Topic: iPad...meh

[gbuell]

I wouldn't go that far, I think Google Chrome OS looks really nice and Google's web apps (Docs, Reader, Gmail, Calendar) are pretty mature. I'm definitely open to the idea of a broswer-based OS. I really like cloud computing in general and I think Apple's biggest flaw right now is its lack of cloud services (though I have a strong feeling that is going to change very soon.) The one big thing that Chrome OS seems lacking in is the ability to play high-end games - even Mac OS X has it beat there.

[BlackNMild2k1]

That's why I said it would be the "Casual" (read: not hardcore or enthusiast) OS of the future.

From the presentations I just watched, it seems to just fit the need of what 99% of people use their computers for these days without all the complicated code, interface, folders & everything else that some of us have gotten somewhat used to by using Windows for the last 15~20 years.

But there is nothing that says it won't support high end games (please don't build in some sort of OnLive system*), it just seems that they've only demonstrated the basics of the UI up the Nov. of last year. (they also mentioned @ that point that it was ~1 year away<see rumor thread>)



*Since this is planned to be could computing online browser OS, I'm just hoping that Google wasn't planning on going with the online cloud/stream gaming model too.

[NWR_insanolord]

Why would I want an OS that is only a browser when I could have that exact same browser as well as a full-featured OS?

And as for Apple and cloud computing, I subscribe to MobileMe and love it. I'd also be shocked if WWDC, which is a week away, doesn't bring some more to the table, with MobileMe becoming free and some sort of cloud-based iTunes seeming to be the likeliest (or at least most rumored) new features and the Beatles are coming to iTunes and there's gonna be a midrange mini tower Mac.

[vudu]

Why would I want an OS that is only a browser when I could have that exact same browser as well as a full-featured OS?

Because it'll save you a couple hundred bucks?

[BlackNMild2k1]

Why would I want an OS that is only a browser when I could have that exact same browser as well as a full-featured OS?

Because it'll save you a couple hundred bucks?

and you are not teh cazual?

[NWR_insanolord]

Why would I want an OS that is only a browser when I could have that exact same browser as well as a full-featured OS?

Because it'll save you a couple hundred bucks?

I'd argue that's not a good place to try and save money, and if there were no other option I'd say go with Ubuntu.

Why would I want an OS that is only a browser when I could have that exact same browser as well as a full-featured OS?

Because it'll save you a couple hundred bucks?

and you are not teh cazual?

Casual users aren't going to use it; most of them won't even be aware of it. The fact that IE still has the vast majority of the market share, and that 1/6 of Internet users still use IE 6, proves that casual users can't be bothered to change the way they do things, even when there are several much better options available for absolutely no cost and with next to no effort involved.

[vudu]

The fact that IE still has the vast majority of the market share, and that 1/6 of Internet users still use IE 6, proves that casual users can't be bothered to change the way they do things, even when there are several much better options available for absolutely no cost and with next to no effort involved.

To be fair, I still have to use IE 6 at work.  I use Firefox for most stuff, but there are some sites I use that aren't compatible with Firefox.  I'm stuck using IE 6 because newer versions aren't compatible with some of our proprietary stuff.  Not everyone who uses IE 6 does so by choice.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Once again, you are not the casual user/computer buyer.

WTF is ubuntu? I know its a Linux(like?) thing but if I don't know, then I really don't expect the know-nothing computer buyer to have a clue.

A Chrome PC could be a moderately priced and spec'd PC or Laptop at budget prices for those people that don't want the cost of Windows factored into their price or that don't want to pay the Apple tax for machine that can access the internet.

The reason most people still use IE is because they don't know any better (since it comes with the system) or they have to(everything supports it). It's what automatically pops up when you try to access the internet, and therefore to most, it's good enough. Most people I have introduced to Firefox and even installed a few customizations for them hardly ever look back, but they would never take the initiative to learn about and use something they've never heard of and therefore don't know about.

Take me for example. Why would I choose Linux over whatever is already installed on my machine? I know that Linux exist, but why would I use it? how would Linux make my life easier? the truth is, I don't know so why would I bother looking into it? I know that OSX is a technically better OS, but I've been using windows ever since I graduated from DOS, so it's what I'm used to, it's what I know and that is why it's my OS of choice(it does what I need and that is good enough for now).

[NWR_insanolord]

That's what I'm saying, though: even if Chrome would be a better choice for some people, they wouldn't use it because they wouldn't know any better. Anybody who would be aware enough of Chrome OS to consider using it would be too hardcore to be able to settle for its limited capabilities.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

"Casual internet user" is just a modern label for the "AOL crowd".

