I posted this earlier, but it's relevant for a repost.
My brother got a chrome pixel at Google I/O and he loves it. The hardware is beautiful. The interface is simple. The speed and ease of use is really unparalleled. The downside is by far the most important - the functionality is very limited due to the limited App space.
The hardware of the pixel looks great. If Windows had a proper touchscreen driver, I'd probably buy one and load it up with Windows (or, if I could get OSX running on it...)
I thought about it a while ago, but then why not just buy a Macbook? Same price, comparable hardware looks, much better specs, much better capabilities. You can run Chrome and do all the same stuff you could do on a Chomebook, plus a ton of other stuff too.
This guy has a down vote but I believe he is referencing the screen, which has a resolution unmatched by Macbooks at this price. The 'Retina' MacBook costs more.
The pixel is very similar to a Macbook Air, (IIRC, thiner/lighter) except has a HD-touch screen. If they refreshed the processor, all that would be missing is a decent harddrive.
I'm interested to see when a MBP or similar comes out with touch - I'm finding there's a few things I do which naturally work well with touch (e.g. scrolling pages).
I actually disabled the touchscreen on my Pixel. The coating on it means it picks up dirt like no other laptop screen ever, and if it's touch enabled it goes crazy whenever you try to clean it.
That and if touch is enabled things like Gmail like to add lots of padding around stuff regardless of if you're going to use the touch at all.
Frankly, I found the touch utterly useless, especially since the touchpad is so good.
For me, the Chromebook killer feature is that it's not got any state: if I borrow someone else's Chromebook, or demolish my own and get a new one, everything I have is back again. I am sick and tired of having to worry about backups! They're such a headache.
I think for many users the Chromebook does fine, and I think for many others the Chromebook is too limiting. I would personally be very happy if, say, Chrome OS was built as a dual-boot solution for Microsoft Surface. Chrome for general case, and an escape hatch to Windows for games or whatever. A VM solution hosted in Windows would also work here.
However, my last attempt at running Chrome OS in a VM indicated that the open-source version of Chrome OS (at least as downloaded by VMWare) was running at a significant lag behind what's being pushed to Chromebooks right now, so I stopped investigating it any further.
If you run Chrome for Windows 8 on an Intel based Windows tablet in full screen mode it's hilariously similar to Chrome OS.
I agree with you on the state thing. The problems we have (hopefully temporary) are the number of choices of where to store our state are inadequate (i.e. too many hosted in the US) and we're living with the layers of crap that is the modern web. The idealist in me would prefer a clean slate completely, but the pragmatist knows they're approaching this in the only way the idea will get traction.
From my experience with the Pixel, using it as my primary personal computer, the hardware of the Pixel is mediocre shit with the sole exception of the screen, which is absolutely fantastic.
I guess if you really have a thing for aluminium then the case is nice enough, but I find it extremely uncomfortable to use at times (the sharp edges have a tendency to bite into my wrists if I am not careful to keep my wrists elevated.)
yea i can't really speak for experience other than the few minutes i got to try it out, but from what i've been told he really likes the hardware (more than just the screen), but hasn't mentioned the sharp edges
Depends on what you want, of course. I put a full Ubuntu distribution on mine, along with a full numerical stack (anaconda python + Octave), git, ruby, perl, etc., and am happily programming away. I grant you that I am not the customer that Google is targeting, but I find it very capable. I am already working from the cloud - all of my python and data resides in Dropbox or a BitTorrent Sync folder, and I just work from them regardless of what machine I'm on.
It's an interesting tradeoff. You will obviously not be putting a first person shooter game on one of these, or installing massive software stacks, but I don't really want that from a ultrabook anyway. I'm overjoyed with mine (I have the cheap Toshiba, not the Pixel). If I lose or break it who cares, I'll buy another. Meanwhile I have a portable ultrabook that I can develop on, keep up to date with the office, or just take to bed to do some light browsing. It's utterly fantastic in a 'less is more' kind of way.
edit: so far I am only using the Dropbox stuff with the chromebook - I do not know if can use BitTorrent Sync from it, and I may have to revise that part of my workflow.
Actually a pretty impressive about-face from Microsoft. I know some people are all-too-ready to see the demise of Microsoft, but I'm glad to see them try their best to be nimble. The more they fight for eyeballs, the more we win.
how is this nimble? the chrome web store has been around for years and so has office online. this is microsoft being forced to compete on ground they don't want to compete on. you see how by listing their apps on this web store, they have validated chrome os as a platform? whereas google still refuses to release native apps for microsoft's mobile platform, and that certainly hasn't helped microsoft. this is microsoft losing.
