Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Google Operating Systems Linux Technology

Google's Chrome OS To Launch In Fall 375

Kidfork writes "On Wednesday Google's vice president of product management said that this fall Google will launch Chrome OS to compete with Microsoft Windows. More than 70 million users already use the Chrome Browser, and Google expects at least 1 million users of the OS by day one of release."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google's Chrome OS To Launch In Fall

Comments Filter:
  • Not me (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I prefer to keep my data where it belongs, on my machine and encrypted on backup servers.

  • Can only guess... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 02, 2010 @09:01AM (#32430202)

    We can only guess what information it will suck up and report back to Google.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by minus9 ( 106327 )
      "We can only guess what information it will suck up and report back to Google."

      We can only guess what information $PROPRIETARY_OS will suck up and report back to $VENDOR.
      • by kthejoker ( 931838 ) on Wednesday June 02, 2010 @09:59AM (#32430984)

        Since Google's entire business model revolves around advertising (and thus, customer targeting), while Microsoft, Apple (and Linux, in a fashion)'s business model revolves around selling OSes, I think it would be pretty easy for MS or Apple to simply say, "We will never collect any data about our OS users' application usage, browsing habits, or other personal information."

        Google simply can't afford to say that. So no, not exactly the same thing at all.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Turzyx ( 1462339 )

          I think it would be pretty easy for MS or Apple to simply say, "We will never collect any data about our OS users' application usage, browsing habits, or other personal information."

          Except they have never said that, nor will they ever.

          Chrome OS is also open source, maybe there will be some nice branch projects in the future. I'm concerned about how their OS is so entwined with Flash though, it hardly has a stellar reputation for security.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by somersault ( 912633 )

      Except it's open source. And it can't suck up any information you don't enter. If you're worried about people spying on what you do online, either use encrypted connections, or don't go online.

      You might want to check over your shoulders whenever you go out in public to make sure nobody is following you - you never know, they may find out what brand of toilet paper you buy, or see what type of films you enjoy watching at the cinema!

    • by V!NCENT ( 1105021 ) on Wednesday June 02, 2010 @09:19AM (#32430410)

      Browse the source code line for line to know exactly how it behaves, you mean?

      • Browse the source code line for line to know exactly how it behaves, you mean?

        Yes, exactly. What, you think that's unpossible? There's a legion of nerds out here who will prove you wrong.

      • ChromeOS will update automatically like Chrome does, so at some point you just have to decide if you trust Google or not. If not then I'm sure Apple and Microsoft will happily take control of your computer instead.
  • It's going to compete with Linux.

    In other news: 2011. Year of the Chrome Desktop (tm).
    • It's going to compete with Linux.

      True, until game-manufacturers come up with Chrome-compatible games and other software companies make chrome-compatible applications?
      Already, Office exists by Google too... and creating a replacement for minesweeper really isn't that difficult.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      It's an OS to launch and run a browser, which does *all* the work .... and do as little as possible otherwise ....

      It's competing with very little the moment, except if you have a thin client desktop machine ?

    • Actually, I think it'll be mostly competing with Android, which makes this whole thing kind of bizarre.

      Why isn't Google packaging a version of Android as Chrome? A restricted version of Android would work fine, and give tinkerers a path up, sell better, allow local apps which are specially judged safe for Chrome/written with tattlers to integrate it into the cloud data, etc.

      Two completely separate OS systems will cause confusion and not allow one to leverage work done on one for the other.

      This seems dumb.

  • by FuckingNickName ( 1362625 ) on Wednesday June 02, 2010 @09:04AM (#32430240) Journal

    ChromeOS is not general competition "with Microsoft Windows". Windows has always been about delivering services on your desktop using the native CPU power and full set of UI capabilities, ensuring availability, low latency, full features and (relative) privacy.

    Google Apps deliver a quite limited subset of general office suite features available only under certain environments. They are completely inadequate where privacy is of concern.

    ChromeOS is another option for Netbooks - i.e. it might be suitable as another alternative in the already harmfully and unnecessarily flooded market of Netbook operating systems. But no firm should entertain using ChromeOS to prepare content.

    • by Miros ( 734652 ) on Wednesday June 02, 2010 @09:29AM (#32430530)

      And why is it impossible to solve the privacy issues in the long run? The way I look at it, if the economic benefits of the "cloud" model are good enough, it's only a matter of time until the other issues are solved over time. Consider checks as an example of this idea. Initially, they seem retarded (I'm going to give you this little piece of paper which is a promise from me to you that my bank will give you this amount of gold if you go there to call on it). Stupid. However, when you consider that the same innovation (banks and checks) allowed you to draw on your account from anywhere that bank had a branch, and enabled you to perform large transactions without having to carry all of your gold with you all of the time, it is obvious that the transactions enabled by the innovation are valuable enough on average to outweigh the risks inherent in the system. Even today there is a tremendous amount of check fraud, but by god, we use them like there is no tomorrow. Why? because without them (and their equivalent financial instruments) our modern society could not exist.

      The new "store everything somewhere else and access it from anywhere" model has very similar risks, but also very similar benefits. Sure, it's not perfect, but it's a lot better than the old model in many ways and will, over time, enable valuable use cases that we have not even imagined yet.

      so, returning to my original question, why can't we solve these concerns in the long run? Because if it's not impossible, it is simply inevitable.

