Between the Lines

Larry Dignan, Andrew Nusca and Rachel King

Google goes after Windows with launch of Chrome OS

By | July 7, 2009, 11:42pm PDT

Summary: Google said late Tuesday that it will launch the Google Chrome operating system, a computer operating system that initially will target netbook computers by offering a faster, better and more secure way for users to access Web-based applications. The Chrome operating system should not be confused with the Android operating system that the company launched for [...]

Google said late Tuesday that it will launch the Google Chrome operating system, a computer operating system that initially will target netbook computers by offering a faster, better and more secure way for users to access Web-based applications.

The Chrome operating system should not be confused with the Android operating system that the company launched for mobile devices. While there will be some overlap between the two systems, Android was designed to work across a number of devices, such as phones, set-top boxes and netbooks. The Chrome OS is being designed to power computers that range from small netbooks to full-size desktop machines.

The Chrome OS is a direct attack against Microsoft’s lucrative - albeit vulnerable - Windows operating system. By now, it’s no secret that Windows Vista was a nightmare and that Microsoft is eager to launch its Windows 7 operating system, which is scheduled for release in the fall. From the official blog post announcing Google Chrome OS:

We hear a lot from our users and their message is clear — computers need to get better. People want to get to their email instantly, without wasting time waiting for their computers to boot and browsers to start up. They want their computers to always run as fast as when they first bought them. They want their data to be accessible to them wherever they are and not have to worry about losing their computer or forgetting to back up files. Even more importantly, they don’t want to spend hours configuring their computers to work with every new piece of hardware, or have to worry about constant software updates. And any time our users have a better computing experience, Google benefits as well by having happier users who are more likely to spend time on the Internet.

Google, which has long been singing the praises of cloud-based applications, is stepping up its game to bring the cloud to the mainstream. The operating system - a lightweight open source system that will run on both x86 as well ARM chips - is deigned to start up and have the user on the Web within seconds, as opposed to the long startup time on Windows. In addition, the company said that it’s “going back to basics” - just as it did with the Chrome browser - to redesign the underlying security architecture “so that users don’t have to worry about viruses, malware and security updates. It should just work.”

For developers, the platform is the Web. All Web-based applications will automatically work on the Chrome OS and new applications can be written using any web technology, which means they will work on any standards based browser running on Windows, Mac or Linux.

Earlier in the day, Google ripped the Beta labels off of its Gmail, Google Calendar, Google Talk and Google Docs applications, presumably to make them more attractive to business customers who might have thought of them as unfinished, untested or unreliable because they still carried the Beta label.

Those apps also go directly at another of Microsoft’s sweet spots, its software suite. Gmail and Google Calendar, for example, provide an alternative to Microsoft’s Outlook while Google Docs is intended to challenge popular productivity tools such as Word, Excel and PowerPoint.

Later this year, the company plans to open-source its Chrome OS code and is already talking to partners about having the first round of netbooks available to consumers by the second half of 2010.

Also see: Dana Blankenhorn: Netbooks, Chrome and the future of computing

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Sam has been a technology and business blogger for more than 18 years.

Disclosure

Sam Diaz

Sam Diaz has nothing to disclose.

Biography

Sam Diaz

Sam has been a technology and business blogger, reporter and editor at ZDNet, the Washington Post, San Jose Mercury News and Fresno Bee for more than 18 years. He's a member of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists and a graduate of California State University, Fresno.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
179
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Google goes after Windows with launch of Chrome OS
makrejktt62-24353626312913337629402893125563 6th Nov
ctefxl,good post!
0 Votes
+ -
Poor old MS
Richard Flude 8th Jul 2009
It was only a matter of time until Google went after the
monopolist profits MS makes with their poor windows.
0 Votes
+ -
not so fast
patibulo 8th Jul 2009
Do you think computers will suddenly move to web-only applications? Have you tried doing anything useful with Google apps? Do you think everyone wants to based his computing life on a permanent always on-line connection?

So you are traveling by train with your laptop. We are about leave the train station, signal will fade, so harry up to access the "insert graph GUI"!

I didn't think so either...
0 Votes
+ -
Indeed...
Mike (not Cox) 8th Jul 2009
Can't be connected all the time - not yet anyway.

