MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Jul 09, 09 - 12:51 pm Comment from: TowerTone

I think a little more polish will keep it from flopping....temporarily.

I think it will be a player - maybe the Firefox of the OS's. I also think it will be late! It can go places OS X can't - like HP's Acers etc.

Apple need to really work on the MobileMe - a free and integral part of OS X.

I don't see hard drive orientated OS's and computers disappearing anytime soon in favour of cloud life but whether we appreciate them or not - there is a new type of limited computer out there and a demand for it.

Jul 09, 09 - 01:02 pm Comment from: Demon

Google doesn't know how to run a commercial software company/division. The other thing is that it's Linux based and Linux is well not every going to amount to a commercial consumer OS. Google's Chrome OS as to change the mind set of long brain washed and brain dead Windows suffers. It's the same challenge that Apple as. But, Apple knows how to run a commercial software business and they have the advantage of being able to build superior hardware, and Apple also has a marketing machine that knows how to appeal to consumers. Google just relies on it being Google. Frankly I think Google being an Internet Advertising company and now looking at selling commercial products they are treading on conflict of interest and monopoly anticompetitive behavior. The same can be said with Microsoft with it's venture into internet advertising while it also sells commercial products. Microsoft is violating this already as their ad placements will always place a Microsoft Ad higher and more often then a competitors ad and let's face it Microsoft isn't paying a dime for their own ads. Google could end up in hotter water for this then Microsoft because of Google obfuscation of their Ad Auction process. But, be sure Microsoft well not be to far behind in the gun sights of the EU and perhaps DOJ(if they've grown some stones anyway).

Jul 09, 09 - 01:05 pm Comment from: DLMeyer

I believe this is more than a little premature.
This will be, after all, just another Linux distro. There are several distros of Linux out there already that are doing fine, and of course, a couple that didn't make it. This one doesn't seem to overlap the markets of any of those, or of OSX, just of a low-end version of Windows.
Sure, it COULD collapse. But, it's major competition is low-end Windows! How much will MS invest to shore up that marginal niche?

@ Gosh: "I don't see hard drive orientated OS's and computers disappearing anytime soon in favour of cloud life"

I agree. People will always need/want a "centralized" computer to do a bulk of their work from. The cloud will (at most) offer an alternative method of access when you can't be at your own computer. I think Apple understands this which is why they have the perfect balance of proprietary technology mixed with open-source projects in OS X.

Anything that needs to be shared/served/moved across multiple computers, should be based off open standards to allow for a high level of interoperability. The hardware, operating system and many of the applications can in fact be proprietary without having any impact. And allows the end user to use whatever they prefer.

Jul 09, 09 - 01:13 pm Comment from: DLMeyer

Demon, I hear what you are saying re: "Linux is well not every going to amount to a commercial consumer OS" - I think. But, then, a decade ago the same was being said about UNIX ... then came OSX.
People who buy netbooks pick them up, check the price, surf to a couple web sites, then compare them to the next one in line. The name of the OS may never enter their heads - even if the counter-ads point it out. If it works with reasonable zip and ease, that's Good Enough. If it requires a manual, it's dead, Dead, DEAD.

Chrome OS isn't "just another Linux distro".

It's a Linux distro that only runs web apps. That's pretty... Umm... Well, let's call it "special".

MS won't have to invest to compete with it. Chrome OS apps, if they can even be called that, will run on Windows anyway.

Jul 09, 09 - 01:15 pm Comment from: wannabe

He's absolutely right that Google has shown a lack of corporate vision. When Apple released the iPhone you could tell the whole company was behind it. Steve even took developers off Leopard, delaying it by months, to complete the iPhone.

When's the last time Google did that with any product? With Android they developed some software and really left the promotion up to their partners. For that matter, even with search Google has been heavily caution-driven with technology improvements and has not made any bold changes in years.

Google has a lot of smart people and thumbs in a lot of pies. I'm looking forward to seeing what they can do if they ever really push something.

Jul 09, 09 - 01:27 pm Comment from: Macaday

Half the world is using gmail.

Is that another of Google's flops?

Tosh and bull.