      • The privacy implication for banking is that banks, and by extension the government, know what amounts of money are coming and going - not always precisely when you pay cash or know which offshore banks to use.

        The privacy implication for the cloud is that Google, selected third parties and the government know every detail about all work you do on a computer.

        • by Miros ( 734652 )
          Two thoughts. One, the risk with checks is much more of a "you can get ripped off" risk than a "your privacy could be invaded risk" although I suppose both risks do exist. In terms of the government getting into your business, well, that's always been an issue with government. Even without all these fancy tools that consolidate your information into one neat little pile that they can just pick up on their way to lunch they have always had the ability to know everything they want to know about you (includ
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by tenco ( 773732 )
        The point is, gold can not be copied as private data can be. If a bank loses/sells your gold, you'll notice it as soon you are going to check if it's still there. But data? It can be sold without you ever knowing it.
  • by nmg196 ( 184961 ) on Wednesday June 02, 2010 @09:05AM (#32430244)

    > Google will launch Chrome OS to compete with Microsoft Windows.

    Sorry, where does it say that they are aiming to compete with Windows, because it doesn't mention windows in TFA. They've never claimed to try and do that - they're targetting a completely different market. Chome OS is just a browser than boot up with no host operating system. Windows IS an entire operating system.

  • by bitt3n ( 941736 ) on Wednesday June 02, 2010 @09:29AM (#32430526)
    if they want my windows, they're going to have to pry it out of my warm, living, delicately moisturized hands
  • What I want (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Miros ( 734652 ) on Wednesday June 02, 2010 @09:31AM (#32430568)
    What I want is the ability to save my browser session back to google somehow "in the cloud" or whatever so that I can close my browser on one computer, start up a generic copy of chrome somewhere else, login, and get my entire session restored. If that happened the whole system would just become much more useful, particularly if you are in a landscape littered with what are effectively thin terminals. Imagine that kind of functionality with a mobile device like the iPad or something (ignoring all of the limitations that exist today). Close out on my desktop, transfer to my portable device, go to meetings and w/e without missing a beat or having to take the time to open things on one device that I was already interacting with on another.
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Joeseph64 ( 1538923 )
      Although it looks like there's a few more steps in this implementation than you'd like, Android has started doing this with Froyo. Here's the Engadget article [] that demonstrates pushing links from your desktop onto your Android phone.

      Of course, this misses the "without missing a beat" part of your solution, but it's a start.
      • by Miros ( 734652 )
        Sweet. Now if I could only get Android 2.2 rolled out to my phone... Thanks for the link! Very informative.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Pegasus ( 13291 )

      Just use Opera. It does what you want for some time now.

  • No thanks (Score:4, Insightful)

    by wcrowe ( 94389 ) on Wednesday June 02, 2010 @09:43AM (#32430744)

    First Google begins by tracking everything you search for. Then, with their browser, they want to track everywhere you go on the internet. Now, with their operating system, they want to track everything you do, period.

    • by Professor_UNIX ( 867045 ) on Wednesday June 02, 2010 @10:16AM (#32431216)

      You missed a lot of evil steps in between like, in no particular order: "Then they want to index all your e-mail and serve you up targeted advertisements, then they want to index everything on your desktop via Google Desktop, then they want to harvest and store all your documents in the cloud with Google Docs, then they want to have all of your appointment and todo information cataloged in Google Calendar, then they want to know where you are at all times with Google Latitude, then they want to know where you plan on going with Google Maps, then they want to catalog your shopping habits with Google Shopper/Goggles, then they want to know about your astronomy interests with Google Sky Map, then they want to catalog all your SMS messages and listen to all your voicemail and telephone calls with Google Voice, then they want to index all your DNS name resolution requests via their resolvers, etc." Google is absolutely insidious!

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by minus9 ( 106327 )

        You forgot to mention search Prof, they have something to do with search engines I seem to recall.
  • I for one will welcome our shiny new overlords.

  • Once Chrome OS can run Android apps, then and only then will things be more peaceful. Until then, most folks will wait for Google to get it's head on straight and figure out what the hell it's trying to do. I get the impression Google isn't sure about product cohesion.
  • by VGPowerlord ( 621254 ) on Wednesday June 02, 2010 @10:32AM (#32431454)

    There are some choice quotes in the article's source article [] over at Reuters.

    Here's one of my favorites, from Sundar Pichai:

    "Chrome OS is one of the few future operating systems for which there are already millions of applications that work," Pichai said. "You don't need to redesign Gmail for it to work on Chrome. Facebook does not need to write a new app for Chrome."

    Wow, lots of revisionist history here. It turns out that Microsoft wasn't/isn't bundling web browsers with Windows since Windows 98. I mean, they must not have been, because they weren't one of the "few... operating systems for which there are already millions of applications that work" such as "Gmail" and "Facebook."

    Seriously, did he think no one would notice that he was saying that Chrome OS is one of the few operating systems that can run web applications?

    I don't need a B.S. in Lieology to detect the problem with that logic!

"If it's not loud, it doesn't work!" -- Blank Reg, from "Max Headroom"