion.
by that, of course, you mean native apps. but google’s point is that there are millions of apps for chrome os – they are just web apps. and increasingly, those are getting to be as powerful as some native apps.
Didn’t this fail with the iPhone initially? Or did I imagine the orgasmic enthusiasm when the iPhone SDK was released and the App Store opened?
I think ChromeOS is a cool idea but it’s a niche product. It asks that you sacrifice a lot when the only real gain is a faster boot time. What else is a selling point to the mainstream user? This OS will be great for devices that aim to only do internet, CrunchPad for example. But it’ll lose swiftly in the already defined netbook/pc market. JMHO
I think the problem with that was a limitation of what WebKit would render and what you could do with what amounted to a local webpage. No PHP scripting, Flash, probably couldn’t do CSS trickery.. Could you even store data and pull it up dynamically?
For an actual web app where you control the server side portion, you can do quite a bit these days. The biggest problem is user perception. It’s actually kind of a problem with the Chrome browser too.. It doesn’t look like the rest of your OS.
If you can put an icon for your web app somewhere, and you can make it look more or less like everything else the user normally sees, then who cares?
“Could you even store data and pull it up dynamically?”
Yes. Actually. iPhone Safari supported HTML5 SQLite implementation before any browsers supported it. Apple added in SQLite support specifically for use in web-apps.
“If you can put an icon for your web app somewhere”
Yes. Even on the iPhone.
Malcolm brings up an interesting point and is something worth looking at in the future. I personally use Gmail web-app over the bs built-in mail app myself. But, I’m not in the majority I’m sure.
Really, try adding and organizing 100 documents in Google docs. If you suggest labels, you haven’t realized the problems.
ChromeOS *is* based on Debian.
put it that way, Google is selling a “mobile phone” with phone call and sms chat features, after all, how many times do we use the radio, calculator, games, notes, music player in a mobile phone?
Microsoft on the other hand is selling a “mobile phone” that cost slightly more, slightly bulkier and all the bells and whistle. You get all the features such as wifi, call, sms, calculator and so on.
Consumer will always go for a mobile phone with tons of features they don’t use… just in case they need it. If I own a netbook, it is meant to be portable. Speaking of portability, it means being able to open a power point and present it to my clients anywhere anytime (without wifi/internet).
and you’d be able to do that with Google Docs with Gears.
Can I open a .ppt from my SD card, if I use Google Docs with Gears?
Oh.. I guess you are suggesting I use Google Docs.
99% of Powerpoint presentations are a waste of time. The question isn’t if you can edit one with whatever OS. The question is…do I really need to waste time making this in the first place?
Wow! I admire your guts for they aspire to change corporate culture with three sentences!
But what if I need to send my presentation to a client that doesn’t use Googledocs?
The same reason Wordperfect and OpenOffice continue to be niche products although they are superior products is because they are not the current standards and neither is GoogleDocs.
According to Google CEO, Schmidt and Qualcomm CEO, Paul Jacobs — they will be called smartbooks –
The netbook moniker will morph into smartbooks
http://smartbookblog.com/
hmm not a bad name either.
How about “portmanteauing” it: Chrome+netbooks = Chrooks!
ChromeBooks.com is already taken
The idiotic thing about your post is that it assumes Windows will be incapable of running on similarly spec’d machines. The netbook market has proven that alot of people *gasp* like Windows running on their cheap netbooks.
that’s quite a leap there. you’re suggesting that people were buying netbooks because of windows? most of them run windows xp, which is 8 years old. more importantly, what do people use netbooks for? to run a web browser, like chrome.
If that was the case, Windows on netbooks would have been a huge failure, right?
Didn’t happen. There have been netbooks built on top of Linux with a fully functional browser on them. Windows still owned that market.
Why is that?
Could it be that maybe, just maybe people actually WANT to do more on their netbooks than just browse?
Linux netbooks failed because Linux is garbage for the most part, even compared to Windows junk. ChromeOS, while based on a linux kernel, throws out the cruft and replaces it with a new lightweight & zippy UI layer. If it meets its goal of being an OS that “just works” and gets people to the web as quickly & hassle-free as possible, it’s going to be a different game entirely.