Jul 09, 09 - 01:27 pm Comment from: Not Bill

It seems like there is a niche there, in the low end netbook market, for the taking. Microsoft, so far, cannot seem to fill it well or cheaply.

Another view to the one posed in the article would be that Google is slowly but surely creating an entire alternate computer ecosystem and it is all getting better and better. Gmail is quite good I think. Obviously, their search engine is tops.

The day may come when large numbers of people realize all they need is a portable device and Google products.

Ever heard of a Tivo? A Tivo is a computer running a Linux OS that uses your television as its monitor. It's very popular, very commercial, and very "consumer."

why? because google knows enough dumkopfs will say 'competition is good' and praise goggles 'innovativeness' and claim their a 'powerhouse' which drives google stock up, without actually producing anything.

Jul 09, 09 - 01:35 pm Comment from: MrMcLargeHuge

Can we please move past this focus on the "cloud?" Software-as-a-Service seems to me to be such a bad idea. Maybe in a perfect world, where we each have gigabit access to the Internet with 100% reliability, the "cloud" and "decentralized computing" could work. Alas, this is not a perfect world; the average US Internet connection is something like 3Mb/s and reliability, at least where I live, is less than stellar. These are not conditions in which "cloud computing" can thrive.

Google has always been about engineering before commercial use. They have "dabbled" half-heartedly in too many free services, but their Gmail, Google Docs, and Google Maps/Earth are solid stuff people use everyday and would pay for if they weren't already paying the MSFT tax.

The top reason Apple is ahead of everybody is because they know what software must go with what hardware. Google and MSFT had a couple of top software hits but now they are in search of the next platform/user experience WITHOUT knowing what hardware people WILL USE IT ON - something only Mr. Steve Jobs knows.

I think Google is learning from the Android experience and will apply it to Chrome - something to wrap everything they have into one single application that runs everywhere. They need to clarify the message to the user - again something Apple knows how to do better than most. Right now naming an OS Chrome after they've just came out with Android and Chrome the Browser is too confusing.

And I do wonder why such pre-mature announcement before a testable product is even available. Are they hoping to attract and keep enough developer interests before Apple destroys the netbooks?

MDN, Could you please tell us when you have quoted the entire (meager) article so we don't waste any time clicking on the link?

Please don't forget:

http://news.cnet.com/The-Apple-phone-flop/2010-1041_3-6141607.html

Jul 09, 09 - 01:47 pm Comment from: Predrag

To the person who anonymously signed as "@Demon" (hint: nex time use a name -- any name -- instead):

It is obvious to anyone that Demon was referring to desktop computers and NOT embedded applications. Otherwise, you could still count OS/2 as a popular OS, since many bank ATMs ("bankomats") and other touch-screen kiosk terminals still use it, almost ten years after IBM gave up on it.

Anything that dilutes MS dominance is more than welcome, especially if it does it at the bottom of the market, where Apple doesn't play anyway.

Jul 09, 09 - 01:54 pm Comment from: Demon

@DLMeyer

UNIX has been used as a commercial OS for a long time, I'll Grant you not at the mass consumer level. Sun (Solaris), SGI (the name escape me at the moment), IBM (AIX), HP (HPUX) and others have long been used as Desktop OS's in Engineering, Scientific, Medical and 3d Graphics Environments, while Yes, these OS's have been predominately used as Server OSs they have served as very well in the Desktop world as well.
Linux on Netbooks has kind of been rejected by the consumer already, because when Netbooks first hit the shelves they came with Linux, Sells were OK but, with high return rates, Then MS made XP available to Netbook makers and when presented with a Netbook running Linux and one running XP the customers choose the Netbooks running XP. While XP and Linux Netbooks were not on the shelves together for any reasonable amount of time before MS pushed them off and manufactures stopped offering Linux as an option. It will be interesting but, I think the average Joe & Jane consumer are so Windows Brainwashed that Google's attention span just will not last long enough. Android by all measure is a failure (9 months and no new Android phones will be on the release schedule). Google has for the most part lost interest in Android and moved on to the Chrome OS. In 18 months or less it will be something else Big and New from Google.
To be frank Google is an ADD 9 year old.

