Google's operating system

[John Doe]

The only thing I like about the idea of Google publishing an
operating system is that it might help keep Microsoft in a box. The
big antitrust trial of pre-2000 was about Microsoft trying to take
over the Internet. Google publishing an Internet centric operating
system is going to rub Microsoft the wrong way.

What, do you think?

 

[Syfo-Dyas]

The only thing I like about the idea of Google publishing an
operating system is that it might help keep Microsoft in a box. The
big antitrust trial of pre-2000 was about Microsoft trying to take
over the Internet. Google publishing an Internet centric operating
system is going to rub Microsoft the wrong way.

What, do you think?

I concur

 

[Conor]

The only thing I like about the idea of Google publishing an
operating system is that it might help keep Microsoft in a box. The
big antitrust trial of pre-2000 was about Microsoft trying to take
over the Internet. Google publishing an Internet centric operating
system is going to rub Microsoft the wrong way.

What, do you think?

Microsoft has nothing to worry about. Basically, any sysadmin who wants
to keep his job knows better than to rely on cloud computing. Google
has shown quite a few times in this year alone just how flakey it is
and how no access to cloud services, either because your internet or
the providers services are down, is a big issue especially as unlike
local served applications and documents you have no control over when
they'll be back up.

 

[John Doe]

Wow.
You should write horror stuff for money.

At the time, I thought you were kidding.
Apparently I was mistaken.

 

[spodosaurus]

What, do you think?

You're a dick.

HTH.

--
spammage trappage: remove the underscores to reply
Many people around the world are waiting for a marrow transplant. Please
volunteer to be a marrow donor and literally save someone's life:
http://www.abmdr.org.au/
http://www.marrow.org/

 

[Steve Sprott]

The only thing I like about the idea of Google publishing an
operating system is that it might help keep Microsoft in a box. The
big antitrust trial of pre-2000 was about Microsoft trying to take
over the Internet. Google publishing an Internet centric operating
system is going to rub Microsoft the wrong way.

What, do you think?

You too are rubbing yourself the wrong way. You ought to stop it before
you become too desensitised to have normal relations with a human
female.

--

 

[John Doe]

John Doe wrote:

You're a dick.

That's what your mother likes about me, Spoon.

 

[John Doe]

You too are rubbing yourself the wrong way. You ought to stop it before
you become too desensitised to have normal relations with a human
female.

Says a nym-shifting troll.

 

[Man-wai Chang to The Door (+MS=32B)]

Too early to comment on it! What values could Google add to a Linux
derivative?

--
@~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
/( _ )\ (Ubuntu 9.04) Linux 2.6.30.1
^ ^ 20:46:01 up 1 day 5:15 0 users load average: 1.40 1.37 1.29
ä¸å€Ÿè²¸! ä¸è©é¨™! ä¸æ´äº¤! ä¸æ‰“交! ä¸æ‰“劫! ä¸è‡ªæ®º! è«‹è€ƒæ…®ç¶œæ´ (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_addressesa

 

[Z]

The only thing I like about the idea of Google publishing an
operating system is that it might help keep Microsoft in a box. The
big antitrust trial of pre-2000 was about Microsoft trying to take
over the Internet. Google publishing an Internet centric operating
system is going to rub Microsoft the wrong way.

What, do you think?

Wow, just a few hours later and several posts have been sent. I've
found an article from CNET, does anybody want to read it? It should be
fit for this groups "pc-homebuilt" very well. And some words in it
seems familiar:
"Chrome OS for the clueless: What it means for real people"
http://news.cnet.com/8301-19882_3-10283555-250.html
written on July 9, 2009 5:19 PM PDT

And is "written on" proper ? Or should it be "written in" or "~ at" ?

pst... it seems some guys here like the topic of that thing very much,
is that actual what you are always doing?

 

[spodosaurus]

Says a nym-shifting troll.

*cough* this from the troll who doesn't like it because he's too slow to
keep up *cough*

 

[John Doe]

*cough* this from the troll who doesn't like it because he's too slow to
keep up *cough*

You are right, Spoon, I have no idea how your trollish nonsense
relates to the subject at hand. I suspect it has to do with stuff
your mother failed to teach you.

 

[John Doe]

John Doe <[email protected]>

Wow, just a few hours later and several posts have been sent.
I've found an article from CNET, does anybody want to read it?
It should be fit for this groups "pc-homebuilt" very well. And
some words in it seems familiar:
"Chrome OS for the clueless: What it means for real people"
http://news.cnet.com/8301-19882_3-10283555-250.html
written on July 9, 2009 5:19 PM PDT

Most regular authors here probably already know enough to guess
what what it is about. Probably few if any would think of the
current Google OS as being a mainstream operating system
comparable to Windows in the foreseeable future.

Or would that be "on"?
(kidding)

And is "written on" proper ?

Definitely, Yes.

Or should it be "written in" or "~ at" ?

No.

You can say "it was written back in July of 2009" but you would
change that to "it was written on July 9, 2009". You are wrestling
with some fine points of English. If I were you, I would stop
trying to be precise. Again... If you really want to know, go to
(alt.usage.English) and knock yourself out.

pst... it seems some guys here like the topic of that thing very
much, is that actual what you are always doing?

The topic of operating systems? I am very interested in the
subject.

 

[John Doe]

"... Chrome OS, a free competitor to Microsoft's Windows operating
system..."

That plainly false statement is where I stopped reading. That
article is for the clueless.

 

[John Doe]

I thought Chrome was a mobile operating system, like PalmOS.
Judging from my Blackberry, anything that will run Java is
adequate for mobile computing. Windows Mobile is definitely
overkill.

The desktop computer is still popular, but it's looking more and
more like a dinosaur. It won't be long before home users won't
bother with them, and businesses will be the only ones with
fixed desktop machines.

That, or similar, is a prediction (strangely) both Microsoft
defenders and Linux Lunatics have shared for many years.

I hope you are at least part right, hopefully low-tech and no-tech
users won't bother with home computers anymore. Then, maybe
Microsoft will produce more technically capable, lean and mean
operating systems. Anything is possible. Yes, Microsoft might be
removed from catering to low-tech users. Or, maybe Microsoft will
just be removed from catering to ambulatory/mobile users.

The only problem I can think of for Microsoft (besides being kept
in a box) would be if there are more mobile PC users than there
are home users, and then connectivity standards were dictated by
the mobile operating system makers, and through that somehow a
different choice of home computer could be forced. But I doubt it,
Microsoft has a stranglehold on desktop software. A power-play
like that would probably end up being prosecuted just like
Microsoft was prosecuted going the other way.

I suppose you could argue that eventually the home user's
processing needs will be saturated, so the mobile device will be
satisfactory for both home and away (just plug it into a big
monitor and a keyboard at home). But, we are light years away from
home computers having enough processing power to run easily
conceivable future applications.

 

[Steve Sprott]

You are right, Spoon, I have no idea how your trollish nonsense
relates to the subject at hand. I suspect it has to do with stuff
your mother failed to teach you.

Says the mong-who-knows-all.

 

[John Doe]

John Doe wrote:

Says the mong-who-knows-all.

Why are you nym-shifting, troll?













See also:
Marty <martywoyzak communitymail.com>

 

[Rarius]

I thought Chrome was a mobile operating system, like PalmOS. Judging
from my Blackberry, anything that will run Java is adequate for mobile
computing. Windows Mobile is definitely overkill.

The desktop computer is still popular, but it's looking more and more
like a dinosaur. It won't be long before home users won't bother with
them, and businesses will be the only ones with fixed desktop machines.

I am sorry, but I have to disagree with you there.

Have you ever tried writing a letter or building a spreadsheet on a
mobile device? Have you ever tried playing ArmedAssault, CallOfDuty or a
million other games on PalmOS? How about downloading and manipulating
pictures from your digital SLR, or building a website?

The desktop PC has a LOT of life in it yet. Unless the interface and
processing power of handheld devices equals those of desktop PCs there
will always be a place for the more powerful desktop PC.

Rarius

 

[Z]

Yes, and it's easier than you think. My Blackberry has a screen that is
half a VGA screen. A full Word and Excel compatible software package is
available for $69. It comes with a web browser and WiFi, and will
handle streaming or downloaded video. It only comes with a gig of
memory, but you can add 16 gigs of storage by just plugging in a chip.
Add a folding bluetooth keyboard and you have a capable mobile computing
platform. If they ever add a miniature monitor interface, it would be a
full sized computer in your pocket. As it is, if you are travelling,
the folding keyboard takes up as much space as a paperback book in your
luggage, and weighs less. Mobile gaming is still primitive, but is
getting better all the time.

Granted, a smart phone doesn't replace a full sized computer yet, but it
is obvious the day is not far off. Computers are a mature technology,
with no new features introduced in a decade. Smart phones are still
rapidly evolving.


For a while.

then like "Final Fantasy: the Spirits Within" and "the Matrix"

 

[John Doe]

....

Granted, a smart phone doesn't replace a full sized computer
yet, but it is obvious the day is not far off. Computers are a
mature technology, with no new features introduced in a decade.
Smart phones are still rapidly evolving.

I think a better description would be that smart phones are coming
into being. Personal computers are still rapidly developing, and
increasing in features. And they have a long long way to go.

But I definitely agree with your other stuff about how impressive
they are. The much greater portability (with computer and Internet
capabilities) makes a world of difference. The name "iPhone" is
misleading, it is more of an ultraportable computer connected to
the Internet than it is a mobile/cell phone.