No Google Chrome OS devices for at least the "next few months"
Summary: Hoping to get your hands on a Google Chrome OS-powered device over the holidays? Forget about it! Google CEO Eric Schmidt has killed that dream stone dead.
Hoping to get your hands on a Google Chrome OS-powered device over the holidays? Forget about it! Google CEO Eric Schmidt has killed that dream stone dead.
Speaking to journalists during a Q&A session at the Web 2.0 Summit on November 15th, Schmidt said that devices running the new platform won't be available for at least the "next few months."
Google misses the critical holiday period.
We first heard about Chrome OS back in July of 2009, and Google went as far as to announce a whole raft of hardware partners. Later that year (November 19th) Google had a further announcement, unveiling more details about the OS. Back then Google claimed that the OS was a year away ...
... fast forward a year later and there's a last-minute announcement that Chrome OS has been mysteriously delayed.
So far Google is silent as to the reason for the delay, and OEMs aren't saying anything either on or off the record.
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
Poor DonnieBoy!
Poor chap.
Maybe he'll but a netbook just to put Chrome OS on it
I'm surprised he isn't here yet
Spamming the board with bull. Usually any blog mentioning "Google", he is on like horse flies on dog.... well you know.
Eitherway, to pre-empt him, no it won't kill Windows
People won't be switching to it in droves
It won't kill Office
blah, blah, blah...
RE: No Google Chrome OS devices for at least the
What he always does. Download another distro, recompile another very trailing edge app and dream of all the modern software and games he can't have.
But let me step in for him.
Google only delays things to make them more AWESOME!!!
Let me guess, it's another beta?
;-)
ChromeOS is probably not for me, as I can probably not use it as a
Come on DB, you're no developer
John Zern: Yes, it does matter what I use. Currently Ubuntu works VERY well
Now, for an extra PC in the house for people to use to do email, facebook, music, watch videos, etc, a ChromeOS computer might be just the thing. Very secure, very functional. Google will make sure that it comes with all the codecs required.
Holy Grail? I think it's called "vaporware" at the moment
It is not vaporware
It just isn't ready for prime time yet.
Still guys, try to calm down. a delay of a couple of months is NOTHING
RE: No Google Chrome OS devices for at least the
That's not the real ChromeOS, which has no desktop or other apps. Get the real deal here:
http://chromeos.hexxeh.net
My point still remains
Why do we even need it?
Given that people trust Google more than Microsoft, quite a few will trust.
I use Google from time to time, and I don't trust them...
Google is like the national highway system, where people who have become familiar with it would be very hesitant about using a set of newly developed roads. It takes time for people to familiarize themselves with the alternatives and gain trust. However, people already know Google, and a great many of them are leery of Google, but, since it's still the biggest game in town and people are familiar with it, it will continue to be used.
Google became the number 1 search engine way before baby Bing was even a twinkle on father Ballmer's eyes. Having a huge head start means the people will use what there is, and especially when what "there is" is the biggest. It's not a matter of trust; it's a matter of using what people have become familiar and "comfortable" with, even though people suspect that their data and search habits are being recorded and exploited.
You have your answer
Google is finding out...
How many times do we have to go through this: Web applications are sad substitutes for native applications, and always will be. Only idiots think that reducing your user experience to a tiny subset of what it is currently capable of would think that Chrome OS is a good idea.
FAIL
Wrong
Final Thought: If you don't want your data being "had" don't use the internet...then, it'll be safely with you...right?
Extra Wrong
"<i>For what the average user does (which isn't play games, or edit videos, or record music), cloud based computing is great. Email, Word Processing, Spreadsheets--these are all doable (and have been getting done) in the cloud.</i>"
Until the very first time these same users <b>do</b> want to do something that crippled web apps can't do. Then these very same users will suddenly figure out what the return policy is...
"<i>If a system can go from cold to ready in a matter of seconds to allow access to your data, that's awesome, is it not? Couple that with the average user, and you have Chrome OS.</i>"
Who cares about boot time? Seriously? If you make your computer platform choices on something as irrelevant as boot time, then I guess you deserve what you get. Especially since if you use the computer's sleep function, the computer wakes up within a few seconds.
"<i>What's not a "good idea" about that?</i>"
Actually, there isn't anything good about it. It is a sad subset of what my computer can do today. Feel free to limit yourself though, if you feel that is in any way "progress".
"<i>Google having your data is no different from your ISP having your data since you presumably use them for your DNS server...</i>"
LOL, I can see why you are so excited about Google - you can't tell the difference between Google having your data and your ISP having it. Here is a clue: Google's core business is based on having your data and mining it for their own benefit. My ISP's business model is only based on moving my data from point A to point B.
Chrome OS will go down in history as one gigantic FAIL. Nothing you have said, or anyone else, has provided one single advantage of Chrome OS vs Windows 7. My browser already does "Chome OS". Why dumb down my computer experience to clumsy web-apps only?
I think the idea is that the future is mobile
That isn't a bad thing, it's just a fact.