In the same way a supertanker turning with a turn radius of 5 miles is "nimble." Microsoft is a big place with a lot of entrenched products, processes, and policies. Being able to change those to enable shipping this product is 'nimble.' Continuing to not adapt to the way to the way the world is changing would be "non nimble."
Personally I think it shows a lot of growth on Microsoft's part, and that is a good thing.
I'm not sure how much blame should be placed on Microsoft or credit given to Google for software trending away from native applications and towards "the cloud." I think that would have happened with or without either company.
Chromebooks (with either Google Drive or Office Online) are as work-worthy as Windows RT devices. Both are perfectly capable if your work only entails answering emails, browsing the web, and light word processing. If you need to do anything that isn't possible in a web-app, you'll quickly find yourself turning to a different device.
Or put your chromebook in dev mode, and turn it into a full-fledged linux machine with crouton. I tried it on a $200 Acer, worked great. And the battery life is much longer running linux at the command line.
I put Ubuntu on my $200 Chromebook. Works great for programming, statistical analysis using R, org-mode, and pretty much anything else for work that I throw at it.
For developers, installing Crouton turns the Chromebook into a fantastic portable machine. My Acer c720 has been able to handle everything I've thrown at it, and generally lasts a full day (10-12 hours) between charges.
I keep seeing this meme, and it persuaded me to buy a Samsung Chromebook, specifically with the intent of putting Linux on it.
It's awful. Forget about accelerated graphics from that nice chip - the drivers are proprietary. Oh, and so are the DSP drivers, so no HD decoding. Enjoy pressing Ctl-D every boot; don't mis-type or you'll wipe the drive. The keyboard lacks essentials such as "home", "end", and "delete". The Crouton OS and ChromeOS get into fights sometimes. HDMI is a crapshoot. I never did get VLC to stream the webcam. The finish is about as durable as whitewash. And so on.
If you're a developer reading this thread and considering buying a Chromebook because it looks like a nice machine for the price, PLEASE don't. Do yourself a favor and buy a used thin 'n' light business-class laptop from 2006-8. You'll take a medium hit on battery life and weight, but you will get a comfortable, well-designed, durable, powerful machine for your money.
The parent is using Crouton on Acer c720, which has an x86 (Haswell) processor, and is much closer in performance to a modern netbook. The Samsung Chromebook has a fairly dated ARM processor, and the performance on Ubuntu isn't great, but acceptable for my uses (Python and Javascript coding in vim, running a dev server, testing with Chromium). You're not going to have much luck with anything that expects hardware acceleration, but you can switch back to the ChromeOS side with two keystrokes.
I agree with your recommendation though, wait and get the Samsung 2 if you want ARM, or any of the other x86 Chromebooks.
EDIT: And you don't need to type Ctrl-D, it just makes it boot quicker when the bootloader is unlocked
I use mine to take notes and do a little programming at the command line. I use vim so I don't need those "keyboard essentials." I'm doing nothing with graphics or video. I'm writing text and code.
That stuff is what "work" means to me, so my (Acer) chromebook is a pretty decent work machine. For bigger stuff I break out the 17" System76 but for travel I take the chromebook.
Windows RT devices do have a native version of Office though - in fact I think that's one of their main (only?) selling points.
I know it's limited compared to the full x86 version (I've only played with one briefly), but I suspect it fills a gap that the Chromebook can't for people who aren't comfortable using "office" web apps.
Can you explain where 'light word processing' becomes 'real world processing' and therefore beyond the capabilities of a web app.
The number of use cases that can't be performed adequately (and in some cases - performed better) in a web app is shrinking and will continue to do so. The native to web app gap is shrinking, especially on non-mobile devices where memory and CPU are less constrained.
That definition is gradually encompassing more and more 'work users.' There are a lot of jobs were the corporate 'killer apps' are web apps, even in the "knowledge worker" space.
For these, a remaining reason to buy windows is "what if I need x." WIndows does everything chromes does, plus some other stuff so its alway going to win that argument. Office online is another step to making that argument moot.
I'm not sure that Google is actively targeting workplaces with chrome, but I wouldn't be surprised to some workplace shift.
ATM, I think there are a lot of users that use 80% web, 10% native apps with decent web based alternatives and 10% irreplaceable native. Since IT departments know what's installed on machines, they'll know for sure if/when a switch is possible.
Offers Office Online apps via Chrome Web Store to Chrome and Chrome OS
With the further qualification:
The move was largely symbolic: The Office Online apps have long been able to run within virtually any browser, including Chrome, the foundation of Chrome OS.
But by packaging the apps in .crx format and submitting them to the automated review run by Google, and thus publishing them to the Chrome Web Store, Microsoft put its Office Online in front of Chrome and Chrome OS users and in a place they've been trained to look for Web apps.
