Introducing the Google Chrome OS!! - Page 7 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Software > Linux and Open Source
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 07-17-2009, 09:32 PM   #61 (permalink)
The Bulldog
 
zmatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: In an empty Ramen packet
Posts: 4,660
Default Re: Introducing the Google Chrome OS!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by S0ULphIRE View Post
It's a useless redundancy because why? o yeah, because you've already got backups going. Again, you're missing the point. With this system you wouldn't need to worry about that anymore. It does it for you! Does that make it useless? but of COURSE it does, why didn't I see that?
I never asked for someone to back up my files for me. And we have already been down the road of network reliability. My hard drives are far more reliable than my ISP and I don't expect that to change. When SSDs take over completely there will be but an even larger gap.

Quote:
Originally Posted by S0ULphIRE View Post
Also, in the first place I wasn't talking about redundancy, I was talking about data security. As in, no matter how many copies of your data you make someone can still steal it. And the average home user will NOT have an adequate security system in place to protect their data.
Again, old news dude. I'm fairly secure. I wouldn't say 100% secure, but I'm not going to sell my own info to advertising companies so they can try and target their ads that my browser addons block anyways. It goes back to it being here makes it more reliable. I have dvds in the safe. Now unless someone really wants the family pictures and movies on those dvds so bad that they will get past me, my .357 magnum and the safe itself I don't think you have much of an argument. Anyone who doesn't backup doesn't know that they should and is asking for it. Most people get wise about data backups after they lost a lot of important files. At least then you can be proactive about it. I have no control over the backup practices of some company holding my information on servers. Besides, such a company would be a much nicer target for crackers since there would theoretically be sensitive information form millions of people stored on there, whereas the stuff at my house just pertains to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by S0ULphIRE View Post
And WHO CARES that it's 1000 miles away? It's all electronic. It may as well be 1000 miles away on your hdd, for all the difference it makes to you. The ONLY problem would be speed, and I believe I've addressed that several times. In case you weren't listening (which you obviously weren't) I said
I care. You must not be a very sentimental person. There is few things that can make you feel more secure about an item than holding it in your hands. Not only that but, (and this has happened to me) when such companies have your information in their hands there is very little that can stop them from selling it to advertising companies or worse to make a small profit. I applied for a college scholarship and the company that ran the application process online sold my info to some company that signed me up without my knowledge to some ring tone service on my cellphone. They charged $10 extra a month. I had to call AT&T to have it removed. Now, instead of them just knowing your cell number, what if they knew the names of your kids, and where you worked etc. It would be very creepy to have something like Google ads that has the name of your family members in the add in an attempt to get you to buy whatever POS it is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by S0ULphIRE View Post
Now, are you going to repeat the same arguments you've been going on about? security? your crappy internet connections? how 'useless' redundancy is?
Yes I am, because they are valid ones that you have yet to adequately address.

Also, I like how you quoted yourself and tried to make it look like we were contradicting ourselves.
__________________

__________________


ポップ・タルトが大好きです。
<<<<<<<Rep is always welcome
Ultimate Guitar exercises/ Songs for technique
zmatt is offline  
Old 07-17-2009, 09:54 PM   #62 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: /home/jason
Posts: 3,056
Send a message via AIM to Jayce
Default Re: Introducing the Google Chrome OS!!

I don't do anything for my extra backups to happen. I had to set up a script, which consists of 4 lines to back up to 3 hard drives. But that was it. Some basic research on the Ubuntu forum and I built a script, tied it to crontab, and it automatically does it for me.

I've also used a program known as SyncBack SE, which is a basic, but free edition of the paid-SyncBack enterprise level backup software. It has a gui with several check boxes. Click this this and that, tell it to do what you want, and presto. You're done. In fact, this is the program I use to get the Windows machines on the network to auto-backup to my Linux machine @ 3 am, then @ 4 am my backup script in my Linux machine takes over.

This is what you would call... "Fully Automated." I don't do a **** thing. Yes, I had to set it up, but I don't do a **** thing otherwise.

If a user is aware enough they need some form of backup, my first instinct would be SyncBack (or another similar program, several of them exist) + external hard drive. Tell it to sync @ a certain time each day. Done deal. Automated. Easy. It wouldn't be "Oh my gosh! Let me switch my entire operating system (scary enough for a basic user) to this Google Chrome OS because it backs up for me!"

