Faster, more secure, more resistant to software obsolescence, all content automatically available on all devices and a more minimalist and unobtrusive user experience. Price is another great benefit. A $200-300 Chromebook performs as well as or better than most Windows and Mac laptops that are 3x their respective price. They're compact and lightweight (portability) and really follow the philosophy of your device being manufacturer agnostic and your device getting out of the way while you get straight to your content. Generally it's a much cleaner, more efficient, less complicated and more rewarding user experience for a much lower cost that you don't have to maintain - it does that itself too.
Chromebooks are awful. And here are some examples why.
- Thread starter JeffDenver
- Start date
- Status
Faster, more secure, more resistant to software obsolescence, all content automatically available on all devices and a more minimalist and unobtrusive user experience. Price is another great benefit. A $200-300 Chromebook performs as well as or better than most Windows and Mac laptops that are 3x their respective price. They're compact and lightweight (portability) and really follow the philosophy of your device being manufacturer agnostic and your device getting out of the way while you get straight to your content. Generally it's a much cleaner, more efficient, less complicated and more rewarding user experience for a much lower cost that you don't have to maintain - it does that itself too.
IMO it's some of all three. The platform design is based on internet connectivity. By contrast, Windows is designed to use the internet only as a supplement. I can use Office and photoshop and whatever with no internet connection at all, and can do so indefinitely if I need to. Communication is the only reason I would ever absolutely have to use the internet on a Windows PC.
Windows is a more robust platform. I can root my phone with it, I can do detailed photoshop work, I can play elaborate games on it, I can develop on it, create media on it (burn CDs for example), in addition to basic web browsing and IMing and email. Chrome OS comes across to me as "windows lite". Something less than a full desktop OS. You have to jump through hoops to do stuff on Chrome that is easily done on Windows. Not to mention Windows is far better supported, both by new development and existing applications.
Chome may very well mature to where Windows is right now eventually. But it's not there yet IMO. And probably won't be in the foreseeable future. For that reason I don't see the point in replacing a Windows laptop with it when the price difference is so minimal. I think the hype surrounding Chrome is premature and unjustified at best.
Because they are charging the same price as a Windows laptop, which has the same capabilities as a desktop.
...assuming you are ok with what it can't do and will probably never do.
I think the performance difference has been exaggerated. The Chromebooks I have used are not that much faster accessing websites than the cheap laptops are.
Maybe you're using the wrong laptops. I have set about half a dozen up in the last year, and they all work great.
Kevin OQuinn
AC Team Emeritus
- May 17, 2010
- 9,267
- 496
- 0
Assuming you're OK with having less of the things he mentioned.
Either your expectations are super low for what "works great" or you're not evaluating the chromebooks fairly.
You mentioned "complex gaming" on Windows. How much is one of those Windows laptops that can play Titanfall well?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
To play Titanfall well you're looking at no less than $1,200
Sent from my Galaxy S4 running SlimKat 4.4.2
Or what you define as performing well is a low standard. Golfdriver mentioned above how his Windows laptop struggles to open a few tabs and doing search features on Windows 8. Would you consider that performing well?
Sent from my Galaxy S4 running SlimKat 4.4.2
Less of what? What exactly am I missing by not having a chromebook? Still waiting for someone to answer that.
Having a Win8 machine means I don't have to compromise anything as far as functionality. All the stuff Chromebooks can do can be done on Win8 machines as well.
I was talking about desktops...but I can play Roller Coaster Tycoon on any of those cheap laptops with maxed settings. Or Civilization. Or Quake or Team Fortress.
Give me an example of a Chromebook that can play games as well or better than a similar priced Win8 machine.
My Win8 laptops do not struggle with opening tabs. They open quick and easy. Maybe he is doing something wrong?
Kevin OQuinn
AC Team Emeritus
- May 17, 2010
- 9,267
- 496
- 0
Similarly priced Windows machines can't play those games. $200 remember.
Or are you going to go further back in the way back machine for even older games?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
- Dec 4, 2012
- 35,635
- 623
- 113
Nope, not quick and easy. Far from it. Had 3 Chrome tabs open and 2 Hangout conversations open. I am not doing anything wrong.
Where are you seeing $200 Chromebooks that can play better games than a windows laptop?
Yeah, you'd have to spend a whole nother $20. LOL
$220 - Dell D630 Intel Core 2 Duo 1.8GHz 2GB 80GB Win 7 14.1-inch Notebook | Overstock.com Shopping - Great Deals on Dell Laptops
Why not? Chromebooks can't play those either.
By "complex" I mean stuff that is not typically on smartphones like Angry Birds. I have seen nothing like Zoo tycoon on tablets or smartphones yet, for whatever reason. So something is missing. The only games I see on tablets and smartphones are stripped down versions of PC equivalents, and that is what I see on Chromebooks as well.
