Comments on: Will Chrome OS offend the Open Source Community – WGAS?

By: LinuxOsman

LinuxOsman — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 07:14:40 +0000

When Google does not use the linux or the Microsoft kernel( and yes microsoft runs on a kernel) then you can represent it as a OS. I really didnt realize how many undereducated writers there was today lol

Best Regards

By: Luc

Luc — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 21:23:32 +0000

#38: Yes, Microsoft has been squandering size/power advantage for years with substandard quality — but still is the dominating company, with massive headway. Maybe I was too sarcastic and didn’t make myself clear.

In other words: yes, Google may as well trump Canonical quite easily even if Chrome sucks.

By: qb

qb — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 18:25:00 +0000

#37 Don Quixote

Have you ever tried to use VS Express? It’s a gutless wonder. VS is horrendous unless you buy ReSharper. Thank God for JetBrains.

By: Philber

Philber — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 17:34:08 +0000

Luc’s right – Microsoft has been squandering it’s size/power advantage for years by coming-up with crap OSs. Size and power (financial resources) does NOT necessarily mean a good product!

By: Don Quixote

Don Quixote — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 16:18:33 +0000

Windows became dominant because it was supported by the hackers decades ago. Today the Apple guy in the commercial stands alone, while the poor MS slob has all these other people to make it work.

And that is just why the Apple guy is standing alone. It is a one person system, selling only his software.

Microsoft has since windows given the hacker access to it’s operating system, for free.. http://www.microsoft.com/express/

MS is what an open system looks like, and will be for sometime.

By: MikieV

MikieV — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 16:03:22 +0000

Me, again.

“Practically the only choice for 100% site compatibility is to use Adobe’s proprietary plugin, so Chrome OS will need to license and include it out of the box…”

Unless they “pull an Apple” and don’t support Flash, like the iPhone doesn’t.

Isn’t that part of the attraction of HTML 5? Using regular video instead of having to use things like Flash/Silverlight?

By: MikieV

MikieV — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 15:59:22 +0000

I’m curious to see how this ramps-up.

Google says they intend to start with netbooks… so they shouldn’t be supporting any “legacy” hardware, initially.

If it stays mainly as a cheap, fast way to get online – and everything else is secondary – I can’t see the new OS being much of a threat to desktop Linux… unless a LOT of desktop Linux users suddenly realize that all they really need is a cheap, fast way to get online.

By: MikieV

MikieV — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 15:48:50 +0000

I love how Ridin the Short Bus [in #5] -completely- misses what Luc was saying [in #3].

Back to the original item, the privacy one makes me laugh, e.g. “Chrome OS might be free of charge but you’ll pay for it with your online soul.”

They can have my online soul, for all the good it will do them. They can’t make me buy things I don’t want/need. They can’t watch my online activities any more than Comcast and/or Verizon already do…

Comcast knows as much about my “private” online soul – at home – as the corporate proxy server knows about my “public” online soul, at work.

I have no illusion of privacy when I go online.

By: Uncle Patso

Uncle Patso — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 11:48:33 +0000

Apparently the open source community is as sectarian, individualistic and just plain contrarian as the leftist community. (I understand there’s some overlap…) All this speculation is completely baseless at the moment anyway. It will be months before we have any idea what Chrome OS will be like. There are so many possibilities. It could be great and achieve a 20% market share in two years in Europe, 15% in the U.S., with much higher figures for netbooks. Or, it could end up like “just another Linux distro” and fight with all the other distros for a few percentage points. (I’m hoping for the former.)

By: danijel

danijel — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 07:24:54 +0000

Every single point in this article is pure nonsense. And you wonder why media is dying….

By: faustus

faustus — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 05:15:47 +0000

on the surface of this it seems to really just suit google and google’s needs and not the linux commune as a whole… which sounds a little like software fascism to me…. what ever the greater good of inc and state… so be it. i mean come on… google all the doe ray me to build what ever microsoft has.. to rip off linux just for the cool…. seems to blow hard and like alot of shite google has been doing as of late probably won’t work out.

By: deowll

deowll — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 04:10:04 +0000

Let me explain. I could care less. An OS that only runs a browser is crap. That goes double when it runs an OS that has a 3% market share.

I’d rather have a Blackberry.

By: Toxic Asshead

Toxic Asshead — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 04:07:44 +0000

Yawn. Richard Stallman is the second dumbest moron on the planet.

By: qb

qb — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 04:02:00 +0000

#17 Luc

I’ve been to way too many conferences where the open source guys spent days arguing over which license to use. Zzzzzz……..

By: dgroow

dgroow — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 03:37:52 +0000

I am not sure what the buzz is about. Other than search, what has Google developed that is complete. Their gmail, although adequate, has room for lots of improvement. Their google maps for smart phones is pretty good.

I think Google should spend more time completing the apps they are marketing, instead of adding a product which at best will be a marginally small success. I would rather partner with a distro and add resources to improve Linux and desktop environments.