All this fuss about Google ChromeOS.
Is it a threat to Microsoft ? Is it a threat to the Ubuntu ?
(funny nobody wonders if that’s a threat to Apple, especially considering everything is a threat to Apple, even being able to take DRM free songs *out* of the freaking iPod)
I’ll just assume you’ve already read the OMG ! ChromeOS Live Blog.
Now, let’s examine extract some important points:
18:13: Netbooks incredibly popular; most people have important data stored in the cloud; webapps most successful platform so far;
First keyword: Netbooks. But let’s go on.
18:15: ChromeOS to be super fast, boot should be just like switching a TV on! Chrome will be even faster on Chrome OS than any other OS.
Another important thing: Super fast boot.
18:15 Better model of computing = Chrome OS.
Whahahah 
This is not important, but I find it very funny.
18:16: All apps to be WEB APPS. NO desktop applications. No binaries.
…also (not only) because it’s too hard. BTW here comes the more interesting indication:
Here it is: custom firmware !
Does that reminds you anything ? Splashtop ! (and similar systems) Quoting myself:
Splashtop is an instant on embedded Linux which boots in seconds (I mean, 3-4 seconds) and give the user fast access to web-based features as Web Browser, Skype, online gaming and similar stuff.
Actually, the most interesting thing about Splashtop is that, being embedded in the computer’s firmware, it does not substitute to the chosen operative system. It’s just a faster alternative to check the mail, and chat with friends.
Google has already agreements with hardware vendors to get dual booting Android/Windows netbooks to the mainstream public. It’s no wonder the droid will be soon replaced by ChromeOS.
So that’s it. Google Chrome OS is (partly) firmware based operative system, that just runs on specific systems (SSDs are required for example) and that you’re likely to find already installed on your brand new netbook, along with Windows.
It will just be the thing you switch into when you have no time to boot the full blown windows (or you don’t want to, or it when win is broken).
My 2 cents
We’re talking about the most inflated operating system ever (no, wait, there’s the mac..). When the marketing bubble will explode we will realize it for what it really is: a brilliant technical achievement, hard to install on anything, useful only as a quick and dirty Internet alternative to Windows.
Is there any chance it will become a full blown operative system ? At least a little bit ?
Well, the official launch will be within a year. My prediction is something more may come in approximately 3-4 years from now.
Is Google ChromeOS a threat to Ubuntu ?
Not within the next 10 years. The only real threat in the meantime being Mark Shuttleworth possibly choke by laughing reading Panettieri’s post. (no offense Joe, I love you. Really.)
And to Windows and MacOS ?
Whahahaha.
Will Linux benefit from it ?
It will get some optimized code and some drivers. The drivers are important, but since netbooks have not much hardware inside (and are almost 100% compatible with Linux already) the benefit won’t be huge.
The boot procedure, being so customized, won’t benefit linux that much, but I’m not very into the technical details, so I may be wrong.
The most interesting chance, already anticipated by some, would be to have (not so) soon a new generation of motherboards capable of holding and handling bigger firmwares and – as a consequence – having the chance to flash the firmware and moving part of Linux directly in the firmware. That may help to have instantly-on (like TV’s !) full blown operative systems.
And has you probably already know, Canonical is helping out Google with ChromeOS. And that’s money to keep things going and further develop Ubuntu, at least in part.
Will Richard Stallman be happy ?
No, Google is no fool and perfectly knows and state that ChromeOS is no real alternative to the existing operative systems. It is just part of a long (loong) term strategy to change computing paradigm (we’re talking about 15-20 years at least). And Richard does not like that kind of shift.
But hey, he will probably be able to get an opensource firmware replacement for his BIOS much sooner. How cool is that ?
ps: not only Google requires Ubuntu to build Chrome, but they probably based it on it, or on a similar system. I mean, they use debian packaging !
From an IT department’s perspective, it is quite possible that a cheap netbook/nettop computer could lead to some major cost savings. In a “return of the thin client” scenario, it would be much more cost effective to purchase a bunch of chromeOS machines instead of a bunch of Window’s based destops or laptops. Email, appointments, and other office tasks can be handled by one decent *nix server running OpenGoo (http://www.opengoo.org/).
