Google's Chrome operating system

Nice.

"Google Chrome running within a new windowing system on top of a Linux kernel"

Sounds good to me.

Sully

Sounds interesting but a "back to basics" operating system will take a long time to kick off and becoming any compeditor to Microsoft - apart from techies of course. When will see a Beta?!

Interesting. Having Google's weight behind it is probably something that Linux could do with.

It's fairly ironic though that the Linux version of Chrome hasn't even been released, yet they want to base an entire OS around it.

Blowfish wrote: »

It's fairly ironic though that the Linux version of Chrome hasn't even been released, yet they want to base an entire OS around it.

Good point. At least we know that it'll be very heavily developed when that does happen though.

justsomebloke

however in Europe will this be an OS built around an internet browser that can't actually come with that internet browser due to the anti competitive nature of it, as seen with windows?

Shipping with a browser is not anti-competitive. Windows ships with internet explorer.

Sully

Khannie wrote: »

Shipping with a browser is not anti-competitive. Windows ships with internet explorer.

Thought this has changed in Europe with Windows 7?

A crippled Linux distro that only lets you install web apps, eh no thanks google.

justsomebloke

Khannie wrote: »

Shipping with a browser is not anti-competitive. Windows ships with internet explorer.

it won't in windows 7 though due to the EU not letting it so this should come under the same restrictions

Wow. Didn't know that.

But sure ubuntu ships with firefox.

Joe the Santa wrote: »

it won't in windows 7 though due to the EU not letting it so this should come under the same restrictions

That was more about the fact that they were abusing their dominant market share in the OS market to 'force' market share gain for IE in the browser market.

Since Google OS wont be dominant in any market at the start, there'll be no issues shipping it with Chrome.

Sully wrote: »

Thought this has changed in Europe with Windows 7?

Blowfish wrote: »

That was more about the fact that they were abusing their dominant market share in the OS market to 'force' market share gain for IE in the browser market.

Since Google OS wont be dominant in any market at the start, there'll be no issues shipping it with Chrome.

But they are dominant in web search, will they be allowed to link to google search or have it as the default in chrome?

joe_chicken

Blowfish wrote: »

Since Google OS wont be dominant in any market at the start, there'll be no issues shipping it with Chrome.

So what happens when they do become dominant?

Great point Joe the Santa, just goes to show how ridiculous the European ruling was.

turgon

Blowfish wrote: »

It's fairly ironic though that the Linux version of Chrome hasn't even been released, yet they want to base an entire OS around it.

Maybe the idea is to have Chrome OS as the only Linux based OS able to run Chrome, thereby eliminating competition from other Linux distros who would argue their distros are effectively Chrome OS + other stuff.

]

Edit: maybe not...

An Fear Aniar

I would not want a computer that I cannot use without an internet connection. I think the whole cloud idea is stupid.

.

joe_chicken wrote: »

So what happens when they do become dominant?

Great point Joe the Santa, just goes to show how ridiculous the European ruling was.

The European ruling didn't tell them to take IE out Microsoft decided to do that by themselves. They just wanted the option of not installing it, since most OEM PC retailers will include IE or another browser It wont really make a difference.

Anyway back to google this is just another platform for them to put ads on.

An Fear Aniar wrote: »

I would not want a computer that I cannot use without an internet connection. I think the whole cloud idea is stupid.

.

I'm sure they would make it work offline.

An Fear Aniar wrote: »

I would not want a computer that I cannot use without an internet connection. I think the whole cloud idea is stupid.

.

I think that's the crux of it. If it's essentially a Linux kernel with Chrome on top and not much else, it's not going to keep the OSS people happy.

If it's a full fledged Linux OS with a focus on Chrome and a few other Google-y bits, but still keeps the full power of the Linux-ey bits too, then it'll be pretty good.

liamo

As I understand it, the EU told MS that they must offer choice! That is, upon starting Windows for the first time, the user should be offered a choice of browser to install.

Rather than having to offer Firefox/Opera/etc to Windows users, MS wanted to ship Windows 7 with no browser installed at all. I believe that the problem with this is that the only way (for most people) to get a browser onto the PC would be to install IE via Windows Update.

MS has been tried and convicted of abusing their position of strength in the market place. If they played fair and by the rules there would be no need to impose restrictions on what they do.

I believe Google is also facing an anti-trust case but this is related to search. But just because MS has been told to unbundle IE from Windows, it doesn't follow that Google must also do the same with a brand new OS.

In fact, thinking about it a little further, that doesn't even make sense really. What they're doing is distributing a Browser not an OS. The browser has to run on top of an OS so they built one. This is completely different to building a browser into an OS which is what MS did. Of course, they then had to reverse this in Visa & W7.

Of course, if Google do become dominant in this area and if they do abuse their position of power in the marketplace then, yes, most definitely they should be dealt with. However, let's not get ahead of ourselves - it's only just been announced; it hasn't even been released yet!

Anyway, enough of my ramblings. I'm looking forward to seeing how this works out for Google and what their new OS is like. Whether or not I end up using it, competition in the marketplace is good for the consumer and I welcome any new entrants!

JPA

If the OS is free can it be considered anti competitive to include a browser?
Or anything else they want?

JPA wrote: »

If the OS is free can it be considered anti competitive to include a browser?
Or anything else they want?

Is it free if you pay for it by looking at their ads

matrim

The way I saw this was similar to the quick boot linux distros that they are shipping with some systems now. I know this is aimed at netbooks but the concept seems fairly similar to me i.e. A lightweight distro with the basics you need for browsing the web

An Fear Aniar

This article pretty much nails the reasons why this OS is not going to make much of a dent in Microsoft's market share:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/07/09/dzuiba_google_chrome_redux/

Some choice quotes:

Ah, yes. Corporate IT workers everywhere have to port decades of esoteric business logic codified into Excel macros to Google Spreadsheets, but the real problem is, what are they going to do after lunch?

Run business apps over a faulty network instead of from your hard disk? What could possibly go wrong? Can I buy an extended warranty with that?

.

An Fear Aniar wrote: »

I would not want a computer that I cannot use without an internet connection. I think the whole cloud idea is stupid.

90% of a computer is feckin' useless without an internet connection IMO. Linux especially. Internet connections are now _everywhere_. Hell, I had one in my feckin' hut in the arse end of the jungles of Northern Thailand last year.

That article is gas.

I lol'd hard in the oifig.

Poulgorm

Google are serious players. One thing they always get right in their software packages is the interface - ref Chrome, Sketchup, Gmail etc. All their software is light and fast. Everybody says that Linux is basically a more sound OS than Windows - but the interface lets it down. Google will simplify it, slim it down, cut out the stuff that is not required by users (e.g backward compatibilty with 286s) and get away from typing in commands. Even the Ubuntu interface is awful - any non-techie try to install Lotus Symphony in Ubuntu? Not possible.

Microsoft, watch out. They are out to get you. Won't happen overnight, though.