[ShyGuy]

Oh man, I remember AOL users. They would haunt me, trying to suck out my life force. MSN users were actually worse.

[BlackNMild2k1]

That's what I'm saying, though: even if Chrome would be a better choice for some people, they wouldn't use it because they wouldn't know any better. Anybody who would be aware enough of Chrome OS to consider using it would be too hardcore to be able to settle for its limited capabilities.

But look at new computer buyers. The hardcore build their own, the casual wander into a store and buy an overpriced machine with a bunch of software they paid for but will never use.

In this store is a decently spec'd PC bundled with windows selling for $800
right next to it is the same exact computer only bundled with Chrome OS for $650(monitor included for $800).

Which one do you think will get bought more often?

Google is just as much a household name as Microsoft, and Google has been pushing ads for Chrome everywhere from TV to Theater previews and bus stop ads. Once people start to associate Chrome with Google, buying a Chrome PC could be nearly as common as buying a Windows PC. The same scenario could be used for a laptop too (only I don't know if people build their own laptops).

[Stogi]

Chrome OS looks nifty for netbooks. I especially like the idea that anything I make is immediately available for me on the internet. That's a badass idea. There have been so many times that I send myself an email just so I have my presentation ready for class.

That said, I don't like how it looks like the browser. It seems cluttered.

[MegaByte]

I especially like the idea that anything I make is immediately available for me on the internet. That's a badass idea.

You really should look into Dropbox.

[Stogi]

Interesting....

[NWR_insanolord]

Android is a much better choice for a netbook than Chrome.

[gbuell]

Yeah I am very hopeful and excited about the cloud stuff that Apple is probably going to be talking about very soon. It certainly seems like they've been planning something for ages, what with that huge data center in North Carolina and all. Their current cloud support is limited to MobileMe, which, while nice, isn't the full music/video/files cloud backup and access solution that is the Holy Grail to me.

[gbuell]

And Blacknmild, I have been under the impression that since Chrome OS is basically ONLY the browser, it will ONLY be able to run browser-based games and applications. I haven't seen any evidence to the contrary.

[BlackNMild2k1]

And Blacknmild, I have been under the impression that since Chrome OS is basically ONLY the browser, it will ONLY be able to run browser-based games and applications. I haven't seen any evidence to the contrary.

I understand that, but they haven't really gone into depth about what it's capable of yet have they?

From what I watched of the videos I linked to, the UI is just set up to be exactly like a browser since that was what most people are comfortable & familiar with. Other than how the UI looks and works, I didn't see anything mentioned about what it can and can't do technically. So I'm holding out for that presentation.

[Shaymin]

So anyone here reconsidering a 3G iPad purchase because at&t decided to screw with the data plan?

Specifically, making the $30 unlimited a $25 2GB plan?

[BranDonk Kong]

AT&T's new plans are a joke. It seems if you already have the $30 unlimited (which is really 5GB) that you can stay on it, but for new customers, they're totally getting screwed.

Edit - Ha! I just saw that tethering will be $45 (including the data plan) a month on the 2GB plan! That's insane! Verizon (if you pay) charges $45 (again, including the data plan), but that's actually unlimited - and if you have a WebOS phone it's free (not including the data plan)!

Yeah, I'm pretty sure Apple will make the jump to Verizon sooner than later now, since you basically can't use your iPhone or iPad on AT&T's network anymore.

[BlackNMild2k1]

How much data do you use on streaming a standard Youtube video that's about 5 minutes long?

[NWR_insanolord]

I looked at my data history for my iPhone on AT&T's web site, and I've never used more than 300 MB in a month. I use the thing a ton, but most of the time I have Wi-Fi. The $20 extra for tethering when you're already paying for a set amount of data is ridiculous, but the difference between 5 GB and 2 GB isn't at all important to me, or, if AT&T's numbers are to be believed, to 98% of users. To argue that you can't use the device on the network is just stupid. Also, since AT&T is Verizon's only real competition, don't be surprised if Verizon changes its data terms to something very similar.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Also, since AT&T is Verizon's only real competition, don't be surprised if Verizon changes its data terms to something very similar.

Or uses that against them like the 3G map.

[NWR_insanolord]

Also, since AT&T is Verizon's only real competition, don't be surprised if Verizon changes its data terms to something very similar.

Or uses that against them like the 3G map.

Look at the major price changes of the two companies in recent years; they align pretty closely. It's more or less collusion, but the government hasn't called them on it yet. If Verizon is indeed getting Apple's devices this year they'll probably wait to change it until after that, but it seems to me that it's inevitable.