Jul 09, 09 - 01:56 pm Comment from: Scott Rose

Blodget is so right. Blogger.com has gone TOTALLY STAGNANT ever since Google bought it. Compare blogger.com to wordpress.com, and you'll see that it's completely night and day. Wordpress.com is in active development every single day, whereas blogger.com has added no new innovations at all since Google bought them.

Gotta love all the hype Chrome is getting at the moment. It's a tech pundit's wet dream. I'll leave aside much of what's being debated above and only inject some other thoughts:

Popular adoption of an OS is not just based on people demanding it, like in the case of Firefox. An OS is paired to hardware, and for Chrome to get a beachhead and more, Google will have to swing deals with hardware makers (initially netbook manufacturers), and to get them to put Windows aside for this to happen. What I'm not completely sure of is whether Microsoft has legal stipulations in place with makers of PCs that mandates Windows on all PCs - I recall reading this once upon a time. So, when Dell offers a laptop with Linux, I believe they must still pay Microsoft a tax whether it's installed on a PC or not. Please correct me if I am wrong.

If there is no financial incentive for Chrome to be the default installed OS on a PC or netbook, I wonder how Google will win the day. Presently, penguinheads gleefully install Linux on their PCs, but this amounts to hobbyists who enjoy tearing their hair out, not a mass audience. Chrome has the potential to be attractive if it is offered for free to PC makers, and if that means they don't have to pay a Windows tax. If so, the razor-thin margins for making a netbook suddenly get a little fatter. And if that's true, then Chrome would have a market.

Chrome would have to run more than Web apps. It would have to be able to handle the usual Microsoft crap, or at least be able to handle the file types of .doc, .xls and .ppt. Google would have to develop a version of Gmail that plays well with Exchange servers. And if Apple decides not to develop a version of iTunes for Chrome, that might hurt Chrome-based netbook sales as well.

My hunch is that somehow, Google wants to make AdWords ads show up in the OS, broadening the marketing for Google's ad revenues, which is the core of the company's income stream. Will consumers embrace this?

Finally, an operating system will need care and feeding, even if it's free. And that means Google would have to get into the customer support business, which will drive up costs, even if you end up talking with Vijay in Bangalor, India whenever you have a problem.

My hunch is that this won't be a slam-dunk. It's not to say that a company like Google with its resources could not make this happen. After all, many pundits sniffed at Apple's announcement that it would design and market a cellular telephony device, which, last I checked, seems to be doing fairly well. But nothing is assured for Chrome. If Google is to make this succeed, they can't go it alone. It will mean winning the partnership of the PC makers, and you can be sure that a certain company based in the Pacific northwest is already at work trying to club the baby seal and prevent their PC box makers from doing business with them.

So, grab some popcorn and a beer, sit back and get ready for the sparks to fly late next year. It should be quite a street fight. If Apple is smart, they can take advantage of the chaos to move ahead with its strategy.

Stay tuned. This should get interesting.

Jul 09, 09 - 03:23 pm Comment from: Macintosher

GMail is not mentioned yet it is a good service - it responds favourably to users and most computers. And phones. I would say that it is Google's best products are not downloads but online so an OS would not do well. As for the search engine being strong... Well, forget it. The tech is ancient - people use it because they've heard of it.

Jul 09, 09 - 03:52 pm Comment from: Not Bill

@ Stupid frigtard Excellent comments. You should be renamed Intelligent Leopard, of something.

It is not illegal to be a monopoly, but it is illegal to use that monopoly power to force decisions in another market. IBM got in trouble for forcing customers to use only their products (way back when). I wonder what the "newly empowered" Justice Department would think of Microsoft forcing its customers to pay for their OS in all machines if it is to be used if any?

This could get very interesting.

Jul 09, 09 - 03:59 pm Comment from: ecrabb

"Every since it launched its two truly dominant products..."?

The article's thesis aside, does no one proofread, anymore? It's the first friggin' word in the story!

I want my cloud to live on my home iMac and be pushed to iPhone, laptop, and work PC, as well as the tablet I expect to have by the time any of this comes true.
Essentially, I want one machine to become a master server syncing all my other tech. I want to own my data and hold it myself. So far, Apple looks like they're the closest to assembling this type of system, but they show little sign of implementing those assets in such a fashion.