This is Microsoft realizing that Windows desktop monopoly, while mighty, doesn't necessarily translate to other markets, especially cloud services, all that well because the monopoly is based on compatibility and compatibility means leaving those holes that allow for third-parties to hijack the platform to deliver their services. Also in a world that kept needing new desktop operating systems, OS monopoly was far more valuable than app monopoly but in a world where a 10-year old operating system is hard to kill, app monopoly is more important, because OS has already been commoditized.
In this sense, their Office monopoly, which is not as reliant on third-party add-ins or platform openness, and is far more based on product superiority, is more important for them to preserve. Office gives them a strong chance at dominance in business cloud services. Since they are far ahead of competitors at this point, they want to win it as quickly as possible before competitors catch up. This has nothing to do with Microsoft conceding anything - it's simply that Office is far too important to be tied to Windows.
While getting Office listed in the Chrome app store is a refreshing thing for MS to do, it seems like quite a stretch to conclude that MS has conceded anything, or that this is related to how MS perceives Chromebooks. If anything, this kind of press might make MS less likely to do things like this in the future, which sucks.
> it seems like quite a stretch to conclude that MS has conceded anything
I think its fair to conclude that Microsoft has conceded something -- but not necessarily about Chromebooks' "worthiness", per se.
I think its fair to conclude that Microsoft has conceded that tieing the rest of the company to live and die based on the strength of the Windows OS and brand isn't good long-term strategy -- and this is just one of many signs (rebranding Azure from "Windows Azure" to "Microsoft Azure" is another.)
Very good point. New Microsoft (assuming there is a new Microsoft) seems like it's remembering to be a software company and not just a Windows company. I really like this approach and hope they keep at it.
The headline is pure linkbait. The Chrome Web Store is not a ChromeOS store, it is for Chrome on all platforms. I would bet that most people using the CWS use it on Chrome on a desktop machine, not on ChromeOS.
The HN guidelines call for not rewriting titles except when they are misleading or linkbait.
Edit: the article is pretty lame too. Is this a significant announcement? If it is, can someone suggest a better url? If it isn't, we may tag it as fluff.
I wouldn't really say it's a significant announcement. It takes up about two sentences at the end of Microsoft's announcement of new Office Online features:
Ok. We tagged it as fluff. This is a penalty assigned to articles that aren't intellectually substantive. Usually we apply it to obviously sensational pieces. The current one is a borderline case, so I'll take the penalty off if more people object.
The tech press is good at camouflaging fluff, though, and this is one thing dragging down the quality of the front page. I believe a solution may be for HN to focus more on primary sources. We're going to be asking the community for help with this.
I can't seem to get this to install/load/whatever_the_jargon_is in the Chrome Web Store tied to a Google Apps (for domains) account. Anybody have any idea what magic incantation I need to mutter/mutter/invoke?
49 comments
[ 5.0 ms ] story [ 97.8 ms ] threadMy brother got a chrome pixel at Google I/O and he loves it. The hardware is beautiful. The interface is simple. The speed and ease of use is really unparalleled. The downside is by far the most important - the functionality is very limited due to the limited App space.
That and if touch is enabled things like Gmail like to add lots of padding around stuff regardless of if you're going to use the touch at all.
Frankly, I found the touch utterly useless, especially since the touchpad is so good.
I think for many users the Chromebook does fine, and I think for many others the Chromebook is too limiting. I would personally be very happy if, say, Chrome OS was built as a dual-boot solution for Microsoft Surface. Chrome for general case, and an escape hatch to Windows for games or whatever. A VM solution hosted in Windows would also work here.
However, my last attempt at running Chrome OS in a VM indicated that the open-source version of Chrome OS (at least as downloaded by VMWare) was running at a significant lag behind what's being pushed to Chromebooks right now, so I stopped investigating it any further.
I agree with you on the state thing. The problems we have (hopefully temporary) are the number of choices of where to store our state are inadequate (i.e. too many hosted in the US) and we're living with the layers of crap that is the modern web. The idealist in me would prefer a clean slate completely, but the pragmatist knows they're approaching this in the only way the idea will get traction.
I guess if you really have a thing for aluminium then the case is nice enough, but I find it extremely uncomfortable to use at times (the sharp edges have a tendency to bite into my wrists if I am not careful to keep my wrists elevated.)
It's an interesting tradeoff. You will obviously not be putting a first person shooter game on one of these, or installing massive software stacks, but I don't really want that from a ultrabook anyway. I'm overjoyed with mine (I have the cheap Toshiba, not the Pixel). If I lose or break it who cares, I'll buy another. Meanwhile I have a portable ultrabook that I can develop on, keep up to date with the office, or just take to bed to do some light browsing. It's utterly fantastic in a 'less is more' kind of way.
edit: so far I am only using the Dropbox stuff with the chromebook - I do not know if can use BitTorrent Sync from it, and I may have to revise that part of my workflow.