Also I had come to rely on Google Apps for some stuff, but their "upgrades" broke so much functionality that it ended up becoming useless for my purpose. So I switched back to Office 2007 (mostly word processing.) And if you dare complain, it's the usual "hey, it's free. What did you expect?"
0 Votes
+ -
..why people still pay for MS Office when OpenOffice is every bit as good....and doesn't require you to pay hundreds of dollars. I've switched countless people to OpenOffice for this very reason and they see absolutely NO impact of difference whatsoever. Please people, if you need a good Office suite download, install and use OpenOffice....you'll never go back to paying for Microsoft Office. It's not that MS Office isn't good...it certainly is but with OpenOffice you can convert from every imaginable Office suite format as well as export your documents into PDF format.
..Outlook equivalent? And the list goes on and on..Office is more than Word, you know.
0 Votes
+ -
be very careful
steeliejim 8th Jul 2009
I tried Open Office, and it randomly corrupted some, not all, of my old word docs I tried to save to it. Maybe I did something wrong, but can't afford experimenting.

Free is seldom free.
0 Votes
+ -
Yes please do be careful....
storm14k 8th Jul 2009
I had the exact opposite happen. I made a document in OpenOffice and saved it in office format and it worked fine everywhere...Google Docs other online doc parsing sites etc. I then opened it in Microsoft Office and made one simple change. From then on the document had problems being uploaded to Google Docs and other sites and editors didn't want to open it. I ended up having to do it all again from scratch.

Software is seldom worth what you pay for it.
0 Votes
+ -
"Software is seldom worth what you pay for it"
corlandogcrta.org 8th Jul 2009
That means that all of google's free apps are worth nothing? Or maybe, less than nothing?

0 Votes
+ -
if you had started out on OO, you'd be making this same claim about MS office. Its like listening to people complain about Photoshop vs GIMP. The learning curve is tough on all these apps. If you have spent alot of time on this one or that one, its easy to understand your frustration dealing with another. That does not mean it(the other whatever app)is bad. Just means (as you mentioned)you don't know the app well. OOOOh scary! Just using one company forever is scary.
0 Votes
+ -
Question is....
storm14k 8th Jul 2009
..how may people use OneNote. I have rarely run into anyone using it. Thats not to say its not used but that there are many people not using it that could use OpenOffice. For many people Office is simply Word and Excel.

What does Outlook have to do with Office? The fact that they are packaged together? If you're on Windows you have Outlook express and if you're on Linux you have Evolution. They just aren't packaged with the office tools.

I'm sure the list CAN go on and on....deeper into stuff that the majority of people don't use but people love to drum up as some excuse as to why OpenOffice won't suffice. Open Office has become very useful around my place of employment.
0 Votes
+ -
The Question is.....
Richard Turpin 14th Jul 2009
You have very little idea of what you are talking about? I suspect you are a pontificate and an assumer? Of course people use One Note it is a unique piece of software and absolutely worth training all your staff in its use. Please before you make comment next time learn what software is about. Incidentally to an advanced Excel user Open Office has its limitations. I do agree that for Offices that do not do a lot it can be sufficient in its own way.
0 Votes
+ -
There is
adelacuesta 8th Jul 2009
but it wasn't bundled with openoffice. It is called thunderbird, it is free as a bird.
0 Votes
+ -
But why use Thunderbird when Outlook is much better?

Outlook is no masterpiece by any means but it's still better than Thunderbird.

Moreover Thunderbird's functionality is severely limited (especially its interoperability), also its development seems to proceed so slowly, that by comparison, a snail looks like a contender for the Indy 500.

Give it 50 years to catch up, if ever.
0 Votes
+ -
@Irritated_User
tmsbrdrs 12th Jul 2009
You made a claim and didn't back it up.

You made the claim that Thunderbird is lacking in features. Which features would those be?

You made the claim that Outlook is better. Please explain why.

Without giving reasons, all you're doing is proving yourself a fool.
0 Votes
+ -
Stating the obvious
bcwise 8th Jul 2009
"Office is more than Word, you know."

Really now. I'm sure that even the most computer illiterate Office user realizes that MS Office is an office suite of applications.....as is OpenOffice.