UI Layer? where is that, I can only see Chrome, which barely has a UI
Linux Netbooks didn’t go well because of the Linux UI. It had nothing to do with the OS or the hardware, and had everything to do with the user-interface.
Google is aiming directly at the UI alterations with ChromeOS. That’s the whole point of “you come right into the browser.” UI is the most important aspect of a computer. And Google seems to understand that.
People are using XP for long time because Vista failed, mostly at marketing. Win 7 changes that.
The point here is Win 7 can define/introduce a fast boot profile with Google Chrome like with additional functionality waiting to be used.
I like Chrome OS for two reasons, 1) it prompts others to think about fast booting 2) if if supports only SSD, it makes adoptions higher and drive SSD price lower.
I still benefit from Chrome OS, even if I choose not to use it.
If people are using XP which is 8 years old on Netbooks, it speaks to Xp’s strength, considering other OSes failed to deliver.
Now with impressive Win7 they might do it again, rule for another 8 years?
To be more specific, Microsoft’s share of the Netbook OS market has grown from below 50% in 2007, to 90% in February, to 96% in April, and continues to rise.
I believe that is because people want to do more with even their Netbook and not less. The Linux based Netbooks made people feel like they were doing ‘less’ since their windows software didn’t work on it. Google is betting people want to actually do less with a browser only interface. I am not sure that is truly what people want, but time will tell.
All that proves is that people like netbooks not that they like Windows. Most people buy from big boxes and big boxes won’t carry *nix computers because they have the same slim margins as Windows machines but they can’t sell services and software to make it up.
Actually the big boxes sold *nix Netbooks and they had a high return rate. The Windows Netbooks are the ones that people are wanting. I am a Linux fan so that is sad for me, but that is what has happened in the world of Netbook sales. Due to this I am not sold on the idea of ChromeOS being a huge hit even in the Netbook market.
Why do you have different info in the box for each of them.
Company: Google
Website: chrome.blogspot.com/2009/07/goog…
Company: Microsoft
Website: microsoft.com/WINDOWS
Launch Date: November, 1985
Website: apple.com
Location: Cupertino, California, United States
Founded: April 1, 1976
IPO: 1980
why not list the same info for all of them.
Anyway Chrome wont do anything to Microsoft except for netbooks and even those what happen when linux was on netbooks they were returned for the windows version.
What would happen if and when microsoft and apple decide to make there os’s have around the same bootup time by whatever measures.
First blog published using Chrome OS. It was an Aw Snap Experience
http://wblg319.blogspot.com/2009/11/first-blog-published-using-chrome-os-aw.html
I thought the Chrome intro was interesting from the perspective that it’s a direct attack against Microsoft.
Make no mistake, I’m not a Google fan boy and I actually dislike the free pass Google gets from the
press especially in the Valley.
But..I also think it would be a mistake to underestimate Microsoft, as good as Windows 7 is, its just the beginning.
Apple and Google want to pick up fight with Microsoft for obvious reason: They won’t get such a free publicity without it.
Thought Apple has low market share, it shouts as if Windows is no match. But I am OK with it, as it kept Microsoft alert and raised quality of Win 7.
internet is the future of computing right now people spent thousands of dollars on licensed softwares, games and other utilities. Furthermore we also spend 100s of dollars on powerful machines but what about that time when we can easily access the most heavy softwares right from our iphones or netbooks on rental basis through a simple browser plugin. No installation required and no crashing issues. Future is virtual
Sorry, this is completely misguided. This is not a squeeze. Netbooks are not the bottom of the market right now – they are an extra product. Netbooks, for most people, do not replace the sale of a laptop or PC — and a web-only OS like Chrome OS will only further that fact. Netbooks are a tiny, tiny market (for now) – so while I am sure Microsoft wants to be on these devices, they are hardly shaking in their boots.
