zlynx on Xanga

Weblog

Sunday, 12 July 2009

Chrome OS - A Rebuttal to Lance Ulanoff from PC Magazine

My reply to Lance Ulanoff from PC Magazine based on this article. Lance’s questions and comments are in bold, my rebuttal is beneath each question.

1. Why Do We Need This? Consumers like variety, but stress levels tend to rise when there are too many technology options. I think this is mostly because each platform has its own metaphors. And while some may tell users that this operating system is better than that one, most users are too scared to switch because they don't know if they can learn to use a new OS. Google, however, is applying the same thinking it used when the search giant launched the Chrome Web browser: We can do it better. They did build a super-fast Web interface, but Chrome still lacks many of the basic features we've come to expect from a good browser. Will a Chrome OS have similar gaping holes?

Primarily because there is no operating system in circulation today that is aimed at an always-on, completely connected world. There is no OS that is light yet focused on integrating the cloud infrastructure and service layers. Google has an opportunity to redefine how we view our file system, what it means to be connected and how an OS and Software as Service (SaaS) unite. Chrome, as a browser, is rock solid (most of the time) and has been engineered to manage many of the application development/deployment flaws found in Microsoft’s browsers, namely the support for HTML 5 and a more intelligence Javascript engine.

2. Hardware Support? Google's blog post on the new Chrome OS seems to gloss over hardware support. "[Users] don't want to spend hours configuring their computers to work with every new piece of hardware." In other words, the Chrome OS should work seamlessly with all of the peripherals you currently use. But why is that? The OS is being built on a Linux kernel, which means that while driver support is decent, it's not foolproof. Will Google work with OEMs to have a rich set of drivers available within the OS? Will you have to download all the drivers you need for your existing hardware? How will they ease the process of installation?

Mr. Ulanoff seems to think that Google isn’t a large enough industry player to attract the chip manufacturers, the OEMs and the development community. He’s wondering what kind of hardware support Chrome might offer. Well, it’s classic monolithic OS thinking here. Look at the convergence of many of the Netbook platforms on ATOM/ION like processor chipsets. How many drivers do you really think need to be written? Another thing to consider is that the open source community has been pretty adaptive to changes /advances in hardware and software. So what type of device, attached to a Netbook, will Chrome not drive?

3. Linux? Really? I know I've said this before, but why do people keep going back to Linuxas the best alternative to Windows? There are excellent Linux distros out there, such as Ubuntu, but none of them are quite as easy to use as Windows or the Mac OS. More importantly, two years of Vista did not create a new user bonanza for the Linux platform. It didn't even do all that much for the Mac OS. Instead, Windows users suffered but stayed put. Now many feel like they're about to be rewarded for their patience with Windows 7. Look at it this way: When gas prices soared to record highs, people did drive less and they even traded in their Hummers for Hyundais. What they didn't do is rush to hybrid vehicles. I know there are more of them on the road than ever before, but they are far outnumbered by traditional gas-guzzlers. Face it, the tried and trusted (Windows) seems to stick around even when better alternatives are available.

I’m not sure how to respond to a comparison between car and computer buying habits, but here goes: Take a long look at Vista. Large monolithic operating systems (from Microsoft in particular) are noted for their long periods in update cycles. Before Vista Microsoft popped out Window ME and before that you had Windows 1 and 2. Netbooks need Just Enough OS (JEOS) and linux is the best kernel to provide that.

4. What About Android? Android is a decent little mobile operating system, and it may even do a good job of powering a new generation of netbooks—I'm still waiting to see the first one—but it hasn't exactly taken its primary market by storm. In fact, it's taken almost a year for the second Android-based phone to arrive. I don't know what caused the holdup. Perhaps it's the same problem that Linux has: consumers have found the mobile platforms they really prefer and aren't interviewing any others.

I confess to never interviewing my mobile platform; I just chose my Blackberry because of its features. However the point raised here is confusing? Ulanoff believes that Android, which is designed for mobile phones, and Chrome, an OS designed for Netbooks are not compatible entities. That would be like asking Apple to clarify their strategy related to the IPhone OS and OSX. It’s confusing because you haven’t really thought about Lance.

The Netbook evolved because of deficiencies in the mobile phone footprint and the need for screen/keyboard real estate. The Netbook platform will prosper because of the Windows’ weight. Most will carry both a mobile platform and a Netbook platform and they’ll be tethered… sounds like plenty of room for a Chrome/Android to coexist in an integrated fashion.

5. Which OEMs? Most major PC manufacturers have offered Linux boxes at one time or another, but they don't push them. There are no ad campaigns out there, and they're typically not featured on, say, Dell's homepage. Google certainly has the clout to get into the offices of Acer, Dell, and HP, but how receptive are these companies to Google's platform overtures? Like the rest of us, they've suffered through a bad 2008 and a dismal 2009. Would they really want to risk precious marketing dollars on an untested platform? All are gearing up for Microsoft's Windows 7 push (which kicks off in earnest on October 22). It's the closest thing these manufacturers have to a sure thing. The Chrome OS has risk written all over it.

Windows 7 isn’t a bad OS. It’s lighter and peppier then Vista. In fact, it actually works, while Vista often doesn’t. You’re looking at the larger desktop and traditional notebook market. Netbooks have different use cases and are used in different scenarios than their more capacious cousins. Google will try to establish a beachhead aimed at the younger end of the market who gets Software as Service and feels comfortable connecting to the cloud.

6. Can We Trust Open Source? The open source community is brilliant at building out new OS features, but it also tends to fracture. Does anyone know how many different Linux distributions exist? Can Google depend on the open source community to put the interests of the lowest common denominator first?

