About Google ChromeOS

[Deja Q]

http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-12691-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=71841&messageID=1388017&tag=content;col1

You know, reading that, I'll side with Microsoft for once.

You read that right.

[RoyGBiv]

1. Synchronicity ...

I was just about to post a similar article and say the same thing.

On the technical side, I do not even like the approach this OS is taking. Given how frequently my Internet connection craps out, this sort of thing is basically useless to me.

What's more, the market they're choosing for their first roll-out is rather dumb. They're comparing themselves to Windows in the netbook market, and that's a bad comparison in which they forget about their other competitor, the instant-on integrated operating systems also based on a Linux kernel. They've built their campaign around how much faster it is to boot the system and start using Internet applications than with Windows mobile, which is true enough, but what you sacrifice is effective ownership of your data and flexibility. And if you're willing to sacrifice that, why not just go with the instant-on systems where you at least retain complete control over your data?

[Dead_Parrot]

2. Whoa

Stuff that.

[charlie]

3. Reads like the TOS of every free web host since 1995

They all have those clauses. Which is fine when we're talking about cat pics and poorly run server farms. Not so fine when the world's savviest data miner and ad broker wants to be entrusted with your tax return archives. Google is being daft, they need to dump 11.1 and make 11.2-3 far more explicit.

[pokerfan]

4. Google has the potential to be purely evil

or at least more evil than Microsoft. It's certainly more competent.