And about my data being 1,000 miles away - I do care. Like I already said, call me old school, but my data is just fine on my computer - in my computer room - in my house. It has no need to be on a server 1,000 miles away. Not only that, but recently I pulled a lot of my pictures down to DVD's to give to my parents. I had a lot of my brother's birthdays and family vacations and such saved that they didn't have due to the fact I'm a snap-happy picture taker. Imagine having to "download" a large 15gb+ quantity of pictures. It wouldn't be a hop skip and jump. -1 for externally located storage. +1 to my hard drives continuing to take the load.

I can see how some people would look at this and be like, awww, this... I like this. I like this a lot. But by no means in any way shape or form do I foresee this being a renowned almighty glorified way of computing.
__________________

__________________
There's no place like /home.
Jayce is offline  
Old 07-18-2009, 01:31 AM   #63 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
S0ULphIRE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 8,637
Send a message via MSN to S0ULphIRE
Default Re: Introducing the Google Chrome OS!!

I see where you're coming from, and I'd agree. Currently networks are too slow and unreliable, the company (or companies as the case may be) ruling over this super-duper-cloud-of-data could easily be corrupted and sell your info for profit etc.

All I'm trying to say is that soon this idea will be feasible. Networks will be fast enough and reliable enough for this kind of use.
The main arguments seem to be about the speed of the network, and how pulling 10+gigs off it would take forever. I've already acknowledged that that's true, hence why I said this would only work in a few more years time.
As to caring about having your hard drive within arms reach at all times, I dunno. Maybe it's just me but I think if you're getting that attached to your hdd you need to see some kind of doctor.

zmatt, how many times a day do you go up to your hdd and hold it in your hands to make yourself feel secure? I really really really hope the answer is 'none'.
__________________
"As a result of all this hardship, dirt, thirst, and wombats, you would expect Australians to be a sour lot. Instead, they are genial, jolly, cheerful, and always willing to share a kind word with a stranger, unless they are an American." -- Douglas Adams
S0ULphIRE is offline  
Old 07-18-2009, 02:16 AM   #64 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: /home/jason
Posts: 3,056
Send a message via AIM to Jayce
Default Re: Introducing the Google Chrome OS!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by S0ULphIRE View Post
As to caring about having your hard drive within arms reach at all times, I dunno. Maybe it's just me but I think if you're getting that attached to your hdd you need to see some kind of doctor.
You're taking this far out of context from what I've said already. And comments such as:
Quote:
zmatt, how many times a day do you go up to your hdd and hold it in your hands to make yourself feel secure? I really really really hope the answer is 'none'.
are not needed seeing as though they don't provide any constructive regard to the conversation at hand.

I do not need my hard drive within arms reach at all times. If you would have read my posts, you would have already been aware that, like most users on the forums here, I prefer to have my personal data on my computer within my household and not at a ****ing remote backup facility miles away managed by people that I have no clue who they are. It's not a matter of a "problem" I have, it's about logic, practicality, and sensibility with combining MY data and MY residence into one.

I have a lot of pictures. Pictures of people who are no longer with us anymore. I have a lot of documentation in my computer. Lots of information regarding the school I went to. Documentation I use at work for utilizing a lot of different things I need. I also have simple things that would be a pain in the *** to lose, such as my resume. All of these things are either precious to me (pictures of late family members) or just simple documents that I could re-generate, but it would require a good deal of time.

Again, why, OH WHY, would I ever want to have all of this data managed by a set of people I have no clue who they are miles away from my house? When I could... just... oh, I don't know... keep it in my computer? And throw a second drive in and run a backup script or 3rd party app to do the backup for me?

I can see how some people out there might like this idea. You need to find what works best for you when it comes to pretty much everything. That's why we have Mac, Windows, Linux, BSD, etc. Everyone likes something different. When it comes to storage management, I like simplicity and convenience, which is why I have an automated setup process in my own computer. Perhaps somebody would like to buy into storing their data elsewhere. That's fine. Whatever floats their boat.

But at the end of the day, you gotta do what you gotta do. With that being said, when it comes to computing, I just do what makes the most sense.
__________________
There's no place like /home.
Jayce is offline  
Old 07-18-2009, 05:08 AM   #65 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
S0ULphIRE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 8,637
Send a message via MSN to S0ULphIRE
Default Re: Introducing the Google Chrome OS!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jayce View Post
And comments [like that] are not needed seeing as though they don't provide any constructive regard to the conversation at hand.
true, and I do apologize for that.

