Chromium OS

[MYstIC G]

I know a few of us like to swap out linux distributions, I stumbled across Hexxeh's Blog - Home of…um, well, Hexxeh… where there's basically an automatic build service for Chromium OS.

Fired it up in Virtualbox and I really don't see what the fuss is about. Can any of you lot see something I don't?

 

[ford prefect]

I thought it was OK, but nothing particularly special tbh.

 

[ford prefect]

Actually thinking about it, it seems to me that it is rather bulky. The latest release is what 2gig? and given that it is 90% cloud based, seems like a pretty large install footprint to me. I think with a descent connection and a few years down the line when more good web based alternatives are available for certain apps, it will work very well, I just think it is perhaps a little early, although obviously google want to push their apps, which do work quite well.

Other point is I am still not convinced that your average office worker with limited IT is going to be convinced about storing and working on things via cloud rather than locally, not sure the mentality is their yet.

 

[MYstIC G]

Someone else owning all my stuff doesn't sit well with me personally.

 

[GReaper]

Fired it up in Virtualbox and I really don't see what the fuss is about. Can any of you lot see something I don't?

Think of it (a Chrome OS device) as an iPad like device (you can't modify the actual operating system) combined with the updating of the Chrome browser, with all your data being stored safely on remote servers. You've now got a device which does 90% of what average users need (web browsing and web based email), without the risk of malware (sandboxed browser, Linux based), no need to worry about Windows Update, and something which "just works".

Add Native Client to all that as well, then you can run various other applications which need more complexity than HTML/Javascript can offer. This assumes that people port their apps to it!

I could give a Chrome OS device to my parents, or some other family member who is prone to downloading malware and isn't savvy enough to figure out that "Windows Stability Center" isn't an official site. I wouldn't have to worry so much about their machine getting infested, or being asked to fix their computer because it's gone slow (I wonder why!).

Then you've got the business side of things. Companies which have to maintain hundreds or thousands of machines and all the problems which go with them. No need to rebuild the machines and install all the company standard software, if a machine dies then just give the user a new device. All the data is saved on the cloud, the user just needs to login to Chrome OS and all their files/settings will be restored from remote servers.

This obviously isn't for everyone, I couldn't do all my web development on such a device, and I'm sure that most of you here all run apps/games. Maybe it could be a useful as a netbook if all you do is browse sites on it. However for the average user who thinks the web browser is their operating system - it could be far better to deal with than Windows.

 

[MYstIC G]

I can see your points.

I am unsure that it will take off on the corporate side of things. Give all your data to google = big trust issues and plays too far into that "too big to fail" mentality imho.

Netbook OS, I agree. For those that want what they "think" is a PC but actually just don't want to use a touch screen to type e-mails to their aunt betty, it's a pretty solid middle ground.

 

[Zenith.UK]

Someone else owning all my stuff doesn't sit well with me personally.

 

[GReaper]

Businesses wouldn't necessarily need to give away all their data.

Instead of Gmail users could access any other web email hosted by the company itself, Outlook Web App, Zimbra, etc. If they can't trust a cloud based docs/spreadsheet service they could use some form of remote desktop to access any application, which is probably why Citrix are working on Citrix Receiver for Chrome OS.

Give every employee a Chrome OS device and the web browser solves most of their needs. For those applications which are highly unlikely to ever get updated, run them on a server with some form of remote desktop access.

Personally I'm unsure if the corporate side will take off either. The cost of running a network full of Windows machines, the licensing, the updating, dealing with all the problems that come along with it all adds up. It has the potential to simplify a lot of issues, however many businesses are stuck with Windows like a bunch of drug addicts, especially Windows XP and IE6.

Wait and see what devices they come up with on launch, we're just playing with developer builds at the moment.

 

[MYstIC G]

Agreed Greaper, they wouldn't have to. Then again it's just a hole in the armour. If you're not using google then why use it at all and then it all spirals back to "we've already got this so why bother changing" which won't get them many converts.

What's clear to me though from delving around is that this is indeed all a long way off as these builds are too rough and ready.

 

[ford prefect]

I think the only way this would work for the corporate environment is if Microsoft step in and develop Office more towards cloud functionality. People trust office, and they are used to it. In general people, especially corporate types don't seem to like change much. I daresay MS will try to push some cloud stuff into the next version of Windows too, simply because they can and won't want to be seen to be missing a trick.

It is probable that cloud computing is the future, but I just can't help thinking that this is all jumping the gun a bit and until we have better data protection laws and a method of cloud storrage which is perceived to be 100% secure, it is going be a source of concern for a lot of people.

 

[MYstIC G]

The cloud can never be 100% secure. It's not yours. If I store stuff on my NAS nobody else can cut the cable and separate me from my information. Not so with the cloud.

 

[ford prefect]

True, but then nothing is really 100% secure. I think it depends largely on how the public view it rather than the technical aspects.

 

[ST^]

The cloud can never be 100% secure. It's not yours. If I store stuff on my NAS nobody else can cut the cable and separate me from my information. Not so with the cloud.

Your NAS can fail and you'll lose everything. Stuff on the cloud is never going to disappear.

There are loads of pros and cons... ¬_¬

 

[Zenith.UK]

Your NAS can fail and you'll lose everything. Stuff on the cloud is never going to disappear.

There are loads of pros and cons... ¬_¬

I also can't stand the term "the cloud".
It sounds diffuse, ephemeral and lacking substance. Much like my opinion of online storage providers.

I feel the permanence of data stored remotely isn't as good as a "proper" RAID1 NAS box. As you said, hard drives can fail, but data stored online isn't necessarily backed up unless you're paying for a service with a specified SLA.

 

[phlash]

Businesses wouldn't necessarily need to give away all their data.

Quite right. If Google start selling cloud application appliances (like they do search appliances), then this issue goes away as information never leaves the company environment without being wrapped in an encryption layer (VPN) between the company cloud appliances and the netbook / laptop / other disposable device in the hands of the user, where it never ends up on a storage device.

Having worked in IT security for a very large company for a number of years now, this kind of solution is very appealing to avoid yet another 'data loss incident'. I'm also sure it would save money, making the bean counters happy *at the same time* as us techies!

The tricky bit is levering the decision makers away from the devil they know... it's a big business change and thus a big risk for them.

Of course people that need serious amounts of local processing and bit shovelling (eg: developers, statisticians) are rather more likely to know how to look after their data, and can still make use of local machines with little increase in risk.

 

[Wij]

Google Apps is quite popular now for new businesses. The amount of faff that infrastructure and backups create is enormous. Putting all your emails and docs on Google is not only cheaper but it simplifies the company. One less department to control.

The main problem is that with big businesses it's a nightmare trying to port all their data into the cloud and try as they might Office -> Google Docs conversions are still pretty pants.

I find having most documents (e.g. my addresses spreadsheet) on Google Docs now is fantastically convenient. Any PC or phone I use can access it. My shortcuts are synced between Chromium and Android too. If I brick my phone I just re-flash and sign in to google and it's all there again. Same if I get a new one. Same with PCs. I never have to worry about my spreadies again. Google does that for me. Hard drive crashes now only destroy my pr0n

(I will admit though that if you are a serious Office nerd, MS Office is way better for advanced users.)

Cloud is win.