1. somanyphones's Avatar

    i like the chrome os direction far better myself but what do you guys think
    02-08-2010 06:26 PM
  2. doogald's Avatar
    I'm not sure that everything as a web app is a better model than discrete apps, but I'm sure that there will be some people who love it. For the average, non-geek user, who probably has owned an iPod at some point and has iTunes loaded with music and maybe some tv shows and movies, I think that the iPad would be a stronger draw.
    02-08-2010 07:29 PM
  3. somanyphones's Avatar
    depends if flash is a point .. like for hulu
    02-09-2010 01:11 PM
  4. jerbear's Avatar
    Can you do more than one thing at a time? Can you use software from sources other than some official application catalog? If so then it is already better than an iPad.
    02-25-2010 02:07 PM
  5. TBolt's Avatar
    when I saw the new Chromebooks in action during Google IO's keynote today, I definitely asked myself, "where's the Chrome tablet?"

    as a business user, I was disappointed to find out that Google Docs works terribly on Android tablets. on a Chrome tablet though, GDocs would work great!

    I'm not spending money on an Android tablet now. I'll wait for the Chrome tablets, or - better yet - a Chrome Transformer-type device.

    05-11-2011 12:50 PM
  6. slbailey1's Avatar
    I just finished watching the Chrome Keynote. Halfway thru the ChromeOS section it dawned on me that the ChromeOS is better suited on a tablet than a laptop. And I would love to have a ChromeOS tablet.

    I'm also thanking that with the NFC features and the Open Accessory APIs, a ChromeOS tablet should be able to see and handle notifications from an Android phone.
    05-11-2011 07:51 PM
  7. Michael Alan Goff's Avatar
    I wouldn't say so.

    People can use an iPad very well offline, but not the Chrome OS. It is an OS meant for nigh-constant internet access.
    05-12-2011 08:20 PM
  8. TBolt's Avatar
    I wouldn't say so.

    People can use an iPad very well offline, but not the Chrome OS. It is an OS meant for nigh-constant internet access.
    Good point -- definitely a limitation to keep an eye on, assuming it's true. I would expect that Google, and app developers, would expand the off-line capabilities beyond Gmail, Docs & (something else).
    05-12-2011 08:29 PM
  9. Michael Alan Goff's Avatar
    Well, the OS -is- merely a beefed up Web Browser sitting on a Linux Kernel. I can't really see it competing with full-fledged apps, unless they do expand offline capabilities.

    And if they do, then I have to ask why they are doing it. Why not just put more resources into fixing the bugs that people are complaining about with Android? I don't see the point of a Chrome OS Tablet, maybe I'm just weird.

    I do see the point of an Android Tablet, though.
    05-12-2011 09:03 PM
  10. TBolt's Avatar
    Chrome OS is beginning to make more sense to a lot of users - maybe not you. My email, my pictures, most of my business and education docs are already online. I don't use the more advanced software, which requires the Windows OS, until I get back to my home office. So, these lighter, longer-life laptops might make more sense for me while I'm on the road. Although, I'd prefer to have Chrome OS on a Transformer-type device, giving me both a tablet and a netbook.

    Most of my clients, who are small-medium sized businesses, are already in the cloud (Google Apps), too. Some of those clients are pilots, who would love to have a laptop that
    1) isn't over-priced, like Apple,
    2) actually gets 8+ hours of battery life and
    3) gives them access to the typical services that they use, every one of which happens to be web-based.

    As for why Google is pursuing 2 platforms - Google OS and Android - at the same time -- I don't have an answer for that one. I think the answer to that question will present itself as both platforms mature a bit more. Too early to tell without being involved in Google's meetings.
    05-13-2011 12:54 PM