If you want to keep things how they are that's fine, and I understand why you like the current storage scheme. Both the current idea and the proposed idea have their flaws and merits (security, actual storage space, ease of access, etc.) so it's inevitable that people will disagree on which one trumps the other.

If you like owning the actual hardware you store your data on, then I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that. I mean, heck, that's the reality right now.

I will say though that with a few improvements cloud computing will be a great asset, no matter who you are or what kind of data you store with it. Sure it's a very different approach to the current 'norm', but maybe that's not such a bad thing after all.
__________________
"As a result of all this hardship, dirt, thirst, and wombats, you would expect Australians to be a sour lot. Instead, they are genial, jolly, cheerful, and always willing to share a kind word with a stranger, unless they are an American." -- Douglas Adams
S0ULphIRE is offline  
Old 07-18-2009, 07:51 AM   #66 (permalink)
Call me Mak or K
Mod Emeritus
 
KSoD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: C:\
Posts: 35,647
Default Re: Introducing the Google Chrome OS!!

Alright enough. This is getting away from the topic at hand which is Chrome OS not cloud computing and it benefits. If you wish to continue that discussion i will split the thread and then you can split hairs about if it is good or not.
__________________
I do not accept support questions via EMail, PM, IM or my G+ page!

Phone: LG Optimus G Pro
Running: Stock JB from LG with Nova Launcher

KSoD is offline  
Old 07-19-2009, 01:08 PM   #67 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Kharn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,638
Default Re: Introducing the Google Chrome OS!!

Quote:
Google has finally announced its long-expected operating system, the Chrome OS. Here’s what we know about it, plus my take on both why it matters and why it could turn out to be irrelevant.
————————————————————————————————————————————— —————
No one is surprised Google announced last week that it is building an operating system. It’s been one of the worst kept secrets in the technology world that Google has long desired to build an OS to take a shot at the Microsoft Windows monopoly. In the wake of the announcement, Google CEO Eric Schmidt even admitted that Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin have wanted to build a Web browser and operating system for years, but Schmidt initially opposed the idea and only recently gave in.
Google’s idea is to essentially create a thin client operating system for consumers. This is not going to have a big impact on IT departments and businesses, many of which are experimenting with Windows-based thin client solutions such as VDI. However, IT pros should understand Chrome OS because you can be sure some workers will try to bring it into the business.
For more insights on Google, Chrome OS, and other tech topics, follow my Twitter stream at Jason Hiner (jasonhiner) on Twitter
Thus, let’s take a look at the few details we know about the Chrome OS at this point, and then look at the reasons why it will matter and the reasons why it may turn out to be virtually irrelevant.
Here’s what we know

  • It will run with a Linux kernel as its base
  • It will boot directly into the Chrome Web browser
  • It will be aimed primarily at netbooks
  • It will run on both x86 and ARM processors
  • It will not be designed to have local storage; all data will be stored in the cloud
  • Google will not entice developers to build software to run on the Chrome OS; instead, they want them to build Web apps that will run on any standards-based browser
  • The three most important features will be “speed, simplicity and security,” according to Google
  • Google will release the software to the open source community before the end of 2009
  • Announced Chrome OS hardware partners: Acer, Adobe, ASUS, Freescale, Hewlett-Packard, Lenovo, Qualcomm, Texas Instruments, and Toshiba.
  • Netbooks running Chrome OS will be available in the second half of 2010
This is Google’s official explanation of the problems that it is trying to solve with Chrome OS:
People want to get to their email instantly, without wasting time waiting for their computers to boot and browsers to start up. They want their computers to always run as fast as when they first bought them. They want their data to be accessible to them wherever they are and not have to worry about losing their computer or forgetting to back up files. Even more importantly, they don’t want to spend hours configuring their computers to work with every new piece of hardware, or have to worry about constant software updates. And any time our users have a better computing experience, Google benefits as well by having happier users who are more likely to spend time on the Internet.
Three reasons why it matters

3. Because Windows needs more competition
Nearly two decades after Microsoft Windows conquered the PC, very few real challenges have been mounted against its dominance. Long-time rival Apple Macintosh has recently had a resurgence, but it’s still hovering at less than 10% of the total market. This market is ripe for innovation and a new competitor. In many quarters, Windows fatigue has set in, especially in the notoriously price-conscious consumer market and in light of the Vista debacle. The virus, spyware, and security troubles of Windows are its biggest weaknesses and Google is wise to target those soft spots with Chrome OS.
2. Because Chrome OS will be cheap
Google has confirmed that the Chrome OS will be open source and will not have any licensing fees. That will enable Chrome OS-based netbooks to be cheaper than both Windows-based netbooks and ARM-based smartbooks from Qualcomm. Plus, once we start talking about nettops, it’s entirely possible that we could see a $100 PC (without monitor) running the Chrome OS.
1. Because it’s from Google
Google is the 800-pound gorilla of the Internet. Because of its brand strength and star power, it’s always a big deal when Google enters new markets. Nothing that Google does will go unnoticed or fail simply because it didn’t get enough exposure.
Four reasons why it’s virtually irrelevant

4. It’s running Linux
So is 2010 going to be the year of Linux on the desktop since Chrome OS is based on Linux? Every year for the past decade was supposed to be “The Year of Linux on the Desktop.” It hasn’t happened and it’s not because it was an idea ahead of its time or it needed a stronger champion. The mass market has rejected Linux on the desktop. Linux is nothing more (or less) than a niche OS loved by a loyal group of highly-technical users. Even Google can’t change that, unless it’s prepared to write Linux device drivers for all of the world’s printers, digital cameras, keyboards, and mice.
3. It’s too late
By the time Chrome OS is released, Windows 7 will be everywhere (at least in the consumer market) and Mac OS X will be faster and simpler with the release of Snow Leopard. If Google really wanted to make a powerful entrance into the OS market, the time to do it would have been mid-2007 when it was obvious that Windows Vista was a failure and it would take Microsoft a couple years to fix it. The opportunity for an OS to make a major impact on the PC market has passed. The OS just isn’t that important anymore. Windows and Mac both do a pretty good job of making the OS get out of the way as quickly and easily as possible. Chrome OS probably won’t be able to do that because it will start out with massive device driver incompatibilities with PC accessories.
2. Google hasn’t proven it can build an OS
Google hasn’t exactly knocked anyone’s socks off with Android, its mobile OS. While Android has potential and still has time to develop, it feels like beta software in a market that demands greater “finish” and attention to detail (see iPhone and Palm Pre). Plus, Android itself was originally touted to be a netbook OS. Therefore, the release of Chrome OS is a de facto indictment against Android, despite the fact that Google executives have tried to downplay it. Maybe Google has realized that the Java software sitting on top of a Linux codebase in Android would have severe performance limitations on a PC. Whatever the case may be, the fact that Google will have overlapping netbook operating systems does not inspire a lot of confidence that Google knows what it’s doing in the OS market or has a sound strategy.
1. It’s limited to netbooks
So here’s the skinny on netbooks. They have two great features: They are small and cheap. They also have two big drawbacks: They are terrible and a lot of consumers regret buying them (verified by a recent NPD survey). The consumer backlash against netbooks has already begun and by the time we see Chrome OS netbooks from Google’s hardware partners in the second half of 2010, the netbook phenomenon will either have retreated into the background or morphed into something better. And then Google will have to scramble to make Chrome OS available on a wider variety of notebook computers, as well as on nettops.
SOURCE.
__________________
Visit this and do something for the world!
www.hackersforcharity.org

Want to do even more? Take a look here and join the fight on human trafficking.

Hear and you forget, see and you remember, do and you understand.

Kharn is offline  
Old 07-19-2009, 02:43 PM   #68 (permalink)
The Bulldog
 
zmatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: In an empty Ramen packet
Posts: 4,660
Default Re: Introducing the Google Chrome OS!!

So it is in a cloud. For me that means two things;

Soulphire was right about Google wanting to go with cloud technology.

and

I wont use Chrome.
__________________


ポップ・タルトが大好きです。
<<<<<<<Rep is always welcome
Ultimate Guitar exercises/ Songs for technique
zmatt is offline  
Old 07-19-2009, 02:48 PM   #69 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: WI, USA
Posts: 1,556
Send a message via MSN to yzmxer608
Default Re: Introducing the Google Chrome OS!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by zmatt View Post
I wont use Chrome.
Me either, I have too many programs that are Windows reliant to use Chrome.
__________________

__________________
yzmxer608 is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Portable Google Browser Google Chrome Osiris Internet Software and Browsers 0 05-24-2009 02:28 PM
Use Google Chrome For Secure Web Browsing Osiris Internet Software and Browsers 1 01-10-2009 01:26 PM
Google Chrome Backup Osiris Internet Software and Browsers 0 09-15-2008 08:54 PM
Google Chrome Anonymizer Osiris Internet Software and Browsers 0 09-07-2008 10:19 PM



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.