Outlook equivalent? Actually there are several full featued mail clients such as Evolution (which works as a Microsoft Exchange Client just like Outlook) and Thunderbird (which is more of a Outlook Express replacement...but much better than Outlook Express). As far as OneNote, if memory serves me correctly it does not come with Office...it has to be purchased separately unless that changed with Office 2007. In any event, I don't know a single person that uses OneNote....even I rarely used it when I had my tablet pc for 2 years.
No OpenOffice doesn't, but there are other programs that are equivalent to OneNote & Outlook, so no I don't think most people need to purchase MS Office.
0 Votes
+ -
Re: Open Office and OneNote
Tom in Raleigh 8th Jul 2009
Try Evernote--I like it a lot, especially if you don't spent all your time in MSFT world. If you use MS Office a lot, then OneNote integrates with it well.
0 Votes
+ -
Does MS Office come with ...
williamacole@... 20th Jul 2009
a pdf button that instantly converts the document to a form that can be read on any platform? Does MS PowerPoint come with a button that turns it into a flash presentation? Does exel come with a pdf button that allows you to do a single button pdf conversion? And most importantly, does Microsoft have a way that you can continue to get updated software versions legally without shelling out hundreds of dollars every few years?

It's true. OpenOffice.org is not Microsoft Office. But I've never lost a document with OpenOffice.

And the price tag means that I don't have to wory about shelling out $500+ for something I can download for free and then decide if I want to make a financial contribution.

If you are happy with MS Office and it's price, I suggest that you continue using it. The rest of us will save our money for something more important.
0 Votes
+ -
Nope...
Mike (not Cox) 8th Jul 2009
OpenOffice has this bad habit of leaving "dormant" processes running after closing applications (mostly the word processor in my case) - and eventually they eat up all the CPU, slowing down the PC to a crawl. I know a good number of people having the same problem. I've reproduced it under XP and Vista, but have no idea what exactly triggers it (sometimes it doesn't do this.) So after using it for several years, I finally got rid of it 2-3 months ago.

Also, Word 2007 has a pretty good grammar checker. I often have to deal with documents received from people with less than stellar grammar, and it helps for the first pass when reviewing their text prior to publication. The grammar checker available with OpenOffice (at least they finally have one) is severely deficient in comparison.

I'll stick with what works for me, thanks. That's why we have choices, right?
0 Votes
+ -
Interesting...
bcwise 8th Jul 2009
Personally, I've NEVER experienced what you explain and I've been using OpenOffice since 2005. Actually, I find it to be MUCH more stable than MS Office. I can't think of a single instance when I've had problems with OpenOffice and I use it on a daily basis to convert Work and Excel documents and to create legal documents. I don't use the database much nor presentations application so I can't talk to those apps but I use the spreadsheet and document apps every single day without issue. I especially love being able to output my documents to pdf format without having to purchase Acrobat or some other third-party pdf creator. I even frequently use it to open/view and import Wordperfect documents which are common in the legal industry. I also have no problems with the spellchecker...though its dictionary may not be as extensive as MS Word's has become...but to me that is irrelevant...any word it does not recognize prompts me to change, ignore or add it to the dictionary which is what I do. You are correct though...we do have a choice which is why I choose OpenOffice and why I never said you had to as well. If you want to keep paying for MS Office then you are free to do so but my point is why pay for functionality you can get for no cost at well?
0 Votes
+ -
OpenOffice: good, Office 2007:...
joepranay 8th Jul 2009
I've used OpenOffice on and off for the past three years and every time I've found myself reverting to MS, even if I had to pay for Office 2007. There are a number of things to pay for actually: a better UI, dictionary, formatting options (the fastest and nicest I've ever seen), all easy to use and efficient; a picture editing system light years ahead of the open source crowd; the best, most widely used presentation making application; a great downloads page with thousands of templates and cloud computing with Office Live. Plus, there's a free pdf converter available to all on the Microsoft Downloads site. OpenOffice is indeed well-suited to word processing but for everything else it's a question of whether you'd pay for the quality of the application and its all important product or not.
0 Votes
+ -
I think you're being disingenuous...
corlandogcrta.org 8th Jul 2009
Lets be honest. I doubt that anyone can come up with an application that hasn't had some sort of problem. And I'm not referring to something about the UI that you don't like or a missing feature. The simple truth is that no application is perfectly stable, and if you've really used OpenOffice as much as you say you have since 2005, you would have had at least a "single instance" when you've had problems.

There have been no fewer than 18 releases of OpenOffice since 2004- each one an improvement, to be sure. Surely, one of those many releases addresses a problem that you have forgotten you had.

