Google OS

[DimPrawn]

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/...chrome-os.html

Time to sell your Microsoft shares.

[pzz76077]

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/...chrome-os.html

Time to sell your Microsoft shares.

Being free is its biggest handicap- none of the big consultancies etc will touch it if there is no money to be made from it....M$ will still rule the small system business market.

PZZ

[Pondlife]

Being free is its biggest handicap- none of the big consultancies etc will touch it if there is no money to be made from it....M$ will still rule the small system business market.

PZZ

Just cos a product is free doesn't mean there isn't money to be made from it.

[pzz76077]

Just cos a product is free doesn't mean there isn't money to be made from it.

Its the reason that Linux has not killed off M$ despite being a better platform and having apps that are at least as good if not better IMV.

PZZ

[d000hg]

Hardly. Chrome is hardly groundbreaking in terms of a browser anyway. And also:

And as we did for the Google Chrome browser, we are going back to the basics

No they didn't. They used massive pieces of existing code (konqueror IIRC).

I don't expect much from GOS. We're not ready for all our apps to be browser-based anyway... try using Google Docs exclusively for serious work.

[d000hg]

Its the reason that Linux has not killed off M$ despite being a better platform and having apps that are at least as good if not better IMV.

PZZ

That's a load. Better underlying architecture... maybe, I'm not qualified to say. Better apps... absolutely not for the typical user.

[DSW]

from what I read, it is going to be linux with a new frontend i.e. no more bloated X (woohoo). However I think this is going to cause lots of problems with graphics drivers.

This is not really a proper OS for doing lots on it basically intended to be a web integrated os - good for netbooks, etc. The idea is to be able to get on the net in a few seconds and then use all their apps that are no longer in beta (finally!) http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/

I dont think linux is unpopular because its free, if you want it in enterprise you basically end up paying licence fees to redhat, novell or whoever. Linux isn't around that much because for the desktop its still lacking (despite the advances in kde 4.2/4.3. For example try running eclipse or even firefox with some flash etc. Lots of stuff is doable but you always end up having to get your hands dirty.

From the server side it has a little pentetration, but all the big boys have their own toys anyway (hp-ux, aix, solaris, etc).

Finally a lot of places are still suffering from being locked into M$ stuff not to mention intransigence.

Don't get me wrong though I spend a lot of time with MS, have MSDN subscriptions, etc and for just getting things done, it just works, albeit a little temperamentally at times!

[pzz76077]

That's a load. Better underlying architecture... maybe, I'm not qualified to say. Better apps... absolutely not for the typical user.

The average desktop user (95% of em) want to type a letter and send receive/emails etc. Linux works great for this and MS is no real advantage.

Oracle etc works great on Linux clusters yet companies still prefer to buy Solaris or whatever. Why??

PZZ

[RichardCranium]

A new operating system?



This makes me so happy.

[Fred Bloggs]

That's a load. Better underlying architecture... maybe, I'm not qualified to say. Better apps... absolutely not for the typical user.

IME, it mashes Word documents to pieces, yuk. But I do foresee a move to thin client computing for sure.