Jul 09, 09 - 04:46 pm Comment from: Demon

Here is the better more complete version of the story above

Jul 09, 09 - 05:03 pm Comment from: silverhawk

@Macaday
"Half the world is using gmail.
Is that another of Google's flops."
Does Google make any money with gmail? I don't have it. Do you pay to subscribe or something?

A Master Server? I already have one - it's called my wife! I'll tell ya, it ain't easy bein' me...

TT,



BTW, did you ever meet that girl that could shine the chrome on your thunder dome?

I found absolutely startling evidence that Goggle staff never read the suggestions that users post on the suggestion page.

Go to that Google suggestion group (not the one where you email in, but the group page where suggestions are posted publicly). In that suggestion page, search for "shoes". The search will come up with many dozens, even hundreds of spam comments selling shoes, clothes etc. etc. This shows that Google does not read the suggestions put forward by its users. This should be evident from the Labs features that Google comes up with.

Admittedly, Google Labs' features are truly cool and innovative -- but that's the problem. Google focuses on cool - and forgets that we use Gmail to get our work done. Google ignores real meat and potatoes functional features that users have been asking for for years.

This total focus on cool is part of Google's stated culture, and it's how they see themselves as being different from Microsoft and Yahoo -- but after a while, we users just need something that is functional and practical. Some of Gmail Labs' new additions really make you shake your head and ask -- sure, that's cute, but why didn't they spend the time and resources to offer us features that we really need to make our work more efficient.

Comfortably immune to any hype but their own, Steve Jobs and Tim Cook think that netbooks are embarrassingly shit products and that the people who want to buy netbooks should not be allowed to give their money to Apple.

Idiots believe that Google's move into the OS market will lead to war between Apple and Google. This makes no sense, as Apple will never compete for commodity machines or for customers who refuse to pay for products.

The only likely outcome of Chrome OS for Apple in the short to medium term is the exit of Eric Schmidt. Apple has three legs to its business (and one hobby): Mac, iPod, iPhone (and TV). Schmidt already had to recuse himself from board meetings on the iPhone due to the conflict of interest concerning Android. Now he'd have to recuse himself from board meetings on Mac topics as well. It's unlikely he'll stay around to be a board member solely for iPod topics. (Also shared between Apple and Google is Arthur Levinson, who will undoubtedly share the same fate as Schmidt.)

I do feel bad for Steve Jobs, who has managed to ship an OS that, version after version since 10.2, is held to be better, safer, and more beautiful than Microsoft's concurrent offering. All of a sudden Google announces a vaporware OS that's over a year out, and bloggers are suddenly gushing about how they "never thought I'd see the day when a company made a frontal assault on Microsoft's core business." Seriously? Are you fucking kidding me? OS X? Safari? iWork? ::tap:: ::tap:: Hello, is this thing on?

Jul 10, 09 - 09:00 am Comment from: Mr. Reeee

@Rastafari

The tech dork "press", probably Microsoft sponsored shills, don't consider an OS legitimate unless it can run on the cheapest Piece-OH-Shit™ generic computer assembled by some pimply freak in his mom's basement (that same dork tech reporter him/her self) on the market.

Macs don't count... they never REALLY counted.

Jul 10, 09 - 09:02 am Comment from: Mr. Reeee

Why should this guy resign?
Because of a vaporware announcement floated to see if they can find any partners?

Sheesh, vaporware announcements suddenly carry that much weight!?!?!

Google's Chrome OS is not only an experiment but a logical step in their master plan beginning with Netbooks. Google's larger plan is to expand Google OS to desktops in companies where office applications, file serving and e-mail services will be hosted by Google. Therefore eliminating the need for companies to manage their own data centers, manage backups and support large IT staffs. Microsoft and Apple obviously have similar plans (Windows Live, MobileMe) but Google clearly appears ahead of the pack at the time being.

Google has an advantage over Apple where it can offer it's OS on any hardware brand. Google has an advantage over Microsoft because they can charge OEMs a lot less or even nothing initially (maybe a web advertising deal in return) for licensing fees than Microsoft.