I love OpenOffice. I use it extensively, myself, and I inform everyone I can about it. I have provided it to many new computer users, in particular, who have had only minimal experience with other Office Suites, and they have adopted it quickly. But there is little chance that you can convince anyone that it is bug-free and perfectly stable. I have had it corrupt documents from multiple other suites in the past. Hell, it's even corrupted it's own documents from time to time. That's not enough for me to stop using it for my personal needs, though. Especially, when you consider the cost of the alternative.

On the other hand, even a few minor problems can significantly disrupt work in an enterprise environment. Large enterprises want to be able to rely on their office suite, and they want tech support when things aren't working the way they should. As of right now, it's alot harder to get that support on an open source product. Even the perception that support is harder to come by can be enough to influence the decision makers in large organizations...

0 Votes
+ -
Office has done .pdf for years
frabjous 9th Jul 2009
I can't believe I'm defending MS in any way (flinch) but I have to
state the fact that saving files to .pdf format is a feature in the
old version of Microsoft Office X for Mac that I bought in 2002.

Granted, it always seems odd not to use the Save function, but
rather to go to Print and then open the PDF menu: Save as PDF,
Save as Postcript, Fax PDF, Mail PDF, etc., and it has always
worked flawlessly for Word and Excel files all these years. I really
don't know about more recent versions of Office, but I doubt MS
took that feature out...
0 Votes
+ -
That is a function of the printing system built into Mac OS X.. The windows-equivalent didn't have this functionality built-in. 2007 was GOING to have it built-in, but after some pressure from Adobe, they decided to make it an optional add-on instead.
0 Votes
+ -
Processor Word No Need Grammer Check
Too Old For IT 8th Jul 2009
I don't know how it is you say this!! Everyone here has learned to talk the English good, no matter what school we bad come from. We make good with the outsource money now.
0 Votes
+ -
I'll tell you why
Originalevil 8th Jul 2009
First, when you launch OO, especially Calc, it has the look and feel of an office 97 app. Obviously, you'll point out that functionality matters, not looks, but if I have to spend three hours looking at an app, I don't want to look at an ugly one.

Second, last week, I created a series of training presentations. I started the process in Impress, because I wasn't sure if the machine I'd give the presentations on had Office 2007 or an older version. I finished three documents on Wednesday and, on Friday, I went back to the second document because I wanted to create a new one using it as a template (just delete some of the contents and move off in the direction I needed to follow). I couldn't open the documents because OO immediately crashed on opening. I'd done nothing to them or to OO, the app just died on me.

I tried this on my workstation and also in several VMs running different operating systems. So I decided to reinstall OO. After I reinstalled, I could open it, but not the documents.

I fired up Office 2007, opened all of the documents, recreated them in another instance of PowerPoint, and saved them in the 97-03 format and said forget it.

I think that free/open source is great. I work for a software company, I test software for a living, and know the investment of time and talent it takes to get an app to the level OO is at right now.

I also know how far it has to go, stability-wise, before it is suitable for mission critical work in the enterprise.

When OO looks like "current level" technology and is as stable as whatever current version of Office is out there, then MS will be in big trouble.
0 Votes
+ -
I use various suites...
914four 9th Jul 2009
OpenOffice on my Linux box, StarOffice on my MacBook and Solaris machines, and MS Office 2003 on my Windows box. I never liked the Fisher-Price(tm) look of Vista and Office 2007, and I suspect after reading your post that that may have been one of the elements that turned me off of it. I don't want to be staring at an app for 3 hours, I don't even want to see it, I just want to use it to do work. I never could stand the stupid paperclip either...
0 Votes
+ -
Hey, I'm not here to tell anyone what to use for their productivity. If OO does it for you, then, since its free, I'd agree, why use a paid equivalent. But if you really are talking about productivity, OO is a long shot away from MSO's equal. I use the VBA capabilities of MSO. I know that that puts me in the minority. But, the majority of users also dont use these suites for productivity ends. For those of us that do, OO isnt ready for the bill. Maybe some day though. And I am for seeing it get there
0 Votes
+ -
There goes That song again N/T
windozefreak 8th Jul 2009
Nt
0 Votes
+ -
I only use Office because...
Captiosus 8th Jul 2009
...I got a volume licensed Enterprise Office 2007 as part of my tuition for school and all of my assignments through online channels require Office 2007.

