I'll take Windows and a good browser over Chrome OS

Local processing and storage are cheap and powerful; why give them up? What is a Chromebook? To tell the truth, it is defined not by what it can do nevertheless by what it does not do; there's nothing that a Chromebook can do that a Windows notebook running Chrome browser cannot.

Chrome OS runs a very small and controlled set of applications that run inside the Chrome browser, and these are unlikely to be real apps as we understand them. The user interface is limited to what Web 2.0 can do, which is not bad, nevertheless it's undoubtedly less flexible and powerful than a full graphical user interface. By avoiding any meaningful local storage the Chromebook guarantees greater use of bandwidth and slower response in many cases. Caching is one of the most important performance mechanisms at all levels on the Internet down to your device. ChromeOS makes local caching harder.

It's interesting and embarrassing, but like as not not a in effect big deal, that Chrome OS can't print directly to printers on the local network -- see Chromium OS Printing from Google. Chrome OS can only print through the cloud, either to a cloud-aware printer or through a Chromium Print Proxy server -- e.g. a Windows, Mac or Linux box that acts as a print server to a local printer from the cloud. That is, to print a 100-page document on the printer right at once to me I need to send the entire metafile up to the cloud from where Google sends it back down to the print proxy. This is a huge and stupid waste of bandwidth if I ever heard one.

There are some small claimed advantages of a Chromebook over a notebook running a full OS like Windows or Linux, just as the fast boot time, however mostly it's a matter of manageability. As a friend said to me about it, giving up local processing and storage is the whole point, because local state is the source of much grief for administrators. Yet the fact is that all the centralization of state in other words possible with Chrome OS is as possible with real computers, and in part this arrangement can be misleading.

The whole Google Apps end of it

Then there's the whole Google Apps end of it. If moving your company to Google Apps Premier is a big deal, adding Chrome OS makes it a far bigger deal, because you're entirely at the mercy of Google and Google Apps. No local backup possibilities. If a page doesn't work in Chrome, you can't just load up Firefox or Internet Explorer. I'm as a matter of fact a Google Apps Premier customer, having migrated from hosted Microsoft Exchange, and it's nevertheless an iffy proposition.

Chrome OS and Chromebook is just another pitch for thin-client computing. It didn't work in the 1990s, what's as a matter of fact different now? If less-is-more computing is your idea of a productive workday, in any case embrace the Google cloud. I'm sticking with my Windows laptop, during you work in the rain.

Maybe i'm confused nevertheless the majority of human beings living in this world aren't nerds and geeks that need three different photo editing programs and office pro 2040 and media streaming servers and other crap we throw on our PC during picking our noses. 95% of the people I know who use a PC only have their browser open when using the computer. Yeah some of my friends are in college and use iWork, yet they use virtually 1% of the features and can be duplicated easily with Google Docs. This article and all the comments on the article are from the perspective of a moderate to power user with extensive knowledge of their systems. Google Chrome OS isn't meant to satisfy your every need and maybe was never created with you in mind. So let it go and stop being a bunch of fire breathing know-it-alls. In terms of business use, Chrome OS probably doesn't have a shot at the corporate level however will be a boon to schools, colleges and small businesses.

Thats the rub...Google is wanting to push this concept as your first pc. But Chrome/splashtop/Android are best suited on a 2nd or 3rd pc

