Google OS revealed

[Skybird]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8139711.stm

Two questions on my mind:

1. Is it compatible with Windows-software and sims designed for Windows OS?

2. Is it safer - or is it also an unscupulous collector of private data and privacy information like it's nasty cousin Google Chrome: which is a web browser as destructive to privacy that the German federal police has issued the toughest warning of it that the office ever has released on any piece of code, application and malware alike.

[Fincuan]

:haha: at that article. Whoever wrote it has obviously well and truly swallowed everything Google says. That sounded more like an advertisement than a real article on BBC's site.

For example this piece
"This is the first time we have had a truly competitive OS on the market in years. This is potentially disruptive and is the first real attempt by anyone to go after Microsoft."

Yeah right...

[longam]

"We are completely redesigning the underlying security architecture of the OS so that users don't have to deal with viruses, malware and security updates.
"It should just work," said Google.


Famous last words. Even the so called untouchable Mac has had many exploits exposed.

[Raptor1]

:haha: at that article. Whoever wrote it has obviously well and truly swallowed everything Google says. That sounded more like an advertisement than a real article on BBC's site.

For example this piece

"This is the first time we have had a truly competitive OS on the market in years. This is potentially disruptive and is the first real attempt by anyone to go after Microsoft."


Yeah right...

:rotfl:

That might be one of the most ignorant things I have heard this year

[danurve]

There has always been alternate OS's. My favorite was OS2/Warp. Big deal. Then again I can't help but wonder if the Linux & varient users will get behind this just because it's not an MS product, or will it drain off like Lindows.

[Task Force]

my prediction... it will never catch on...:yep:

[PeriscopeDepth]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8139711.stm

Two questions on my mind:

1. Is it compatible with Windows-software and sims designed for Windows OS?
No. It's a Linux distribution backed by Google essentially. Going after netbooks (at first) for the most part.

PD

[kiwi_2005]

Google OS :o Hell i'll give it a try if/when it comes out.

[CaptainHaplo]

Not to be used on gaming machines.

Its going to be a linux based kernel - which alone would kill most gaming. Plus its going to be a stripped version (easy to modify kernels in Linux) that will be geared to pretty much not do anything but handle the tasks a netbook does - which is surf the net.

There will be no gaming ability on the box in contrast to a windows OS. Sure you could play browser based games - but thats going to be it. No 3d graphix, minimal onboard processing, etc.

[Fincuan]

Even at the moment gaming is pretty much the only reason why many home users stick to Windows. A good linux-distro easily tops Windowses in every other aspect, but they still just won't do very well in gaming use despite the recent advances. MS Office compatibility is another big issue for many, mainly in work related use, since while Openoffice is very good on its own it's not truly compatible with MS's suite.

[Rilder]

Even at the moment gaming is pretty much the only reason why many home users have computers.

I had to fix up your post a bit there.

Also, Google sure is getting stronger and stronger, Hopefully they form a political party next, then I might have a reason to vote.

[Skybird]

I had to fix up your post a bit there.

Also, Google sure is getting stronger and stronger, Hopefully they form a political party next, then I might have a reason to vote.

:o
What party would that be? "Big Brothers"?

[SUBMAN1]

Even at the moment gaming is pretty much the only reason why many home users stick to Windows.

I'd have to wholeheartedly disagree with that statement. I could buy familiarity though, and software support, etc. Linux, while having many advantages such as a lot of free software, is and probably always will be too foreign and extremely hard to use as compared to Windows. What Windows user that tries Linux knows a damn thing about going out and finding libraries, or modifying the kernel, or even knows what the hell a module is? Windows users don't worry about proper libraries and which damn version you are running to make something work, while breaking compatibility for something else....

What Windows user will want to use a command line to get something accomplished? Even to this day, many things in Linux require a command line.

The point being, while I love Linux, it is faarrrrrrrrrrrrr from making much of a dent into the desktop market outside a cheap web based OS for netbooks. Even these cheap netbooks have been returned in droves for ones that run XP. I read an article the other day about this very fact.

Anyway, I don't see Microsoft getting surplantted by Linux in the next 10 years at least. Probably longer. Especially if they make a product like Windows 7 where everyone is frothing at the mouth to get it.

Anyways - I have to root here - You are not a man unless you can run Gentoo with a stage 1 developers install customized to your own hardware and with integrated LVM support! :D LVM is the bomb!

-S

[Fincuan]

Ahh Subman you're thinking ten years back or using too much of the "advanced user" stuff. After my recent OS installation roulette(Windows 7 beta build 7000, Windows 7 RC1, Ubuntu and Xubuntu) I did find the Linuxes quite a bit easier to install and set-up than Win7. Granted Win7 is still not final, but it should be pretty close to it by now. Out-of-the box the Linuxes were definitely more ready than Windowses, with better drivers for my hardware and more necessary software. In the distant past I used to tweak the OS quite a lot and compile my own kernels, but nowadays I just can't bother with it. The less micromanaging the better, after all the OS should serve the user and not the other way around.

[PeriscopeDepth]

I agree with Subman. While I love my Ubuntu install, a lot of command line stuff is required and that just doesn't appeal to the average user. But hey...My first OS was MS DOS.

PD

[SUBMAN1]

Ahh Subman you're thinking ten years back or using too much of the "advanced user" stuff. After my recent OS installation roulette(Windows 7 beta build 7000, Windows 7 RC1, Ubuntu and Xubuntu) I did find the Linuxes quite a bit easier to install and set-up than Win7. Granted Win7 is still not final, but it should be pretty close to it by now. Out-of-the box the Linuxes were definitely more ready than Windowses, with better drivers for my hardware and more necessary software. In the distant past I used to tweak the OS quite a lot and compile my own kernels, but nowadays I just can't bother with it. The less micromanaging the better, after all the OS should serve the user and not the other way around.

I'd agree with you if you were only going to use a web browser to surf the web, that is until you needed to upgrade something to keep surfing the web. However, 99% of us do more than that, so I can't agree with you. Wait till you install some new app that requires X library, and then it doesn't work because it is missing a half dozen dependencies. Now me, I love this kind of stuff because I like to tinker. The average Windows user? He wants enough knowledge to start Outlook and the latest game - enough said.

I should know. I just don't install a distro, I install every last nut and bolt from the bottom up, custom tailored and compiled and built on my system. Doing things this way gets you under the hood so you know how things function and interact with each other.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

I agree with Subman. While I love my Ubuntu install, a lot of command line stuff is required and that just doesn't appeal to the average user. But hey...My first OS was MS DOS.

PD

Damn straight man. Fun for me and you, hell for anyone who is the average Windows user.

Well more fun for me because I compile every last ounce of code for my Linux installs and build it from the ground up, even down to the compiler that I use to install it with. A custom tailored personal version that doesn't work on any machine but my own, and is unlike the standard this is how it is going to be smuck they give you with a normal 'distro'! Only whimpy Linux users use Ubuntu! :D Did I mention how fast and tight my version runs? They probably compile to i386 for Ubuntu even to make sure it will run on anything. Half the special features of your CPU aren't even being utilized. I compile to every last extra gadget on my CPU. Speed is where it is at instead of one size fits all.

Take the plunge if you dare (peer pressure - feel it?:D Be a man!):

http://www.gentoo.org/

Start small and build yourself from a stage3. Then we can discuss building from nothing on a stage1.

One warning - building everything yourself takes time. Expect a good accomplishment to have something like KDE running in a day or two. The end result is a system that runs faster than any other Linux distro you have ever used or tried.

-S

[PeriscopeDepth]

Damn straight man. Fun for me and you, hell for anyone who is the average Windows user.

Well more fun for me because I compile every last ounce of code for my Linux installs and build it from the ground up, even down to the compiler that I use to install it with. A custom tailored personal version that doesn't work on any machine but my own, and is unlike the standard this is how it is going to be smuck they give you with a normal 'distro'! Only whimpy Linux users use Ubuntu! :D Did I mention how fast and tight my version runs? They probably compile to i386 for Ubuntu even to make sure it will run on anything. Half the special features of your CPU aren't even being utilized. I compile to every last extra gadget on my CPU. Speed is where it is at instead of one size fits all.

Take the plunge if you dare (peer pressure - feel it?:D Be a man!):

http://www.gentoo.org/

Start small and build yourself from a stage3. Then we can discuss building from nothing on a stage1.

One warning - building everything yourself takes time. Expect a good accomplishment to have something like KDE running in a day or two. The end result is a system that runs faster than any other Linux distro you have ever used or tried.

-S

What kind of coding skills/language are required for that kind of stuff Subman? I'm just two school quarters into C++, so I doubt I'm advanced enough for that. Sounds pretty cool to customize your own OS like that though.

I was considering Fedora for my first plunge into Linux, but knew that Ubuntu was "easymode" Linux and didn't want to take any chances on blowing my computer up, I just don't have the budget for a new one or taking it in if the fix is out of my league.

I'm still pretty noobish with Linux and figuring stuff out, but god does it beat the crap out of Windows for general use (and I got X-Plane running on it!)! Nice getting to use a command line regularly again! :DL

PD

[SUBMAN1]

No coding skills needed outside of modifying scripts that you want to change, but this is not needed either. It will force you to understand how Linux works and it will teach you how to fix things in it. Understand Gentoo from the ground up and you are probably worth up to $150K+ (if you attain the rank of Sr. so after time spent of course) in the job market.

-S

PS. You can get a stage 3 install done pretty quickly (relatively speaking) by doing nothing more than following the step be step guide:
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/