Jezra: you miss-read. ChromeOS will be shipped dual-booting with windows (so you’ll eventually pay the OEM Windows license).
Of course it is possible for a vendor to sell just ChromeOS, but then you, as an IT department, are stuck with a inflexible OS than doesn’t allow to install anything on it. That may cause you to spend a *lot* of money when the first change of requirements happen.
You’d be much better off installing Xubuntu or gOs on your corporate netbooks.
Dual boot? In that case, what’s the point if there are no cost saving for the consumer?
In my imaginary scenario, a private webserver is the OS and and the “instant on” ChromeOS machines are just thin clients. If the IT department wants to install new software, they will only need to install a new web-based application on the private server.
Similary, the IT department would only need to worry about backing up one machine.
Jezra: I guess such OS is targeted to mainstream users, not IT departments.
I think IT departments would be better of with existing thin-client solutions or light-weight stuff like xubuntu/lubuntu.
Hi Steff
First of all I think the overhyped ChromeOS will do no harm to Ubuntu. However, I see Google staking their massive reputation on this. They stand to lose a lot should things go haywire. What I think they should have done was to have given users a prelim release. Something to give people a feeling of what is to come, rather than give us some stupid screen shots and ask us to wait for a whole year.
In any case, why wait for a whole year? Are they not working with the Ubuntu developers who produce two distros in 12 months? Why do we have to wait one whole year for a browser called an OS? I surely think there is more to this than Google is telling us. Otherwise, I think ChromeOS will be the biggest tech failure of the 21st century.
Stallman is already gone ape shit about this ridiculous cloud mania (not ChromeOS in particular), and I think he’s right. We’ll eventually lose our freedom. Google (or someone else) will control not only our data but our source code also. There’s enough to go ape shit.
Ciao.
Mr. Stefano Forenza
You have some of your basic facts wrong. Google have never said they would be dual booting ChromeOS with Windows as a splashtop (although I for one would like to see them do that). They have said that they will be sold as separate devices.
They will also be installed on very cheap machines – cheaper than current netbooks, because the hardware requirements are going to be pretty minimal with nothing running locally – think very low cost and very long battery life. They will also be able to run local applications – either offline apps using google gears, or Linux apps using plug-ins and the ChromeOS equivalent of ActiveX that Google has been talking about.
ChromeOS will also be maintenance free unlike Windows, Mac, or Linux, because it is stateless. This is its big selling point – Internet to go – no viruses/malware or anti-virus programs , no configuration, no regular maintenance and updates etc. a “just works” device in the true sense, rather than “only just works” in the Windows sense.
Google Chrome OS will be wildly popular unless Microsoft can intervene in the market to cut a deal with OEMS to prevent them from preloading it like they did with Linux netbooks which were popular until Microsoft’s deal to effectively pay OEMS not to put Linux on netbooks. Microsoft has defined a netbooks as a special hardware category with defined hardware specs on which Microsoft charges a nominal amount for Windows OEM licenses and then provides rebates so Windows is effectively cheaper than free. This predatory pricing is subsidised by the Microsoft Windows licenses paid on other higher end desktop and laptop machines which do not meet the hardware specs to qualify for the subsidy. This is why Microsoft’s revenue took a big tumble as a result of Linux netbooks being introduced.
jezra, check out eyeOS, 2.0 is due out in Jan. 2010 with BIG improvements. It’s a cloud server and can be mated with gOS as the thin clients.
SNP: thanks for your opinion.
I didn’t state that ChromeOS will dual boot, I stated that that would be pretty obvious (too me and other people) move.
The opposite seems pretty much unlikely to me. But if what you say is true (super cheap machines), that could happen.
As for the rest I keep believing that ChromeOS won’t hurt Microsoft main business but a little bit for the next few years. The only stake to Microsoft will be yet another stake to mainstream users perception that Windows and Office are the “standard if not only computing model”.
I don’t think ChromeOS will hurt Windows too much either because they cater for different niches, but it will hurt Microsoft’s monopoly control of the desktop and nullify Microsoft’s attempts to control the cloud and the Internet. If you have two popular platforms, then content providers will have to standards that will allow universal access, and bang goes Microsoft’s market control through proprietary lock-in.