I wonder
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tracyanne Jun 20, 2011 7:24 PM EDT |
Does this bloke realize that Google's Chrome OS is based on Linux? If they sell well that will be a lot of Linux based OS sales. |
| fewt Jun 20, 2011 8:55 PM EDT |
True that. I don't think netbooks are going anywhere. They are still small, and still offer a decent price / performance value. Tablets have their place too, mine is "placed" right next to my netbook. :) |
| tracyanne Jun 20, 2011 9:45 PM EDT |
Yes I carry a netbook around with me all the time. When it's in the car I hook it up to a device that steps up the voltage from 12 Volts DC to 19, so I can run it off the cigaret lighter. I use it for a lot of things, including programming while waiting around in doctors offices, while my partner gets seen to. I also use it as a portable recording studio using Audacity. |
| jimbauwens Jun 21, 2011 3:14 AM EDT |
My netbook is my main computer, I do all my programming and stuff on it. I know the screen is a bit small, but so far it hasn't let me down :) |
| fewt Jun 21, 2011 8:22 AM EDT |
Same here, with the exception of compiling and building large packages, most all of my work is done on the netbook. |
| jimbauwens Jun 21, 2011 10:51 AM EDT |
I posted a comment yesterday on the comment of the author on Tracyanne's comment (yes, lots comments :p), but it still isn't there. I posted some stuff about that Chrome OS was mostly Open Source, unlike what he said and some other facts. I guess he can't handle it when he is wrong :/ Another blog for me to skip. |
| techlaze Jun 21, 2011 11:35 AM EDT |
@jimbauwens I've double-checked the spam queue and your comment isn't there. Maybe there is something wrong with disqus. Only comments with links enter the moderation queue, and no comments are filtered (even with the ones with swear words). I'm sure this is some problem with the commenting system. I've mentioned explicitly in the post that I'm even okay with people starting a flamewar. Still, I apologize that your comment isn't displayed. I've disabled caching today, so if you want you can try commenting today. |
| techlaze Jun 21, 2011 11:39 AM EDT |
@tracyanne Well, yes, Chromebooks are based on Linux, but Chrome OS is proprietary. By Linux-based, I meant a netbook which runs Ubuntu or any other completely open-source distribution. Besides, I don't think Google itself wants to classify Chromebook as a netbook, even though it looks and feels like one; however, it's just a browser that costs 500$. I know that the post title may be confusing to some, so sorry about that, it's too late to change it. |
| techlaze Jun 21, 2011 12:00 PM EDT |
@jimbauwens Hey, I found your comment, it was in the moderation queue just because you had included a link there. Sorry, I hadn't check my disqus queue for a day, that's why the comment was still stuck in moderation. It's there now. |
| jimbauwens Jun 21, 2011 3:37 PM EDT |
techlaze, thanks for posting!
It seems I was looking to much on the dark side (because I had more experience with comments not coming on other blogs). Sorry for that :) |
| Steven_Rosenber Jun 21, 2011 6:31 PM EDT |
I don't think Chromebooks will catch on at these prices. <$200 is where they need to be. |
| tracyanne Jun 21, 2011 7:20 PM EDT |
techlaze, yes I understand that ChromeOS is basically proprietary. It is still by definition a Linux based OS. As to Ubuntu or other Linux based operating Systems selling well in the netbook/tablet space that really is up to the distributors of those distributions. Canonical seem to be in the best position to fill that gap, but unless they are keeping thier marketing and partnership plans very quiet, they seem to be making the same mistake that every other Linux based OS builer is making... they are waiting for the world to notice them. Good, bad or ugly, Google do understand the power of marketing, they should, that's their business, and they have been very good at marketing Android and ChromeOS. Part of the reason that Android and ChromeOS are successful is that Google have marketed not a FOSS operating system, but a Free operating system that anyone may lock down to suit their needs. They haven't marketed it in a way the Free Software Community understands Free(dom), they've marketed in the way the suits understand Free(dom), the freedom to create vertical markets or silos, the freedom to create lock in. I don't really have a problem with this. If it means people buy a phone or a tablet or a netbook with Android or ChromeOS they aren't buying Windows or Apple products that do the same thing. What does concern me is that the companies/organisations that have genuinely Free don't seem to be marketing well. One of the problems that Canonical face, as I understand these things, is, that when dealing with say Dell, while Microsoft subsidises a lot of the costs, and a lot of other crapware companies can also add to these subsidies... (marketing, advertising for example), Canonical apparently can't, after all Ubuntu is Free and also no cost to anyone. But while that may be true that leaves a company like Dell to carry all the Marketing and Advertising costs, so Canonical, or any other Linux based OS distributor, has to find a way to carry some of those costs. But to afford marketing/advertising budgets you have to actually have a reliable source of income, either from the thing you are marketing (Windows in the case of Microsoft) or from something associated with it. Adobe, for example, markets Flash heavily, but they don't sell Flash, they sell products that make flash useful. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!