Google OS

[swamp]

I think it's great news. I will certainly be interested to see what ideas Google come up with for their operating system. And by OS I mean the whole thing, the whole user experience. Most OSes just hark back to old mainframes. These days computers should have an 'on' button and an 'off' button.

 

[bogeyman]

Wrong.

Well goodness! That was a timely announcement, wasn't it.

Perhaps G's marketing focus groups had determined that having things perpetually in beta was not the best position from which to launch 'their own' OS.

 

[bogeyman]

I think it's great news. I will certainly be interested to see what ideas Google come up with for their operating system. And by OS I mean the whole thing, the whole user experience. Most OSes just hark back to old mainframes. These days computers should have an 'on' button and an 'off' button.

What a ridiculous comment.

Computers are not toasters or washing machines, and they never will be.

 

[swamp]

I think it's great news. I will certainly be interested to see what ideas Google come up with for their operating system. And by OS I mean the whole thing, the whole user experience. Most OSes just hark back to old mainframes. These days computers should have an 'on' button and an 'off' button.

What a ridiculous comment.

Computers are not toasters or washing machines, and they never will be.

So only toasters and washing machines should be easy to switch on and off easily?!

You think computers should still have a (visible) boot up process? Are you forced to wait for your phone to shut down?!

On a similar note, when was the last time you saw someone heating the coils on their diesel car? You don't because the coils are heated and the engine made ready with the fuel pump engaged when you use the remote key fob. In other words, diesel cars are made to behave and be as usable as if they were petrol cars.

 

[ace00]

So only toasters and washing machines should be easy to switch on and off easily?!

You think computers should still have a (visible) boot up process? Are you forced to wait for your phone to shut down?!

On a similar note, when was the last time you saw someone heating the coils on their diesel car? You don't because the coils are heated and the engine made ready with the fuel pump engaged when you use the remote key fob. In other words, diesel cars are made to behave and be as usable as if they were petrol cars.

WHS - Computers should / will be commoditised. That's what people want. Example: There's no real reason not to have web access & keyboard supplied with a new TV is there (except it would kill PC sales.......).

 

[pzz76077]

WHS - Computers should / will be commoditised. That's what people want. Example: There's no real reason not to have web access & keyboard supplied with a new TV is there (except it would kill PC sales.......).

Would agree, if the average user only wants 3 basic apps, then why should they have to wait several minutes for a PC to boot up and shutdown. Harks back to CRT based TV's- who would want to buy a LCD TV that had to warm up' before you could watch it these days, or a microwave that took as long as a conventional oven to start cooking food??

PZZ

 

[bogeyman]

So only toasters and washing machines should be easy to switch on and off easily?!

You think computers should still have a (visible) boot up process? Are you forced to wait for your phone to shut down?!

On a similar note, when was the last time you saw someone heating the coils on their diesel car? You don't because the coils are heated and the engine made ready with the fuel pump engaged when you use the remote key fob. In other words, diesel cars are made to behave and be as usable as if they were petrol cars.

Well that's really not what I meant.

Appliances? fine! I have no problem with that - but some people still need powerful general-purpose computers with local processing capabilities, rather than some limited, locked down, turn-on and off, needs-Internet-to-work 'appliance' (me for one).

I admit that something like a giant Blackberry or iPhone would suit many users' needs, but it is not a real general purpose computer - even though it has a powerful computer somewhere inside it.

 

[Bunk]

Well that's really not what I meant.

Appliances? fine! I have no problem with that - but some people still need powerful general-purpose computers with local processing capabilities, rather than some limited, locked down, turn-on and off, needs-Internet-to-work 'appliance' (me for one).

I admit that something like a giant Blackberry or iPhone would suit many users' needs, but it is not a real general purpose computer - even though it has a powerful computer somewhere inside it.

Exactly. Thin clients are fine for some things but others need the processing power and low latency that you can only get running applications locally.

It's similar to that company that was trying to replace games consoles with a thin client. I'm yet to be convinced that it's possible at the moment.

 

[bogeyman]

Exactly. Thin clients are fine for some things but others need the processing power and low latency that you can only get running applications locally.

It's similar to that company that was trying to replace games consoles with a thin client. I'm yet to be convinced that it's possible at the moment.

It will probably become possible as bandwidth increases, but who the hell want's some corporation and/or service provider to say what you can do with the physical device?

I certainly don't. My 'computer' (once paid-for) is my own to do as I please with.

I don't want (e.g.) Apple or Google or MS deciding to disable software I have installed, or add something that monitors my everyday activity for marketing (or even darker) purposes.

If some do, let them suck at the Google teat, by all means - I won't be joining them.

 

[VectraMan]

Exactly. Thin clients are fine for some things but others need the processing power and low latency that you can only get running applications locally.

What's was Google's native code in a browser system? I forget. Maybe they'll allow that, or something similar. And then there's Silverlight/Flash/maybe even resurrect Java to do what it was originally intended (God forbid).

A browser only system doesn't mean no locally running applications, but just no applications installing themselves on the local hard disk and running willy nilly all over the system.

I think this is good. I'm a software developer, so a system like this would be entirely useless to me and I'd need a "real" computer, as I'm sure would most on here. But many people, maybe even the vast majority don't need that. If they hide away the Linux'ness, then that'll be a good thing too.