It was sad to have to put aside OpenOffice for now, but at least I didn't have to pay retail for MS Office.
0 Votes
+ -
Except for the fact....
kaninelupus 9th Jul 2009
that it is highly remenicient of Apple Docs ten yrs ago. If you are simply after a basic word editor, then certainly it fits the bill. But if you are attempting to put together an application or presentation with real polish, OpenOffice doesn't even come close. Open Office especially stuggles with Word-based tables and text-boxes.

The biggest bane of Open Office (and many of the competitors) is actually not Word or Excel compatibility - the one app that Open Office still struggles to work with is PowerPoint, especially a complex PPT compilation.
0 Votes
+ -

As much as I hate to admit it, Microsoft Office still remains a significantly better package than does OpenOffice.

The machine I'm writing this on has both MS Office 2000 (now ancient) and the current OpenOffice 3.1, yet I use O2K in preference simply because OpenOffice doesn't even have a full set of BASIC EDITING FUNCTIONS as does O2K, let alone a decent speller or grammar checker--not to mention an Outlook clone, nor even a keystroke compatibility mode for newbies fleeing from MS Office. Oh, and I nearly forgot, it's a resource hog and often very slow (amongst other things).

Why these issues continue to remain a problem after so many years just beggars belief.

If you are to beat Microsoft at its own game, not only does the application have to be significantly cheaper but also much better, OO might be cheaper but it utterly fails at being better.

Having looked at many free software packages over the years, I've come to the conclusion that writers of free software like writing code much more than they do about being part of a disciplined team whose objective is to write the best software available.

There are many other examples of where potentially excellent free open source software has been screwed up by nerds who are just pushing their own barrow--guys who are more interested in doing their own thing rather than being part of a team whose objective is not only to be equal but better than Microsoft.

For instance, Thunderbird--even the latest beta 3--is far from being an equal of Outlook. Even Eudora with its brain-dead editor has much more functionality. What is so sickening is that Outlook is so mediocre yet there's nothing better, and a much better mail client is desperately needed.

But The Gimp has to take the cake for having the worst ergonomics of any program with comparable complexity; it is diabolically terrible when compared with just about any version of Photoshop. It's ergonomics are strange, ill-considered and illogical and it's preview speeds are so slow--even on the fastest of machines--that by the time the preview has been painted/rendered one has already forgotten the comparison. If there were ever a program that needs rescuing from a bunch of nerdy geeks this is it.

Unfortunately, free software might be free but it's clearly not the best.
0 Votes
+ -
Corporate and well-off users vs everybody else
Prime Waverider 10th Jul 2009
Most users don't need the allegedly better functionality of MS Office or Photoshop. They need something at little or no cost(Linux,GIMP,3d games). Otherwise the mostly crappy machines sold won't be good for anything loaded w/vista and its incl. software. Move vista over on the HD and load Linux, voila, 3d FPS games, full-version apps and more. No nickle-diming us to death for simple apps and games.
0 Votes
+ -
Perhaps not in the US
zdnet-gregc 8th Jul 2009
But in some other parts of the world, wireless access is ubiquitous. I was amazed that, while on a train trip in Scandinavia, I never lost my mobile signal. That was about 8 years ago. Laplanders herding reindeer had connectivity.

In parts of the "developing" world wireless may well be the dominant networking paradigm.

If I commanded a largish business today, would I opt for a complete cloud solution. Nope. But I know some smallish business owners that already do.

I don't think Windows is in any trouble just yet. 10-15 years down the road, who knows?
0 Votes
+ -
But keep in mind....
kaninelupus 9th Jul 2009
There's a strong possibility Windows won't be the MS OS of choice.

They actually have TWO alternate OS projects in the R&D stage. Windows may be around for a couple more builds, but 10-15yrs from now, it will be little more than a legacy OS.

As to the US being behind, unfortunately Australia is also lagging. Btwn the fact that we had one dominant telco for far too long, coupled with this "firewall of Australia" the federal govt is trying to push on us, we also have a long way to go.
0 Votes
+ -
A linux distro plus a browser is a new OS?
Martin_Australia 8th Jul 2009
I cannot believe how much attention and hype this non-announcement is getting.

Google announced that they are releasing an OS for Netbooks based upon Linux plus a browser and they will name it Chrome.

And this is a story deserving comparisons with Microsoft and Windows?

C'mon can we please get some sensible debate going on here for a change?
0 Votes
+ -
It's deserving of attention because ...
mwagner@... 8th Jul 2009
... under the Google moniker, there will be cusotmer support. This makes Google a worthy competitor to Microsoft.
0 Votes
+ -
Depends on the level of support.
Captiosus 8th Jul 2009
You're angling your assumption that Google will provide equivalent levels of support. Yet Google themselves are looking to independent programmers to help them bring Chrome's Linux core up to par in a relatively short amount of time.