The Chromebook is old wine in new bottles

"This is why the Chromebook is old wine in new bottles."More like new wine in old bottles. Sure it is thin client, nevertheless it has HIGHLY improved software. Software is the important part."Local processing and storage are cheap and powerful; why give them up?"Not as cheap and powerful as Google's data farms. As well not as resilient, anyway you look at it."Caching is one of the most important performance mechanisms at all levels on the Internet down to your device. ChromeOS makes local caching harder."Have you even studied how ChromeOS handles cache? Can you please explain what it does? I doubt it completely doesnt do anything. It has memory and I'm sure it stores local data on it. Even my Android caches.Dunno what to say about printing. I honestly am not printing out 100 page documents anyways. If I do need to print its on the whole just one or a few pages. I do know I will not get rid of my windows desktop, so it won't be a problem to use it as a print server. On the whole need a printer although..."Some say that a Chromebook doesn't need antivirus, yet that's true only to the same degree that Macs don't need it."Um, how can you possibly claim this? People have constantly proved, as you admit, that it is very easy to create viruses for Crapple products. The reason people don't do it is because it isn't a large enough part of the market. As well, how can you say it's the same as Macs? I would say Macs are more the same as Windows, and ChromeOS is far from them. Remove the ability to install programs and you're removing the primary cause of virus infections."Security for most of this could run on the server, nevertheless wouldn't it be good to take advantage of local processing power to check things there too?"No. Antivirus programs are the worst viruses."Chrome OS makes it a far bigger deal, because you're absolutely at the mercy of Google and Google Apps. No local backup possibilities. "In other words the point. Google products are superior, and they will handle backups better than most people ever could."In these times Wifi is ubiquitous, yet it as a matter of fact could be ubiquitouser."It will be ubiquitouser, if Google can help it."Outlook does better, and Google Calendar is pretty weak compared to Exchange."Kill it with fire."Chrome OS and Chromebook is just another pitch for thin-client computing. It didn't work in the 1990s, what's in point of fact different now?"Google grew and created awesome innovations in the way we use the internet, and has created software that is to tell the truth a delight to use.

Couple reasons I don't see ChromeOS taking off...- To many iPhone/iPad users, they can't sync with the ChromeOS- Most corporations have custom in-house apps that would have to be re-written as webapps. Many companies are moving to Sharepoint, which probably doesn't work so great in ChromeOS either

It doesn't matter if Apple devices can sync. It only matters if other Android devices can sync. Apple is totally irrelevant when it comes to Android products.

If Apple products can't sync with ChromeOS, at the time how will those millions of people use iTunes on it? They can't, that's my point. No iTunes means ChromeOS won't be an option for those people.

The wrong product?

Who's fault is it that they bought the wrong product? If people would stop acting like everything Apple makes is the most amazing thing on the planet at the time this wouldn't be a problem.

Remember the days when the world gave Microsoft antitrust heartache over having Internet Explorer integrated into the operating system? :-)I wonder if someone is going to raise hell if big G pulls the chrome OS into a big success story. Can you have a competitor's browser like Mozilla in Chrome OS?

Platform for applications including web browsers

Windows is a platform for applications including web browsers. Chrome OS is a platform for web apps. Chrome OS is the actual product being sold. To force Firefox into Chrome OS would be like forcing the M&M maker Mars to put Skittles in their packages instead.

Google didn't change the world, the world was already changed and Google just took current innovation a step or two furthermore than it's competitors.I just don't get this devotion to Google that people have. Google is a company! A company set on making oodles of your freaking money and they do so by advertising and now as well selling products just as this ChromeBook. All the during you're giving up your privacy to them.Ever wonder why there's privacy modes in web browsers? Or why people disable cookies or use such things as NoScript and AdBlocker? It's because they want their privacy and they don't want to be tracked online. Nevertheless with Google, you're being tracked and will be tracked at your every turn, more so if you use their browser and their ChromeOS and ChromeBook. If Microsoft were to start doing such privacy invading tracking that Google does, the world would be up in arms and the law suits would be flying faster than mach speeds, yet for some reason people ignore this fact with Google and waltz along like it's the new defacto in life, no care or concern in life, just letting Google do as it sees fit with you and your information.I swear, this all reminds me of the infamous 1984 Apple commercial and this time it's the hoards of people hypnotized by Google.Lastly, my data is right where I want it to be, on the HD in my PC and on a couple of back up drives instead of on Google's drives where they can see it.Heh... The new Big Brother is Google and you all love him for it.

@garretthylltun - Privacy concerns regarding Google are totally overblown. Google doesn't steal the data you store on their cloud servers. They don't even peek. They as well have no way to determine where you are at any given moment if you have an Android smartphone. What Google does is no worse than Apple or Microsoft. Stop spreading misinformation. You sound like some shady PR person trying to start a smear campaign against Google.

Cheap?! Where did you get the idea they were cheap? Cheaply made perhaps, I don't know I haven't seen one. However the announced pricing was give-or-take $400!!! You get a mid-range laptop for that price, whereas a Chromebook is just a browser!!! $400 for a browser?! Not when I can get a netbook for $200 and install Chrome OS on it for free. Or better but, install Linux on it and at the time install the Chrome browser - I'll have the best of both worlds for half the price.I can only imagine Samsung and Acer insisted on those prices to avoid cannibalizing their other products. Yet if Google as a matter of fact believed in the Chromebook they would have insisted on a much lower price or they would have built it themselves. And have you seen the Motorola Atrix Lapdock? It's brilliant, and it runs Android!!! Yeah, Android! You get all the Android apps and functionality on netbook. Google needs to drop-kick ChromeOS to the curb ASAP and get manufacturers to start using Android on notebooks - ultra slim, low power, simple, basic note/netbooks.

The Atrix comment

You kind of hurt your argument with the Atrix comment..one of those plus the doc costs more than either a Chromebook or a laptop. Other than that, good points, esp. regarding Android. The only way Chrome OS ever goes anywhere is if it supports Android apps and has some off-line functionality. If neither comes to pass at that time Chrome probably will be abandoned in favor of Android like you suggest.

Uhh, I think the price mainly reflects hardware. I looked up the processor itself and it's $83. That only leaves another $300 for the rest of the stuff, which includes high quality super bright screen, comfortable trackpad/keyboard. All in all a LOT cheaper than Crapple.

I as a matter of fact hope it doesn't become a full replacement for PCs in the corporate environment. Since there is no hardware to locally support and is controlled by subscribing to Google, the IT field from a corporate standard becomes obsolete - in other words, unless Google wants to hire all of us who would lose their jobs because of it.I get using it for remote sales reps or support reps for something easy with which to communicate back to the company, nevertheless it is most anyway a terrible idea to fully replace any PC on the corporate network. I would consider switching to Linux-based machines earlier handing my money over to Google for the use of a web-only terminal.And where is the customization? You may as so then use dumb terminals that use the net. Terrible idea from an IT support standpoint. You are at heart renting the use of a terminal.

Larry, why is it you seem to be a closet Windows bigot. First you blast IBM and the MS antitrust suit, and now a web-based OS by Google. File storage can be done in the 'cloud', and MS has been touting 'cloud' functionality as the then and there platform it will attempt to take over. Yes IBM tried this with JavaOS, nevertheless it was a case of being too before long without the research. Now that the research exists, It boils down to choice. If your choice is to have a PC with local file services, and if in other words what you like, good for you, yet it does not mean the rest of us have to 'stick' with an antique innovation that requires local file storage in order to operate.

The problem here in Sri Lanka is the bandwidth

I do like google docs as then as Microsoft office webapps however the problem here in Sri Lanka is the bandwidth. It's terrible to access these services at the office. I could do the job lot faster from the office installed with my computer. We have VPN and it looks like not going to be upgraded in nearly feature. They say it as a security yet common sense refuse to accept it. Any I am not a decision maker for that matter.

For every tech head like Larry who actively likes computers there are another hundred who don't. They don't want to manage computers themselves, they don't want to understand them, and they don't care for the massive complexity which is typical of modern applications. They just want to use the internet. So it doesn't matter if dear Larry doesn't like it - the target market is different from him and much much bigger.

The nail on the head

I think you hit the nail on the head, skycat. Apple products have such success because they're "magical" and "just work." Most computer users "just" want to get to their work/user experience, to put it more exactly than clicking out of dialog boxes, worrying about updates or destroying their machine by clicking "yes," antivirus, spyware, malware, counter-intuitive behaviors and file locations, etc., etc. Chromebooks add benefits by taking away headaches. I agree that most "tech heads" chafe at this concept or simply fail to have it penetrate their built-up layers of OS experience and knowledge. Note that I consider myself a tech "geek," but I've loved my Cr-48 and cutting out the headaches.At once, Larry talks about Chromebooks being as susceptible to viruses as Macs. The point is that a Chromebook runs only a browser, in other words than a bunch of other exe.s, so any threat is either blocked completely or presumably eliminated at log off. Yes, I'll agree that a Chromebook may be susceptible to some form of spyware, viruses, etc. and, for all intents and purposes, I see that 0.000000001% chance as virtually 0. So, for most people, it is "no viruses."

Uh, ChromeBooks are not simply a Browser on a Netbook/Notebook. It's a Linux/Unix based operating system with a browser as the interface which is such as susceptible to hacking, virii, malware and spyware as any other operating system.You should be happy that there are people out there who voice their concerns on these things, for as you note, the simple folks wouldn't know of these things, however people like many you see here posting and replying understand these things and can point out the obvious issues and problems to the simple folks.The biggest concern is that all your data, information and applications are not stored locally, yet on external servers which can and will be hacked, take the PlayStation network as a prime example. The other issue is that your data, information and applications are all housed by Google, a 'Company' who's sole purpose is to make money through advertising, which they do by.. wait for it!..... wait for it! WAIT FOR IT!!!! by targeting it's users via information they garnered from using it's services! OMG! The horror! The simple folks probably don't know or understand this unless other more educated on the subject let them know.

I totally agree with Fred. I have used a CR-48 since December and you cannot effectively write about the Chrome OS platform unless you have used it. I have used the iPads and the Xooms and I totally agree with Google, its a different experience. You cannot compare using a Chrome OS device with a Windows machine. They simply are not in the same universe. Even when CR-48, and its functionality was shaky in the best case, it was so much better than the Windows end user experience. It is actually easy to overlook the boot times, however that in fact matters. I can pick up my CR-48, open it, and within seconds I am surfing. Afterwards using the OS for a during, you start to taking everything into account realize how much of your computing is done via the browser. Until I started producing a daily podcast, I never needed to even turn on my PC. I can edit audio via Aviary, edit photos through Piknik, store things in the cloud via Box.net and Dropbox. My CR-48 is blazingly fast even on lousy internet connections. What do you basically use on your computer? Word? Excel? You said you use the Google App suite, so what are you using that you can't get online? If your computer is not online, do you in point of fact use it? The answer is no for me, and for just about everyone reading this. USE THE PLATFORM Earlier YOU REVIEW IT.

The Google services

I dont use the Google services, not even search. I use MS Office and use lot of its features. I use Quicken...OFFLINE. I use Photoshop, I have thousands of photos and songs. I have a ton of home video that I edit. I use applications for work that are only written to work on Winodows. I use windows only apps for Boy Scouts. These are just a few of the things I do with my Windows PC that cant be done on a Google appliance.I guess if all you use is facebook and gmail the Chrome OS is where you need to be.In that case you should have never had a PC.

Didn't Google say that Chrome would have 100% compatibility with Windows apps? All you have to do is set up a remote desktop connection, until further notice that was my understanding. If so, it's a very simple process that anyone could do.

I disagree people aren't giving Google enough credit for their OS and remember it's not even on the open market but and how do do you know that the Chrome OS will not be as good as windows it's not even released but. Larry unless you have reasonable grounds on the Chrome OS being a failure don't talk about it being a failure unless you have proof that it will fail. This OS hasn't been tried but by people nevertheless yet you are don't even know If this will be better or worse at the time windows. I would switch to Chrome OS over windows anyday or anytime simply because windows will never be the greatest OS in the world. Its a complete failure If you ask me. Microsoft did the coding wrong with windows 7 and Microsoft continues to patch their OS very poorly. Now Google's OS hasn't been tried by us yet to sum up they haven't had any reliable comments about how good or bad the OS is so until people start giving their feedback on it I think that we need just sit back and relax on this issue.

The past scenarios as so then as now

In the past scenarios as so then as now, thin computing is only good if you need it to solve a problem. If the problem outweighs the disadvantages, at the time go for it. When apps need to use a remote data source and need more bandwidth than what you have available to move data back and forth then and there you use a remote solution like Terminal Server or Citrix. When more processing power was needed than what was available in a desktop box was when we used mainframes. The reasons I can see for using something like the Chrome book are to solve management or data-sync problems. Don't we already have solutions to these problems?I'll keep using "cloud based" services, however I don't need a special machine, that's crippled so it can't do anything else, to do it.

Software Assurance is 10 years old, which is about nine years too many, says Paul DeGroot, an expert on Microsoft licensing. It's time to make big changes to a program that confuses clients and does more damage than good to Microsoft's business.

On May 15, 2001, Apple gave journalists a tour of its first retail shop, which opened four days later. Joe Wilcox presents photos of the Tysons Corner Center store debut and describes what is was like to be there.

The Windows boot screen is something not easily done

Customizing the Windows boot screen is something not easily done. The fact that the images involved are hardcoded into system files is enough to put off all nevertheless the most seasoned of tweakers. Windows 7 Boot Updater puts you in control.