No Lance, the Open Source community consists of communists and socialists and therefore can never be trusted. We should instead trust Microsoft to produce products that are secure and functional (sarcasm intended). Lance, you need to understand the difference between licensing your software using a Open Source Licensing scheme and leaving the evolution of the product up to an Open Source community. These are two completely different ways of thinking. Google is smart enough to understand the difference and will undoubtedly leverage the community participation while ensuring that the distributions don’t fragment.

7. Will the OS Be in Beta? Okay, I'm asking this one somewhat facetiously. Google officially grew up this week when it pulled most of its major apps and services out of Beta. I'd say it's no coincidence that it did this right before the Google Chrome OS announcement. The ever-present "beta" tag on many of the company's products made it seem somewhat less than serious about software. The company can't afford that perception now.

Well, I’ve been using a version of Vista for the past two years now and every so often I look for the Beta disclaimer in my EULA. Unfortunately I can’t find it…but I know it’s there somewhere. Wondering whether Google is serious about software borders on the ridiculous.

8. Is Chrome Chrome? One thing that isn't clear is whether the Chrome OS desktop is actually going to be a brand new interface, with new code, or if the whole thing is simply a rejiggering of the Chrome Web browser with a Linux kernelunderneath. Google's blog post makes it sound more like the latter. That could be kind of cool; you get things like tear off tabs and an incredibly lean, speedy interface. On the other hand, how does it handle tasks and applications, navigation, file storage, networking? Does that all get passed off to the Linux platform?

This remains to be seen. However this is a golden opportunity for Google to reshape the way we think about client computing. See my post about the things that I’d like to see in a Chrome OS.

9. Google, Are You Really Building Anything? If the answer to the last question is that Chrome OS is really just the Chrome browser and, maybe, the same Linux core as the one that exists in Android, then maybe there's nothing being built here. Perhaps Google is just making some small adjustments to the Chrome browser and replacing the connections Chrome makes with the Windows platform with ones that work with a Linux backbone.

It’s all conjecture until we get a peek at what will be delivered. I haven’t seen any announcement related to a beta/developer release. My experience working with Google indicates that code will be available soon. Will they have built something? Define build. Maybe integration, standardization and vision are enough.

10. Is It Free? Most everything Google does is, at some level, free. Will Google Chrome OS be just like the Linux brethren it's based on and cost no more than the spare change it takes to download it? If so, does Google still charge OEMs to pre install it? I assume it does, but will Google pass any of those profits (if they materialize) back to the open source community?

You’re dealing with an old world software economy here. Google wins by reducing the cost of the Netbooks, gaining market and mind share and linking the install base to their cloud based services. It’s game IBM and Microsoft played in the early days of the PC industry. The IBM PC with PC DOS cost X while the IBM PC with DR. DOS (from Digital Research) cost $250 more. If all else is perceived to be equal which will the consumer choose?

The marginal profit of the network client (read Netbook in this case) will descend to zero and perhaps go negative. Yes, we’ll be given OEM subsidized computing devices. Look at the mobile market. It will happen to PCs. Verizon is already doing this with their Air Card bundles. If Google can reduce the cost of the subsidy they’ll gain market share. Where does that leave Microsoft?

Wednesday, 08 July 2009

Google Chrome OS Features I Must Have.

Well Google's finally announced their Operating System for mobile Netbooks and I thought I'd just rip of a quick wish list and send it onto the nets in order to give the ten to the hundredth crew my two cents.

I’ve been thinking about a Netbook OS for quite a while now here are the top 7 features I’d like to see in the Chrome OS:

1. Unify Storage: I want my bits and bytes to live in the cloud but I'd also like them around when I'm not connected. Heresy your say! But it's a fact Jack; I'm not always going to be online. So let's imagine a file system that transparently handles the location of my data. Caching it where it makes sense, allowing me to pin things locally (perhaps via folder location) while allowing me to relegate other data to a 'store it where it makes sense' algorithm.

2. Secure Discovery: While I'm roaming around I'd like people to find me via Blue Tooth, the net or even the Alpha waves emanating from me noggin. But make it a secure, remembered hand shake between devices and/or users. I need to get my social on.

3. Optimize Connectivity: Simply put: figure out the cheapest way of getting me bandwidth but then switch providers as I go mobile without my needing to get involved.

4. Sip Power: Sleep when necessary, wake up quickly. The power of the Netbook is based upon instantly available, just in time access.

5. Embed the Cloud: Why should I tell the men from the cloud to embed the cloud? Cuz. Give me Google apps but let me use the code locally even if I'm not on the network. "But it's a NETBOOK you say!"...yup. But down here I live in the real world and if you want me to use a device for productivity apps as well as traditional web/social browsing I need it both ways. Wrap that Google Apps stuff into that Google Gears infrastructure and deploy part of that code locally... so I can read some of those documents you've already let me cache.

6. Hack Me Not: You better make it impenetrable if you're going to connect me to everyone and everything. Do it before the hacker world paints a bull’s-eye on your backs like they did to Microsoft. Well, OK, Microsoft made it a sport.

7. Enterprise Enable: In a world of enterprise clouds make sure I can get there from my Netbook. Embed client (terminal) code so I can remote console on into my Linux and Windows virtual boxes. Make it part of the OS so you can assure me the code is clean and ‘unhackable’. There are certain apps that require a single throat to choke; this one is critical for enterprise adoption.

Let me know what you think. Message me at ZlynxMaster@gmail.com.