The level of support won't be all that great and Google has to maintain a lot already with the money they have.

I mean, really, Red Hat isn't exactly strapped for cash and they have extensive support that you have to pay for (which will likely be the Google model, as well), so why aren't you here saying Red Hat is a "worthy competitor" to Microsoft?

Because they aren't and neither will Google. It'll be just like any other Linux distro and the support will be buy-in, just like Red Hat. If Red Hat couldn't crack MSFT with that model, neither will Google.

In reality, the only reason this is getting attention is because it has the "Google" name behind it. I don't know anyone of my local friends, coworkers or classmates who uses the Chrome browser any longer. They've all gone back to Firefox, Opera or Safari.
0 Votes
+ -
How will there be??
kaninelupus 9th Jul 2009
Since when do Google provide decent support for any of their products??

Stop spinning the hype and deal with real fact... isn't that what a real journo is s'posed to do??
It seems to work very well when the popular press doesn't see "Linux" along with "operating system". Microsoft and their puppets (tSCOg comes to mind) have spun so many negatives concerning Linux out to those not quite in the know.

This way -- by not saying "Linux" out loud -- the result is [deservedly] broader coverage for "yet another Linux distribution" with extensions from someone [Google] who will also integrate browser technology very well into both remote and local programs using "new glue" [based on Python and Java technologies].

The result will be a cross-platform upper-cut followed by a nose-crushing blow to Microsoft-- all enabled by Linux/FLOSS and a deep pocket, savy OSS player.
0 Votes
+ -
To be honest, around 50% of Google's project fall on their face... if they even make it out of R&D. Even their mobile OS (Android) has had shocking reviews! They haven't either given ANYONE a build to play with, nor have they made clear just how they're going to ensure stable cloud-based OS support in the real world.

Stop sniffing the Google-crack!! Until we actually see some facts, and until we see if the OS even hits the market, why don't ppl leave off on all this BS claims!
0 Votes
+ -
I think ...
JonWayn 8th Jul 2009
it is newsworthy. I am surprise the talk back is so short
0 Votes
+ -
People can legitimately start calling this a direct challenger to Windows when I can play Crysis, Left4Dead, Command & Conquer, and other tier 1 games on it.
0 Votes
+ -
I know, it's a joke.
Irritated_User 9th Jul 2009
I know, it's just a joke.

It'll be a long time before Google worries Microsoft, especially given that Google apps are pretty shallow affairs.

Nevertheless, I'd love there to be true competitor for Microsoft but that's still a pipe dream.

0 Votes
+ -
Oh come on ...
mwagner@... 8th Jul 2009
Google is just as interested in turning a profit as Microsoft! In the end, everybody (including Microsoft) benefits from the competition.
0 Votes
+ -
No, YOU "come on"...
Captiosus 8th Jul 2009
This is not NEW competition.

This is going to be the exact same model as Red Hat, as I stated earlier. In the end this is going to be just another Linux distro with LESS functionality because Google wants to pipe you into THEIR web services.

Red Hat couldn't crack MSFT.
Ubuntu netbooks couldn't crack MSFT.
Google will not crack MSFT.

This will be a completely niche OS that many won't even use because they still desire the functionality and CHOICE (yes, CHOICE) of how, when, and where they store their data and by what means they open it.
0 Votes
+ -
Google is not Redhat or Ubuntu
Prime Waverider 10th Jul 2009
SEE if you can find ANYONE who doesn't know the name GOOGLE. It's difficult to find anyone who doesn't use it. I use Ubuntu (and Vista dual-boot)and if I mention Redhat or Ubuntu, I might as well be speaking Ubuntu happy
0 Votes
+ -
This is _not_ a real OS.
deowll 9th Jul 2009
It is meant to run on the cheapest excuse of a net book that money can make with the best battery life.

I expect it to show up on something being handed out free by phone companies after you sign their contracts.

It does one thing. It runs Chrome on top of a Linux kernel. If you can live in Chrome go with it. Otherwise forget the twiddle.
just sayin'
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Google goes after Windows with launch of Chrome OS
makrejktt62-24353626312913337629402893125563 6th Nov
ctefxl,good post!

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix