InfoWorld Home / Adventures in IT / Notes from the Field / The Google OS: Are we saved at last?
July 08, 2009

The Google OS: Are we saved at last?

The looooong-rumored news has finally come to pass, but will the Chrome OS make a dent in Microsoft's dominance or will it be another geeks-only thing?

| Print | 23 comments|
368 Recommendations

Forget Michael Jackson, Sarah Palin, Roger Federer, Vladmir Putin, and everybody else. Today we have some real news: Google has finally stopped dorking around and announced it's going mano a mano with Microsoft in the operating systems game. Starting in the second half of 2010, you may be able to buy a netbook from a major OEM running the open source Google Chrome OS.

I had two immediate reactions to Google's announcement:

[ Reactions are coming in all over the Web. Find out what InfoWorld's Randall Kennedy thinks of the newly announced Google OS. | Stay up to date on Robert X. Cringely's musings and observations with InfoWorld's Notes from the Underground newsletter. ]

  1. It's about friggin' time.
  2. Let's hope Chrome the OS is a lot better than Chrome the browser, which was the buggiest Google product I've ever used. Nimble and innovative, for sure, but also occasionally maddening.

Also: If this is all just a joke, it will be the best prank Google has ever pulled.

Of course, an open source OS for netbooks (and eventually desktops) isn't exactly a Windows killer. If that were true, Jaunty Jackalope and all its furry Ubuntu cousins would have dusted Microsoft a long time ago. Remember also that Google has traveled down the OS highway before, and Android hasn't exactly made anyone forget the iPhone; personally I find it underwhelming. Finally, open source OSes appeal primarily to geeks because support ranges from problematic to nonexistent. That's not exactly a good fit with cheap consumer-friendly netbooks.

All that said, things around Cringeville just got a lot more interesting. And the entire geekosphere is kvelling about it.

Venture Beat's Dean Takahashi and Anthony Ha write:

Related Content...

White Paper

D2D Virtual Tape Library Replication Primer

This whitepaper explains the terminology and concepts behind Data Replication technologies and establishes some sizing rules through worked examples. Learn the new paradigm in disaster tolerance—protect data anywhere.

Download now »

White Paper

An Alternative to Virtualization for Datacenter Cost Savings

Server virtualization is a popular option for dealing with mounting datacenter costs. Another equally promising approach is the use of an Application Delivery Controller. Citrix NetScaler provides a low-cost way for organizations to reduce their server count and accrue cost savings from a reduction in space, cooling, power and personnel.

Download now »

White Paper

Why Your Firewall, VPN, and IEEE 802.11i Aren't Enough to Protect Your Network

The emergence of WLANs has created a new breed of security threats to enterprise networks.

Included in HP ProCurve WLAN solutions is security technology that alleviates threats from WLANs through:
* Monitoring wireless activity inside and out of the enterprise
* Classifying WLAN transmissions into harmful and harmless
* Preventing transmissions that pose a security threat to the enterprise network
* Locating participating devices for physical remediation

Download now »

White Paper

Bringing the Edge to the Data Center

Effectively address data protection challenges, implementing solutions that help store and protect business–critical data while cutting costs and improving efficiency and reliability.

Download now »
22 of 23 comments
Sign In or Register to comment
CodeZombie 8-Jul-09 8:25am
A new OS? Hey, I'll probably play with it some when it comes out. Will it make me dump XP? Doubtful but that's mainly because so much of what I have is Windows-based. I do software development in Windows as well. Yeah, like Linux and Apple before it, it probably won't do a whole lot to unseat MS mainly because most people have so much invested in Windows that they won't want to leave it any time soon. No, I don't think anyone will unseat MS's OS dominance unless they come up with something that you just plug directly into your brain.
splendidcrm 8-Jul-09 9:34am
At SplendidCRM, we are die-hard Microsoft supporters, but we would be interested in a Google OS so long as Miguel de Icaza and his Mono team can enable us to run our .NET application on the new OS. As application developers, we are less enthusiastic about learning a new OS or a new API, but we would be very open to running our application on a new, fast, simple and secure platform.
MrNatural 8-Jul-09 9:50am
1 reply
How exciting! Now google will be able to data mine absolutely everything done on a computer! I won't be interested until it's proven that this will not be occurring.
prowness 8-Jul-09 11:55am
If Microsoft isn't already doing that, I'd be very surprised.
tomaddox 8-Jul-09 9:54am
On the one hand, if anyone can pull this off, it's Google. On the other hand, designing an OS, especially a consumer OS, is not a job for the faint of heart. Linux has been around for years and has been able to challenge Microsoft's dominance in server rooms but not on the desktop. There are many reasons for that failure, but the most obvious is the software ecosystem, most notably Microsoft Office, which either doesn't run on other platforms or doesn't run as well. What Google has to keep its eye on is the need for users to be able to do all the stuff they do on Windows while simultaneously providing a user experience which is sufficiently superior to justify the discomfort of learning the quirks of a new interface. Good luck with that. Seriously. If the Chocolate Factory can pull this off, I'll be both happy and amazed.
EVVJSK 8-Jul-09 11:53am
1 reply
I also posted this under Randall Kennedy's article, but thought I would also do so here, as I think Mr. Cringely more open minded that Mr. Randall. To succeed Chrome OS will need to do a few things: 1) Run on X86 (even Apply eventually figured that one out, but possibly too late). Check (Plus ARM). Check Check. 2)Have wide application support. If the keep the Linux thinking and extend it, they should have Java, MONO(.NET), Silverlight (maybe no activeX, but that needs to die anyway). If they do those, they will have applications developed for Windows and Other platforms which will also run on Chrome OS. We will have to see if they are smart enough. 3)Make the interface/configuration changes, etc... Intuitive and easy to manage (i.e. automate). Linux is still learning this, but they need to build a scripting technology into the OS (i.e. Powershell that Microsoft has recently embraced). 4)Include OS and Application updates as part of an industry standard(they should embrace one of the Linux Package managers or work with a Linux Distro to create a new Standard). Having to rebuild packages for different distro is killing Linux adoption. While those things aren't trivial they can be done, and people are looking for a viable alternative to Windows, Apple, and Linux. My opinion... much better than a IceCube's Chance in He!!
zman58 9-Jul-09 9:37am
1 reply
A scripting technology into Chrome? Most Linux distros come with the best scripting technologies available on the planet. Hopefully Chrome will just be able to inherit them since it is Linux based. BASH, Perl, Python, Java, whatever, it's all there. It is Windows that fails miserably on this front. You can add powerful scripting $$, but it does not come with the OS--so you can't count on everyone having it. You get rather lame .bat and a DOS command processor with the OS. :)
JamesMartin 9-Jul-09 6:43pm
Mono and Silverlight. I can see the MS attorneys now, rubbing their hands in anticipation of digging into the Google deep pockets for patent infringement.
mikale 8-Jul-09 11:58am
1 reply
I suspect that the success of Chrome depends on how much Google wants to spend; certainly, they can buy the market if they want to. Microsoft's virtual monopoly did not come cheaply or quickly, but at least was offset by its revenue stream. Chrome, on the other hand, can win only by monopolizing the user's experience...(a chilling thought). However, I think that the anti-competitive nature of such a strategy would eventually attract the attention of the DOJ more than did Microsoft's attempt to monopolize the desktop. And...ignoring the word count... what if Google decides to take the Facebook approach, and claim that any content stored in their environment belongs to them? Google already claims that the public essentially has no claim to privacy; especially if they live on a public street, or below a public satellite. I'm afraid that as a society, we appear to be increasingly lagging behind the technology curve. Only common sense can narrow the gap.
mikale 8-Jul-09 12:03pm
Oops... when I said "Chrome" in my earlier post, I'm referring to the Chrome OS, not the Chrome browser.
daves 8-Jul-09 2:32pm
1 reply
"Finally, open source OSes appeal primarily to geeks because support ranges from problematic to nonexistent." Like, Microsoft offers reasonable support for the average individual user? You have got to be kidding to use this as a reason for the lack of success for open source. It might be true for large IT shops paying the extortion to MS for their subscription service plans and having technical staff with access to MS developer forums, etc. It certainly is not true for the average individual - just look at a PC license. Microsoft absolves themselves of any responsibilty to support you - you are required to get support from the vendor. And the vendor could support any product they choose just as well as MS.
zman58 9-Jul-09 9:18am
I agree with you daves, The major problem is the people do not read the EULA, hence they do not understand what their limitations are concerning use and support of the technology. It is all they care to know. They wait, a very short time, before they have a problem only to discover that they really have very little or nothing to fall back on. They discover only then that the solution they chose simply does not scale and will cost them far more than they ever dreamed. They stick with it anyway throwing good money after bad over and over again. With FOSS you break the dependency and cycle of continual expense. The investment you make carries you forward and scales to any extent you desire. The Chrome OS is supposed to be open sourced. We can only wait to see what license model Google chooses for Chrome. Since it is Linux based, perhaps they will continue in the FOSS tradition.
dmarois 9-Jul-09 2:55am

"so that people can access their email instantly without waiting for browsers to start or computers to boot. "

What really needs to be fixed is people's sick obsession with email. So humanity would be better served by the creation of competent online psychiatrists. I'm sure that's as viable as a "better" OS. Sheesh!

zman58 9-Jul-09 6:24am
Linux success or failure on the desktop is a subject which can be debated. I have never seen a business work harder to keep the public misinformed than a monopoly trying to prop up their business model--nearly all avenues of information are polluted. Because of this situation most users and business out there are seriously misinformed about what is best for them and what they can actually achieve without spending the money and time they currently spend on the status quo. We do not know how many Linux desktops there currently are, but I suspect they are significant numbers and growing very fast. It is all we use at home and we all find it very easy to use, secure, and productive. Of course all of the big vendors including Microsoft, "recommend" Microsoft but that is because this is where the money is for them and it has nothing to do with best fit for business and/or consumers. It is because people believe what they are told and "buy" the story. Google has a very loud voice and deep pockets, like Microsoft. This will help them immensely in regard to Chrome. I expect they will be successful with the platform. On top of that, other Linux contenders will continue to prevail and eat away at the proprietary software market as users and business discover that FOSS is a very effective solution for desktop and server.
rcprimak 9-Jul-09 2:06pm
2 replies

Three Points:

Timing: By mid-2010, everything smaller than a desktop gaming machine will be running Windows 7 or Mac OSX Snow Leopard. Win-7 will make everybody except Mac fans forget about desktop Linux entirely forever.

Getting to e-mail in just seconds: Windows 7, at least on some Netbooks, already has a Quick-Start Mode, in which you can get on line and get your e-mail long before the Windows Desktop loads up, and often even before the System Tray begins to load. So much for that alleged "advantage" of Google OS.

Not needing to back up your data: And what if the Cloud goes down? What if you are in an airplane and cannot get to the Net? How can you possibly exist without local access to apps and documents, including e-mail archives? And if you store documents and mail locally, you need a backup system which is not dependent on your Internet Connection. Hard Drives are not going away anytime soon.

And finally, given Chrome's abysmal track record on security patches, Google's refusal to secure G-Mail, and the inherent lack of privacy of anything which uses Google Analytics, think very hard before signing over your data to this OS in the Clouds!

JamesMartin 9-Jul-09 6:51pm
Surely the starter edition won't, where you can't even change the wall paper, something even cell phones let you do. Forget Linux? Hardly! Don't forget this is Microsoft which downloads "Windows Genuine Advantage" as a security patch. Trusted Computing? Trust MS to mess you up just when you can't afford it!
cmaurand 13-Jul-09 11:40am
Win7 is OK, Its faster than Vista, but way too bloated...still. It won't make me forget about Linux. So not interested in a "netbook." Pretty useless machines with small screens. So not interested in the Cloud for many security and privacy reasons and government intrusion reasons. Google will start charging money for the use of their "cloud" pretty soon.
JamesMartin 9-Jul-09 6:46pm
Marry the Chrome OS with the CrunchPad: http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/03/crunchpad-the-launch-prototype/ and the Mozilla Concepts project Aurora: http://adaptivepath.com/aurora/ And see what happens.
tomg 9-Jul-09 9:25pm
The only reason to have an OS is to run software. The reason Windows is king and will continue to be king is because that's where software development is. If all anyone wanted to do was a little email and shopping anything would do. There are a lot of big money Windows programs that might run under emulation if you manage to jump through the right hoops but it's not worth all the trouble.. Yet. If Microsoft keeps screwing around with their OS trying to turn it into a entertainment center it could turn out to be worth the trouble after all. There may be people out there that can get by with a Linux loaded netbook but there are a lot of other people that still need a computer to compute as fast as it can, running native Windows programs with the best hardware drivers and as many resources as possible. Good luck Google.. You are going to need it. OTOH Microsoft seems determined to shoot themselves in the OS, so maybe they'll do most of the work for you.
landonmkelsey 13-Jul-09 12:02pm
1 reply
how about making browsers reject ads? I hate ads specially the flashing ads! I get seasick! I remember yahoo.com mail once had an empty space in one window filled up with a fat woman who wanted to lose weight! hotmail had some hot cleavage ads
Hiram Q. Pustule 14-Jul-09 8:34am
It's called Adblock Plus, and it's the reason that after trying the Chrome Browser for a week, I removed it and returned to FireFox. Google doesn't make money by searching the web for keywords; it generates revenue by selling ad space, so it stands to reason that they're not going to be strongly motivated to provide an ad-blocking strap-on to their browser. Which is a shame, because if you don't mind the ads, Chrome provides a very attractive browsing experience.
Luteguy 27-Jul-09 12:27pm
Should be fun to try with my clunker laptop which barely runs Windows XP without overheating the CPU. By the way, the term is "hear, hear" and not "here here" which doesn't really make sense.

Sign up to receive InfoWorld Resource Alerts

Subscribe to the Robert X. Cringely: Notes from the Trenches Newsletter

The one-stop resource center for IT professionals.

©1994-2009 Infoworld, Inc.