Even if they do appear I am still making the same argument about choice...the PC is a mature platform and the software library shows it. Even if Chrome managed to produce a scant few games that could compete it would still only be a tiny fraction of what you can get on the PC (and laptops).
- - - Updated - - -
So do I have a magic laptop or something? Not sure what to tell you.
- Dec 4, 2012
- 35,635
- 623
- 113
I know this: my experience with Chromebooks versus my experience with my Win8 laptop is my Chromebook wins. Period.
I'll post video of the one I have at home. Have had 30 tabs open at once before.
- Dec 4, 2012
- 35,635
- 623
- 113
You can post all the videos you want. It won't change the opinion I have of my own machine.
Maybe not. But it will be evidence that your experience is not necessary the norm for cheap laptops. Which is relevant to this thread.
Kevin OQuinn
AC Team Emeritus
- May 17, 2010
- 9,267
- 496
- 0
A game from 2001? You really want me to list Android games that are more graphically demanding than that? Or are you defining "complex" as something different than that?
Portal, Half-Life 2 now available for NVIDIA Shield | Android Central
Both games are far more demanding than Zoo Tycoon.
zkSharks
Retired Moderator
- Mar 15, 2011
- 2,012
- 75
- 0
That settles it, Chromebooks are the bee's knees. /thread
At the risk of narrowing the focus or changing the subject... Golfdriver mentions Hangouts conversations, while Jeff talks about smooth and speedy tabs. I, myself, have generally good performance from my (albeit high-end) Windows machines, and equally (if not somewhat better) experiences on Chrome OS devices. That changes when I have Google+ open, especially with Hangouts. It's sluggish and jumpy.
Now, Chrome OS is a web-centric platform, and it makes sense that the Chrome browser wouldn't skip a beat. In theory, Windows would be the same (processing speed this, graphics prowess that), but in my experience it simply isn't. Windows and Chrome haven't always had a great relationship (don't you love those perfectly smooth and crisp web fonts, and beautiful high-DPI support?). So how much of these web performance woes can we attribute to apps that are heavy in animation, JavaScript, GPU compositing, etc.? When my G+ sounds like a looping doorbell (thanks, mods), it brings down performance on Windows but not on Chrome OS from what I've seen.
We can easily test this to back up these claims. Shift+Esc in Chrome... pay attention to anything related to Hangouts, Tab: Google+, GPU Process, any other sites/apps that come to mind, and the corresponding CPU usage. Also try the "stats for nerds" option. Spin things up and monitor the processes to see what's dragging things down. Fun fact: Hangouts uses iFrames to display conversations. You can use the 'Inspect Element' context menu option to quickly remove the iFrame (replace its source attribute with "about:blank") and see if there's a noticeable performance improvement.
Just my thoughts. The platforms work in fundamentally different ways, as I said before, and that's going to have a significant effect on web performance even with more or less the same browser and rendering engine — though for what it's worth as a comparison, there are less than 20 Chrome flags that don't support both Windows and Chrome OS.
At the risk of narrowing the focus or changing the subject... Golfdriver mentions Hangouts conversations, while Jeff talks about smooth and speedy tabs. I, myself, have generally good performance from my (albeit high-end) Windows machines, and equally (if not somewhat better) experiences on Chrome OS devices. That changes when I have Google+ open, especially with Hangouts. It's sluggish and jumpy.
Now, Chrome OS is a web-centric platform, and it makes sense that the Chrome browser wouldn't skip a beat. In theory, Windows would be the same (processing speed this, graphics prowess that), but in my experience it simply isn't. Windows and Chrome haven't always had a great relationship (don't you love those perfectly smooth and crisp web fonts, and beautiful high-DPI support?). So how much of these web performance woes can we attribute to apps that are heavy in animation, JavaScript, GPU compositing, etc.? When my G+ sounds like a looping doorbell (thanks, mods), it brings down performance on Windows but not on Chrome OS from what I've seen.
We can easily test this to back up these claims. Shift+Esc in Chrome... pay attention to anything related to Hangouts, Tab: Google+, GPU Process, any other sites/apps that come to mind, and the corresponding CPU usage. Also try the "stats for nerds" option. Spin things up and monitor the processes to see what's dragging things down. Fun fact: Hangouts uses iFrames to display conversations. You can use the 'Inspect Element' context menu option to quickly remove the iFrame (replace its source attribute with "about:blank") and see if there's a noticeable performance improvement.
Just my thoughts. The platforms work in fundamentally different ways, as I said before, and that's going to have a significant effect on web performance even with more or less the same browser and rendering engine — though for what it's worth as a comparison, there are less than 20 Chrome flags that don't support both Windows and Chrome OS.
- Status
Similar threads
Trending Posts
-
Did anyone get the new silicone case from Samsung?- Started by ansa82
- Replies: 12
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram