Chrome OS wishlist

[Pogeymanz]

I really hope that the folks at Google either adopt Xorg or replace it with something awesome.

From every technical article I read, I can only conclude that Xorg is messy, outdated, inefficient and generally busted.

Since Google has never made a crappy product, as far as I know, I think the biggest help they can give to the Linux community would be to fix Xorg.

Rumor has it that they are making their own DE, which I hope will spur them to help Xorg since I'm sure their DE will want some compositing effects and such.

I think that will make Chrome OS and Linux in general much better, more stable, and almost certainly more popular.

[Xbehave]

From every technical article I read, I can only conclude that Xorg is messy, outdated, inefficient and generally busted.Read anything relevant written in the last 5 years? For example, the nvida driver guys interview. Most anti-xorg stuff is nonsense people repeat from quite some time ago and is no longer relevant.

Since Google has never made a crappy product, as far as I know, I think the biggest help they can give to the Linux community would be to fix Xorg.
this suggests differently (http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=navclient&gfns=1&q=list+of+failed+google+products)

Rumor has it that they are making their own DE, which I hope will spur them to help Xorg since I'm sure their DE will want some compositing effects and such.
Rumor is they are making thier own windowing system (e.g !xorg), this would be in line with android which does a similar thing, ultimatly i belive it will make a more lightweight windowing system that will lack much of what xorg offers but be enough for thier simple webbased OS.

I think that will make Chrome OS and Linux in general much better, more stable, and almost certainly more popular.
While i do look forward to it, i can't help that we don't need a crippled linux distro just because its google, and we would be better of waiting while the current major players keep at linux+xorg+gnome (maybe a bit more kde would be nice)

[kavon89]

I hope it doesn't catch on. The whole idea of it sounds very Big Brother/insecure and unreliable.

[Mr. Picklesworth]

From every technical article I read, I can only conclude that Xorg is messy, outdated, inefficient and generally busted.

It is definitely not outdated. The latest version (http://www.x.org/wiki/Releases/7.5) supports multiple pointers (http://wearables.unisa.edu.au/mpx/), which is completely revolutionary. In a year's time, the stuff running on top of X should be a bit cleverer about that new tech so we will have some really incredible things happening while the competition continues along with the arbitrarily limited 'one pointer for all devices' design from 20 years ago.

As it is, Fedora 12 has XOrg 7.5, and even with very little (if any...) patching elsewhere, it is possible for multiple users to operate comfortably inside one session. Each user can have their own keyboard and mouse and, as long as they aren't using the same application, they stay completely out of each other's way.

Potential applications abound. Drawing tablets could behave more predictably where you could change the tool without leaving the working area (and that particular pointer could be restricted to the working area without causing harm). When someone accesses your session over VNC, your control could no longer be compromised (since that person would get his own pointer for remote access and your local pointer would remain only yours). Oh, and multi-player games, naturally :)

[earthpigg]

It is definitely not outdated. The latest version (http://www.x.org/wiki/Releases/7.5) supports multiple pointers (http://wearables.unisa.edu.au/mpx/), which is completely revolutionary.

the Wii is a computer, it also supports two pointers :D

the Linux version of World of Goo unofficially supports this feature (a capability carried over from the Wii version)... meaning the game is capable, and people do it all the time, but it's up to the end user to modify their system's config files to get it working.

[PhoHammer]

I hope it doesn't catch on. The whole idea of it sounds very Big Brother/insecure and unreliable.

I don't know where people are getting this idea...

[jrusso2]

It is definitely not outdated. The latest version (http://www.x.org/wiki/Releases/7.5) supports multiple pointers (http://wearables.unisa.edu.au/mpx/), which is completely revolutionary. In a year's time, the stuff running on top of X should be a bit cleverer about that new tech so we will have some really incredible things happening while the competition continues along with the arbitrarily limited 'one pointer for all devices' design from 20 years ago.

I had two pointers back in the Windows XP days two mice one ps2 and one usb.

[drawkcab]

Am I the only one that thinks chrome OS sounds stupid?

[Xbehave]

I had two pointers back in the Windows XP days two mice one ps2 and one usb.
2 mice != too pointers 2 pointers = this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MUOn_nJmRA) shows 2 seperate pointers "guiding two separate keyboard inputs.

[claymater]

Am I the only one that thinks chrome OS sounds stupid?

Yes because they have android, No because it can help! ;)

[kavon89]

I don't know where people are getting this idea...

One would have to be an idiot in order to not see a problem with having the majority of one's programs rely on another system not controlled at all by the user... requiring an internet connection to do everything.

Chrome OS aims to take _everything_ out of the desktop and put it in a web browser; all of your programs become websites, applets, you name it. If the server is down/overloaded what will you do? Watch Google or any other software developer start charging $50 a month for a "premium" service/program and the standard "free" service is slow/featureless/non-existent. It sure as hell would solve many problems related to software piracy because you would have lost your freedom to do something like that.

What Google wants is a nightmare and I can only see it as a good choice in an business setting on a local network.

[drawkcab]

One would have to be an idiot in order to not see a problem with having the majority of one's programs rely on another system not controlled at all by the user... requiring an internet connection to do everything.

Chrome OS aims to take _everything_ out of the desktop and put it in a web browser; all of your programs become websites, applets, you name it. If the server is down/overloaded what will you do? Watch Google or any other software developer start charging $50 a month for a "premium" service/program and the standard "free" service is slow/featureless/non-existent. It sure as hell would solve many problems related to software piracy because you would have lost your freedom to do something like that.

What Google wants is a nightmare and I can only see it as a good choice in an business setting on a local network.

Thanks...that is what I was thinking too.

[Xbehave]

What Google wants is a nightmare and I can only see it as a good choice in an business setting on a local network.
1) Google gears/etc allow it to work without a connections
2) It seams like most people who don't care about their computers would see ,just trust google/websites, as better than running stuff locally.

[claymater]

I think the more google pushes "go linux" The more people will start using it (thus more commercial programs, adobe, ect...) So in the long run, if it works, it will be a great thing to the linux community! And if it doesnt work, What will it hurt?


Because we know people (Dell, HP, ect..) will trust google to have a good OS to sell to people (kinda like ubuntu, but google has a more well known name than ubuntu)


So It can be REALLY good, or just keep us where we are....

[kavon89]

1) Google gears/etc allow it to work without a connections

Gears would also allow for a website (http://kavon.org/gears.html) (install Gears to try that) to do some crazy things (http://code.google.com/apis/gears/api_geolocation.html) simply by having the user click Allow.

EDIT: It didn't even get close to my location, but it will get better as time goes on.

[Mr. Picklesworth]

Gears would also allow for a website (http://kavon.org/gears.html) (install Gears to try that) to do some crazy things (http://code.google.com/apis/gears/api_geolocation.html) simply by having the user click Allow.

So does Firefox 3.5, straight out of the box.

[PhoHammer]

One would have to be an idiot in order to not see a problem with having the majority of one's programs rely on another system not controlled at all by the user... requiring an internet connection to do everything.

Chrome OS aims to take _everything_ out of the desktop and put it in a web browser; all of your programs become websites, applets, you name it. If the server is down/overloaded what will you do? Watch Google or any other software developer start charging $50 a month for a "premium" service/program and the standard "free" service is slow/featureless/non-existent. It sure as hell would solve many problems related to software piracy because you would have lost your freedom to do something like that.

What Google wants is a nightmare and I can only see it as a good choice in an business setting on a local network.

There is already an offline version of gmail (and calenders, I think).
The switch to "charging $50 a month for a "premium" service/program" hardly
sounds like something Google would do, and I doubt they ever will.
I use gmail now, I use google calender now, I use google docs now. I have never needed
to access any of my email/calenders/docs and couldn't because of a lack of connection.

You may say I am asking for trouble, but I would bet you that my HDD would fail and lose
any Evolution data (emails/calender) on my 2 year old Gateway laptop before Google
loses my gmail data. And don't give me the "backup your data" lecture. You know Google
backs up my data more than most computer users back it themselves.

It might not be for everyone (even though gears/other implementations will render your
argument moot even for those with intermittent internet connections) but I think Chrome
OS as you are portraying it (I personally don't think it will be as "cloudy" as you make it
out to be) fulfills the needs of 95% of computer users. And I think it will fulfill 95% of my
needs.

And just because the Chrome browser will be the user's main UI for the OS, it does not
mean that Google will "take _everything_ out of the desktop" in the way that you try to
make it sound so spooky and big-brotherish.

I would recommend taking off the tin-foil hat and waiting to actually test a product before
you bash it.

[DracoJesi]

It is definitely not outdated. The latest version (http://www.x.org/wiki/Releases/7.5) supports multiple pointers (http://wearables.unisa.edu.au/mpx/), which is completely revolutionary. In a year's time, the stuff running on top of X should be a bit cleverer about that new tech so we will have some really incredible things happening while the competition continues along with the arbitrarily limited 'one pointer for all devices' design from 20 years ago.

As it is, Fedora 12 has XOrg 7.5, and even with very little (if any...) patching elsewhere, it is possible for multiple users to operate comfortably inside one session. Each user can have their own keyboard and mouse and, as long as they aren't using the same application, they stay completely out of each other's way.

Potential applications abound. Drawing tablets could behave more predictably where you could change the tool without leaving the working area (and that particular pointer could be restricted to the working area without causing harm). When someone accesses your session over VNC, your control could no longer be compromised (since that person would get his own pointer for remote access and your local pointer would remain only yours). Oh, and multi-player games, naturally :)

when will Ubuntu users get to do this o.0

the idea seemed kind of uneeded, but the more I read your post and thought about it, it's total win XD

Windows user: we know have multiple desktops, so you can no longer rub that in or use it to your advantage
Linux user: multiple desktops are old news...
Windows user: what?
Linux user: yeah, you didn't think it would be the coolest thing forever did you? It's all about multiple pointers now....
Windows user: What does that do?
Linux user: Well you see.........................................
Windows user: T_T

[phrostbyte]

There is already an offline version of gmail (and calenders, I think).
The switch to "charging $50 a month for a "premium" service/program" hardly
sounds like something Google would do, and I doubt they ever will.
I use gmail now, I use google calender now, I use google docs now. I have never needed
to access any of my email/calenders/docs and couldn't because of a lack of connection.

You may say I am asking for trouble, but I would bet you that my HDD would fail and lose
any Evolution data (emails/calender) on my 2 year old Gateway laptop before Google
loses my gmail data. And don't give me the "backup your data" lecture. You know Google
backs up my data more than most computer users back it themselves.

It might not be for everyone (even though gears/other implementations will render your
argument moot even for those with intermittent internet connections) but I think Chrome
OS as you are portraying it (I personally don't think it will be as "cloudy" as you make it
out to be) fulfills the needs of 95% of computer users. And I think it will fulfill 95% of my
needs.

And just because the Chrome browser will be the user's main UI for the OS, it does not
mean that Google will "take _everything_ out of the desktop" in the way that you try to
make it sound so spooky and big-brotherish.

I would recommend taking off the tin-foil hat and waiting to actually test a product before
you bash it.

Google Apps is also Gears enabled. It can function as an offline spreadsheet and word processor, and when Internet access is established, it automatically syncs up your work.

[CJ Master]

Can we please be mature enough to not turn this into YET ANOTHER "chrome shouldn't exist" debate?

[N4zgu1]

One would have to be an idiot in order to not see a problem with having the majority of one's programs rely on another system not controlled at all by the user... requiring an internet connection to do everything.

Chrome OS aims to take _everything_ out of the desktop and put it in a web browser; all of your programs become websites, applets, you name it. If the server is down/overloaded what will you do? Watch Google or any other software developer start charging $50 a month for a "premium" service/program and the standard "free" service is slow/featureless/non-existent. It sure as hell would solve many problems related to software piracy because you would have lost your freedom to do something like that.

What Google wants is a nightmare and I can only see it as a good choice in an business setting on a local network.

+1

and besides that I think that Google is hypocrate, because even though they say that they support open source they continue charging for some of their products and services, and they invade our privacy and sell our information, I am not going to download chrome os, I prefer to continue using ubuntu or other distributions

[ad_267]

To the OP, you might be interested in the Wayland display server. It's still got a long way to go though.

[papangul]

One would have to be an idiot ...

Here is an idiot...

Everything has a place in this world, take for example the case of proprietary software, I can't believe someone can use a piece of software the source code of which is not open, but I myself use things like opera, skype or flash.

I have never backed up anything, even if I ever 'back up' something - even then I would trust google's back up more than mine.

Also the convenience of accessing data from anywhere is almost a blessing from heaven, I would rather prefer to trust google and suffer.

[HappinessNow]

Am I the only one that thinks chrome OS sounds stupid?
Yes,...but there could be others.

I honestly don't know how you could pass judgment on something you know nothing about.

Google is a smart company, the Chrome OS will be a regular OS simply with cloud options.


I really hope that the folks at Google either adopt Xorg or replace it with something awesome.

From every technical article I read, I can only conclude that Xorg is messy, outdated, inefficient and generally busted.

Since Google has never made a crappy product, as far as I know, I think the biggest help they can give to the Linux community would be to fix Xorg.

Rumor has it that they are making their own DE, which I hope will spur them to help Xorg since I'm sure their DE will want some compositing effects and such.

I think that will make Chrome OS and Linux in general much better, more stable, and almost certainly more popular.

I have heard un-verifiable rumors that the new DE will be most like a stable enlightenment-17 desktop (that does not yet exist), hybrid with Gnome like and Compiz qualities but again these can Not be verified. Google Chrome with new enlightenment-18 desktop-like environment?

Google Chrome may well steal the spotlight from Ubuntu, the best that we could hope for is that Google buy Canonical and thus become the God-Father of Ubuntu. Mark Shuttleworth has money but he is NOT that wealthy that he would not be overjoyed to sell out. I would rather him sell out to Google over Apple or Microsoft; it would be the only reasonable and prudent thing to do. Otherwise, like Yopper has done in the past; they lost their Mark Shuttleworth and then the community based version just became insignificant.

Let's hope for Ubuntu's sake that Google buys Canonical and Mark Shuttleworth is smart enough to work for/with Google on the Google Chrome OS project. It would be equivalent to him working on a space station or colonizing mars or the Moon instead of just taking a joy ride into outer-space and then landing back on the earth. Likewise, instead of carrying the note for Ubuntu that would eventually be destined to insignificance unless Google buys Canonical and puts Mark Shuttleworth on the board/paycheck.

For those who don't see this, you obviously can not see the forest for the trees.


There is already an offline version of gmail (and calenders, I think).
The switch to "charging $50 a month for a "premium" service/program" hardly
sounds like something Google would do, and I doubt they ever will.
I use gmail now, I use google calender now, I use google docs now. I have never needed
to access any of my email/calenders/docs and couldn't because of a lack of connection.

You may say I am asking for trouble, but I would bet you that my HDD would fail and lose
any Evolution data (emails/calender) on my 2 year old Gateway laptop before Google
loses my gmail data. And don't give me the "backup your data" lecture. You know Google
backs up my data more than most computer users back it themselves.

It might not be for everyone (even though gears/other implementations will render your
argument moot even for those with intermittent internet connections) but I think Chrome
OS as you are portraying it (I personally don't think it will be as "cloudy" as you make it
out to be) fulfills the needs of 95% of computer users. And I think it will fulfill 95% of my
needs.

And just because the Chrome browser will be the user's main UI for the OS, it does not
mean that Google will "take _everything_ out of the desktop" in the way that you try to
make it sound so spooky and big-brotherish.

I would recommend taking off the tin-foil hat and waiting to actually test a product before
you bash it. Agreed, Google Chrome OS represents a Renaissance era in the computer evolution to lift us out of the dark ages of the computer era, to lift us out of the current jungle that exist and help enlighten humanity.

Bottom line, we live in the dark ages as far as computers are, but this dark age period can not exist forever. Google will help us evolve to a new level not yet seen or utilized. People complain that Google will become our overlords or big brother but these same people have been complaining about such paranoid scenarios all along about everything. The Nay sayers will prevail, but this does not mean they have any credit or a ground to stand on.

Where Google innovates the rest of the world imitates.


Google Apps is also Gears enabled. It can function as an offline spreadsheet and word processor, and when Internet access is established, it automatically syncs up your work. through the cloud of nay sayers comes a voice of reason, again.

Thank You.

[cascade9]

One would have to be an idiot in order to not see a problem with having the majority of one's programs rely on another system not controlled at all by the user... requiring an internet connection to do everything.

Chrome OS aims to take _everything_ out of the desktop and put it in a web browser; all of your programs become websites, applets, you name it. If the server is down/overloaded what will you do? Watch Google or any other software developer start charging $50 a month for a "premium" service/program and the standard "free" service is slow/featureless/non-existent. It sure as hell would solve many problems related to software piracy because you would have lost your freedom to do something like that.

What Google wants is a nightmare and I can only see it as a good choice in an business setting on a local network.

WEll, IMO, its not just that-


7.3 Google reserves the right (but shall have no obligation) to pre-screen, review, flag, filter, modify, refuse or remove any or all Content from any Service. For some of the Services, Google may provide tools to filter out explicit sexual content. These tools include the SafeSearch preference settings (see http://www.google.com/help/customize.html#safe). In addition, there are commercially available services and software to limit access to material that you may find objectionable.

http://www.google.com/chrome/intl/en/eula_text.html

Yes, I knows thats for the Chrome browser. Theres lots of usage tracking in the Chrome browser, which is why things like SRware Iron exist, and I doubt that google is going to drop that with Chrome OS.

Google seems far to happy to deal with nasty, totalitarian regimes. Besides possible deals with the spooks.