In the same way a supertanker turning with a turn radius of 5 miles is "nimble." Microsoft is a big place with a lot of entrenched products, processes, and policies. Being able to change those to enable shipping this product is 'nimble.' Continuing to not adapt to the way to the way the world is changing would be "non nimble."
Personally I think it shows a lot of growth on Microsoft's part, and that is a good thing.
It's awful. Forget about accelerated graphics from that nice chip - the drivers are proprietary. Oh, and so are the DSP drivers, so no HD decoding. Enjoy pressing Ctl-D every boot; don't mis-type or you'll wipe the drive. The keyboard lacks essentials such as "home", "end", and "delete". The Crouton OS and ChromeOS get into fights sometimes. HDMI is a crapshoot. I never did get VLC to stream the webcam. The finish is about as durable as whitewash. And so on.
If you're a developer reading this thread and considering buying a Chromebook because it looks like a nice machine for the price, PLEASE don't. Do yourself a favor and buy a used thin 'n' light business-class laptop from 2006-8. You'll take a medium hit on battery life and weight, but you will get a comfortable, well-designed, durable, powerful machine for your money.
I agree with your recommendation though, wait and get the Samsung 2 if you want ARM, or any of the other x86 Chromebooks.
EDIT: And you don't need to type Ctrl-D, it just makes it boot quicker when the bootloader is unlocked
That stuff is what "work" means to me, so my (Acer) chromebook is a pretty decent work machine. For bigger stuff I break out the 17" System76 but for travel I take the chromebook.
I know it's limited compared to the full x86 version (I've only played with one briefly), but I suspect it fills a gap that the Chromebook can't for people who aren't comfortable using "office" web apps.
I have a 32 GB Surface RT. Here are some of its many selling points:
1. Memory card slot to upgrade storage to 96 GB
2. USB port that can be used to connect and charge devices
3. 10.6" touch screen
4. Cost only $179
5. Runs full version of Microsoft Office 2013
6. Runs full version of OneNote which is a must-have app
7. Unbelievably good Type keyboard with magnetic locks
8. Built-in standard Windows utilities (ex: RDP client)
9. Built-in kickstand
10. Tons of apps/games
11. Multiple user profiles on one device
I have a 64 GB iPad Retina as well. My three kids actually fight over the Surface and the loser is left with the iPad.
The number of use cases that can't be performed adequately (and in some cases - performed better) in a web app is shrinking and will continue to do so. The native to web app gap is shrinking, especially on non-mobile devices where memory and CPU are less constrained.
For these, a remaining reason to buy windows is "what if I need x." WIndows does everything chromes does, plus some other stuff so its alway going to win that argument. Office online is another step to making that argument moot.
I'm not sure that Google is actively targeting workplaces with chrome, but I wouldn't be surprised to some workplace shift.
ATM, I think there are a lot of users that use 80% web, 10% native apps with decent web based alternatives and 10% irreplaceable native. Since IT departments know what's installed on machines, they'll know for sure if/when a switch is possible.
Offers Office Online apps via Chrome Web Store to Chrome and Chrome OS
With the further qualification:
The move was largely symbolic: The Office Online apps have long been able to run within virtually any browser, including Chrome, the foundation of Chrome OS.
But by packaging the apps in .crx format and submitting them to the automated review run by Google, and thus publishing them to the Chrome Web Store, Microsoft put its Office Online in front of Chrome and Chrome OS users and in a place they've been trained to look for Web apps.
In this sense, their Office monopoly, which is not as reliant on third-party add-ins or platform openness, and is far more based on product superiority, is more important for them to preserve. Office gives them a strong chance at dominance in business cloud services. Since they are far ahead of competitors at this point, they want to win it as quickly as possible before competitors catch up. This has nothing to do with Microsoft conceding anything - it's simply that Office is far too important to be tied to Windows.
I think its fair to conclude that Microsoft has conceded something -- but not necessarily about Chromebooks' "worthiness", per se.
I think its fair to conclude that Microsoft has conceded that tieing the rest of the company to live and die based on the strength of the Windows OS and brand isn't good long-term strategy -- and this is just one of many signs (rebranding Azure from "Windows Azure" to "Microsoft Azure" is another.)
The HN guidelines call for not rewriting titles except when they are misleading or linkbait.
Edit: the article is pretty lame too. Is this a significant announcement? If it is, can someone suggest a better url? If it isn't, we may tag it as fluff.
http://blogs.office.com/2014/04/14/more-office-online-commen...
The tech press is good at camouflaging fluff, though, and this is one thing dragging down the quality of the front page. I believe a solution may be for HN to focus more on primary sources. We're going to be asking the community for help with this.