Apple has a choice. They can stand by and let Google and Microsoft duke it out or Apple can create their own net centric OS to compete in business. Is that what the new North Carolina data center is all about? In the mean time it may also make sense to offer OS X server on non Apple hardware to cement installations of OS X in server rooms. Companies will switch much quicker if they do not need to remove existing hardware and or make room for the install of new server hardware (Another option is licensing virtualization of OS X server on non Apple hardware). Desktops and laptops are purchased on a much more frequent basis than servers.

Microsoft will continue it's domination unless they are conquered in the business arena. Windows is a business centric OS which has been altered to support consumer use. The reason Windows continues to enjoy market share dominance is because Microsoft has licensed it's OS to many hardware manufacturers (That is the ONLY freakin reason people!). Apple and Google need to offer entire business solutions that are so cost effective that Microsoft will not be able to compete.

I believe companies such as Dell, HP, Acer and others would offer Google's OS pre-installed on their hardware in a heartbeat if Google can offer up what PC manufacturer customers require from a computer. That is the big question. Can Google's OS offer a compelling alternative to Windows in the business arena for most users or are we going to be stuck with Windows forever?

Jul 10, 09 - 05:05 pm Comment from: Demon

Cloud Computing and everything is moving to the net. The Network is the future computer. Or so, all the Tech Punters claim..

I call BS on this... Businesses nor Users are going to pay for computer time. Google, Microsoft, Amazon nor Apple is going to give away computer or storage space for free on a massive scale like Cloud Computing would be.

Cloud Computing = 1970's Mainframe Time sharing. Today a Mac Mini has more power then the 1970's Mainframe. I'd almost argue that the iPhone Gs has more CPU power, more GPU power, more RAM, and more storage then most 1970's Main Frames had. Yes, Servers have gotten a lot for powerful then the old Main Frames, users are still pushing their desktop PC's harder and harder. Many of today's Applications require a lot of CPU Power, GPU Power, Ram, and disk space. While these are all factors playing against the New Wave of timesharing aka Cloud Computing.

You can claim that Facebook, Google Mail, Google Docs,Yahoo, Twitter and the rest ... are Cloud Computing. But they are not, they are just Web Applications. Corporate Networks are not going to move to the Public Network, and as for users well lets just say Broadband penetration, Speeds, Options, and costs are going to need to get a lot better before Cloud Computing stands a snowball's chance in hell of even getting a toe in to effect consumer computer buying habits.

If Google's Chrome OS lasts for more then 18 before Google moves on to the next big thing my prediction below will play out.

Chrome OS is the Google why of telling Microsoft's Steve Ballmer get off of our turf or we'll get onto your turf. Basically they're tell Microsoft if you want a fight we'll bring the fight to you and not wait for you to bring the fight to us with Bing because well let's face it that will take to long.

I have no doubt that Google could bring an OS Fight to Microsoft and well Google could damage Microsoft to the point of shrinking Microsoft in less then 5 years. But, Google would need to be committed to the fight and be willing to stick to it. In the long run Apple would end up being the winner. because well let's face facts, Microsoft nor Google really know how to build a proper OS or a proper UI. Will Google's Chrome OS threat put the fear into Ballmer so he backs off his Internet search advertising quest to take down Google at it's own game? Guess, we'll find out, If he doesn't. I would figure that Google will start a preemptive strike with Chrome OS on Netbooks as they have said but, will move quickly up the PC Power range. If Google can pound Microsoft hard in the OS business by moving quicker then Microsoft and reduce Microsoft's cash cows quickly, Google will have won because if Microsoft doesn't have the extra Cash to toss into their Bing hole they'll have to kill it. Once it's dead and Google as sealed over the hole, Google will just turn all of Chrome OS over to the Open Source community and walk away. Microsoft doesn't need to die Google will just need to damage them enough to kill Bing. This will be a huge wind fall for Apple as Customer's and Developers will be migrating to the Mac OS to stay out of the Microsoft, Google slaughter.

Jul 10, 09 - 08:08 pm Comment from: DX

The difference with Chrome OS though is that Google staff will probably be encouraged to use it internally, which means more attention will flow onto it.