I think that will make Chrome OS and Linux in general much better, more stable, and almost certainly more popular.

I really doubt it on 'more stable', but I agree on 'more popular'. Google has more brand recognition than all the linux distros, BSDs etc put together. Lots of people who have no idea what linux is will try Chrome OS when it comes out.

I doubt I will ever use ANY 'cloud' system. With a 30GB a month cap it would take, ohh, over 6 months to upload just my music files. Thats if I did nothing by upload. Let alone my normal net use, or redownloading them. I'll look after my own data, and not subject it to google being able to 'pre-screen, review, flag, filter, modify, refuse or remove' anything of mine.

[HappinessNow]

I really doubt it on 'more stable', but I agree on 'more popular'. Google has more brand recognition than all the linux distros, BSDs etc put together. Lots of people who have no idea what linux is will try Chrome OS when it comes out.

I doubt I will ever use ANY 'cloud' system. With a 30GB a month cap it would take, ohh, over 6 months to upload just my music files. Thats if I did nothing by upload. Let alone my normal net use, or redownloading them. I'll look after my own data, and not subject it to google being able to 'pre-screen, review, flag, filter, modify, refuse or remove' anything of mine.

Do you really believe Google would make a product that isn't marketable?...that just would not make good business sense,which is exactly the opposite of what Google normally does.

[cascade9]

Who said anything about marketable?

I just doubt that ChomeOS will be any more stable. Any cloud system is going to have more things to go wrong than a system based..er...system.

Anyway, with quotas, its never going to be a workable system for me. I dont know how many people have 200GB+ of music though (yay for Flac)

[Joe Ker1086]

I hope it doesn't catch on. The whole idea of it sounds very Big Brother/insecure and unreliable.

Agreed! Google already has its hands in everything. I mean they read your email so they know what adds to put on the banners...... I don't trust it.

[pwnst*r]

and in come the haters, lol. typical.

[pwnst*r]

Agreed! Google already has its hands in everything. I mean they read your email so they know what adds to put on the banners...... I don't trust it.

do you run your own mail server? if not, LOL, your point is moot.

[Xbehave]

and in come the haters, lol. typical.
The thread was full of haters from the start. It started with unfounded xorg hate (well if it was founded it has not been backed up yet), then i hated on him for xorg hating, now your hating on everybody that's hating on chrome.

p.s additionally i hate you for double posting

IMO there is a place for chromeOS even if it doesn't use xorg (Their wording of the initial press release suggests this, as they would know the difference between a windowing system and a window manager), however it will not be as good (IMO) as a real distro. While I'm all for chromeOS breaking into windows market share, I just hope it doesn't hurt the chances of real distros in doing so.

[pwnst*r]

The thread was full of haters from the start. It started with unfounded xorg hate (well if it was founded it has not been backed up yet), then i hated on him for xorg hating, now your hating on everybody that's hating on chrome.

p.s additionally i hate you for double posting

IMO there is a place for chromeOS even if it doesn't use xorg (Their wording of the initial press release suggests this, as they would know the difference between a windowing system and a window manager), however it will not be as good (IMO) as a real distro. While I'm all for chromeOS breaking into windows market share, I just hope it doesn't hurt the chances of real distros in doing so.

i'm glad you hate me. that makes my day. it's even funnier that you hate a PERSON. pathetic to say the least. have a good one buddy!

[pwnst*r]

double posting for the hate.

[drawkcab]

Ok, I officially hate Chrome OS but I love all you guys. <3

[pwnst*r]

lol

[PhoHammer]

Bottom line, we live in the dark ages as far as computers are, but this dark age period can not exist forever. Google will help us evolve to a new level not yet seen or utilized. People complain that Google will become our overlords or big brother but these same people have been complaining about such paranoid scenarios all along about everything. The Nay sayers will prevail, but this does not mean they have any credit or a ground to stand on.

Where Google innovates the rest of the world imitates.


Great summary to the entire argument!

Back to the actual topic though: On my wishlist for Chrome OS is a 5 second boot time.

[HappinessNow]

Great summary to the entire argument!

Back to the actual topic though: On my wishlist for Chrome OS is a 5 second boot time.I would like to see a 5 nanosecond boot time.

[CJ Master]

I would like to see a 5 nanosecond boot time.

5 pecosecond?

[ad_267]

5 pecosecond?

picosecond (10^-12 seconds)

[PhoHammer]

picosecond (10^-12 seconds)
Maybe 5 femtoseconds?

[ad_267]

Maybe 5 femtoseconds?

Well that's just getting silly.