Google Chrome OS – Why ?

Posted on 20. Nov, 2009 by Andrew Watson in Google, Software

With the launch of Google Chrome OS, there are many articles about how Chrome OS is a game changer and the future of computing etc… but I just don’t get it.

Don’t get me wrong I love Google and understand the premise of ‘cloud’ computing – not only does that all makes sense – but most of us are probably using a form of cloud computing when we login into our chosen webmail package (hotmail, gmail, yahoo mail – whatever your flavour), our chosen calendar application, our chosen document creation platform (the draft of this is written using Google Docs), our chosen social network etc. What confuses me it why we need a new operating system to do that ? And how does Google benefit – will they start displaying adverts on our desktop ?

Cloud computing is great… until you lose broadband connection – and then you are in limbo. Even working in a digital agency, the pinnacle of web development, we loose connection. Not necessarily down to the broadband provider – sometimes router issues, power issues, application providers (like Google) upgrading their network or dealing with problems etc… and even though it may only be for a few hours at most… when you start to rely on the web, frustration quickly picks up. This is where traditional software wins hands down, obviously unless there is a power failure – essentially though you are only reliant on power… not broadband, power and the application providers.

In terms of traditional software I can see merits in most of the available OS platforms. Apple has OSX, and whilst I am not a fan of Apple, competition is good in the marketplace, shown perfectly with the continued improvement in OSX and the marked impact this has had on the improvement of Windows. OSX has been adopted for use on the iPhone – once again a move that made sense, and developers can easily develop for both platforms.

Microsoft has also moved Windows across platforms keeping a degree of consistency, and whilst many are happy to jump on the ‘beat microsoft up with a stick’ bandwagon, Windows has done a huge amount to bring everyone to the point we are at today with computing.

Linux in its various distributions, and although I am skipping all the distribution pro’s and con’s, the key point I’m trying to make is that Linux based systems have been ported across various platforms with success.

Even relative new comers such as the Android and WebOS I can see the merit of – OSX on the iPhone restricts users to one function at a time, and an OS that allows for multiple applications is essential in the modern world.

This is the point that I start to get confused… having developed a successful mobile platform in Android, that is starting to role out into new ‘low power’ netbook machines and tablet like devices… Google has announced Chrome OS ? I was hoping that yesterdays announcement would be about a totally new operating system, devoid of bloated and legacy code… very similar to Android… and yet it was neither. It was about Google putting its name to yet another Linux distribution ?

If that was what they were going to do, why not work with someone like Mark Shuttleworth and Canonical to make ‘ONE leading Linux distribution’… call it ‘Linux by Google’ or ‘Gubuntu’ or ‘Uhrome OS’ – but just have ONE leading distribution. Google have enough scope to promote it and Canonical has made Ubuntu into a great platform.

Google have also announced it was for use with netbooks ? So people will now choose between Android and Chrome OS ? That makes no sense – have people forgotten – generally people don’t like confusion between similar platforms – think back to VHS and Betamax – Blueray and HD DVD (and now CBHB)… once again create one great platform and port it across different devices – Gubuntu Mobile or Uhrome OS Mobile.

What about the bucket load of Android widgets being developed ? I am / was looking forward to a small portable device with a decent screen, that I can take on holiday etc and is simple and clean with plenty of easy to install widgets, and Android seemed a strong contender – now I’ll stick with my Palm Pre. In terms of widgets, will Chrome OS now have it’s own widget engine ? Or will it offer the distinct lack of extensions available for the Chrome browser (or though this is starting to develop 1 year on – if you are running the development version) ?

In summary – I am not sure what the point of Chrome OS is ? or maybe I am just feeling generally confused by the OS fest we seem to have had this year – Windows 7, OSX Leopard, Palm OS, Android, Ubuntu Karmic Koala, Maemo… do we really need them all ?

Share and Enjoy:

One Response to “Google Chrome OS – Why ?”

James Doyle

04. Dec, 2009

Very interesting article Andrew and you do make a very good point about ‘Why’?

As you know I am mindful of cloud computing and agree with your argument about broadband connectivity. In my view this extends to decision makers assessing the risk to their business and simply saying ‘No’ to cloud computing. Unless we could guarantee, as a society, that we would have 99.9% connectivity and lightning speeds (I refuse to settle for adequate anymore) then I for one could not recommend or accept the risk.

It strikes me that while the concept may be well publicised (being Google afterall) it sits as a plaything for the very technically minded who love opensource applications and operating systems. I cannot see the point of Google OS for regular consumers or businesses . . . . . only developers.

However, you have touched on what could be a key winner in my view. Indeed Windows software has migrated across various platforms (which made sense) and OSX was replicated onto the iPhone (which made even more sense). But it appears that Google are trying to crack the same nut but in a different way by developing the mobile platfor first (Android) and then the larger OS later. But it is this cross platform development that I believe could make Google OS a big success.

My theory goes something like this.

EA have long been highlighting the vast cost of developing a single game across several console platforms and have even said that it makes a lot of projects look commercially unviable. A cost saving has to come from somewhere so normally is taken from the gameplay experience. We often see the same gaming engine already developed as a foundation for each platform with the game content merely ‘painted’ across the top. However the really good games have some more significant development in the programming. That is why I believe we now see a market of console exclusive games . . . . . not because of some great deal with the studio but more a case of economics then dressed with some clever licensing and PR hype. For example Uncharted on the PS3 and Forza on the Xbox. Both outstanding games. Portable? Yes! Financially viable? Probably not.

There are ofcourse some exceptions to this (GTA, Assassins Creed, Guitar Hero etc) but even then these titles tend to sit at the premium end of the market.

Back to Google OS and the opportunity at hand. What would be a really clever approach for Google would be to develop it not as a ‘Cloud’ base OS, but perhaps a multi platform OS. A tool that would make developing applications relatively simple and easier to migrate between the competing OS. Now I am aware that a large element of this would probably have to come from some pretty resource hungry emulation code running deep within, but the simple concept of being able to use your current PC to run Mac and MS applications through the same environment would be revolutionary.

I can visualise this utopian approach of developers being able to see the code they enter for Google OS trickling through (Matrix style) to OSX, Linux or MS code equivalents on alternative windows or screens within the same environment.

Then ofcourse would come the huge amount of legal wrangling and arguments over things such as “hey, that’s Apple trademarked code” and “this clearly is a robbing our MS brand” which brings us full circle back to why there is not a single platform at the moment . . . . competition! As long as we live in free markets the large corporations will continue to stifle and throttle each other until cooperation is the only way they can survive.

In conclusion, I have to agree that Google OS has a huge question mark over its existence. The Google developers are clearly driving the business strategy at the moment because we can all see that this does not look like a successful endeavour. The question is if Google wanted to change their strategy, and were to read these comments and agree would they be big enough and brave enough to take the challenge on.

Personally I doubt it.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Andrew Watson