And while Google mocks Microsoft for having created an app for Chrome OS (web-based Office), the joke is really on Google. Microsoft wants Office in more browsers, because in the long-run more page views could mean more ads and ad revenue. Microsoft doesn’t care which browser they’re in, just like Google wants to always expand their content network.
We’re at the beginning of something new… it’s a little early for a score card.
touche
Most people i know who own a netbook, actually own several other machines.
good point re:web based office, they keep the vaunted .doc and .docx living as a standard, Google docs might yet lose to Microsoft online office, we will have to wait and see.
now if only microsoft embrace firefox instead of that awful browser.
In all this though, the premise is that money is made of ads, i somehow doubt it. if you will keep the platform open, adblockers will be some of the first apps developed.
early adopters and heavy web users seem to block ads more then others.
MG,
Ask Toyota if being in the middle of the market has worked for them?
In many sectors, the largest source of sales as well as profits comes from the middle market segment.
The article of MG doesn’t do what to accredit what I have written to this address: http://giovanninews.com / google-chrome-os-open-source.
Google Chrome OS he goes to put in the band of the lower part computer cost, the computers from 300 $ that exclusively offer a fast Internet connection.
Chrome OS cannot notch Mac that is turned to the richest market of whom wants to purchase a product of quality and to the top of the performances, but this can surely nibble something to Microsoft that is more turned to the market of mass and more to low cost. My opinion, that I here want to repeat, is that the future development in open source of Chrome OS, will destroy instead the diffusion of Ubuntu.
Are you a journalist or a fanboy?
hahahah! You must be new here!
Ha.
Ha!
dell
I am only a funboy!
I am all for the Chrome OS on Netbooks as long as I can dual-boot into Chrome or Windows. I am not sure that I would give up running local Windows apps on a netbook solely for cloud computing yet.
What I am really excited about is the pressure this will put on all OS vendors to step up their game. In the end, the consumer wins.
If Goole designed a netbook device and placed the Chrome logo on it as a product brand, make the MSRP $129.99, which would likely go at retail for $99.99:
It will sell faster than crack in NYC durring the 80’s.
The educational and children market would eat it up alone.. All 3 of my children whould have a unit and my youngest just turned 1 years old.
“GBook” How fitting.
I think google approach is good. Most of the people use netbooks just for internet (mostly facebook) and chatting (mostly live messenger). I don’t see people buying a computer where they can’t install live messenger, so google will have to work hard to make an instant messenger cooler than meebo.
“Google’s positioning for Chrome OS reads like a page out of Apple’s playbook, only from the opposite direction.”
There’s something that just don’t add up in this analysis.
Top-end brands (Apple, Porsche, Rolex) have low market share and very high margins. That equals to a profitable business model.
Low-end brands (Dell, Chevrolet, Casio) have high market share and low margins. That also equals to a profitable business model.
Now you are saying that Google will be happy having Chrome OS as a low-end, low-margin (however this is captured – ads I guess) business?
Makes little sense now, doesn’t it?
It’s not like Google is pouring tons of money into this. It’s using free software as it’s base, making everyone else do the software, not worrying about any more compatibility than the basics, and I could keep going on. They aren’t in this market for money.
Google’s not going to make a loss on this, they’ll simply have a better way for users to experience web services. There’s one thing I’m sure won’t be in Chrome OS though. An ad blocker.
You’re forgetting that Apple’s marketshare for higher-end, high margin desktop PCs and notebook computers is itself, well, marginal, at less than 7% or so. That leaves plenty of room for Microsoft to play that market and also take up with the middle market as well, which brings in the bulk of their cash.
Google will be moderately successful at dominating the low-margin, low-end netbook market but will not only have to compete with Microsoft, it’ll be competing with Ubuntu and other Linux-based operating systems like gOS. I would say ChromeOS could have a 10-15% market share within five years. Apple will likely get to 10-15% within 10 years, about what it took it to go from under 5% to about 7%.
That leaves Microsoft with a greater than 70% market share for at least the next 20 years.
Their market share will be reduced greatly over the early part of this decade but they aren’t going anywhere anytime soon – in any market.
Cheers,
Doug