Comments on: Google calls time on the Age of Windows Wed, 16 Nov 2016 01:37:11 +0000 hourly 1 By: Mr. Hat Wed, 29 Jul 2009 15:28:09 +0000 Another vague, generic and dated article.

By: Hans Wed, 15 Jul 2009 15:32:37 +0000 Big words, mr. Bell.

I don’t care what the OS is as long as it works.

(2x OSX leopard, Win XP, lot’s of Linux distro’s. All on my desk.)

They all work.

By: The Bell Fri, 10 Jul 2009 04:22:00 +0000 My only issue with this article are its implications a) that top-selling Microsoft products themselves have been based on anything other than major tracts of open-source code – whereas they have, and have seldom been modified for the better; and b) that there is a “market” out there in which Microsoft has ever *earned* reputable recognition – whereas what has prevailed for too long is a monopolistic stranglehold over a widespread but inexplicably masochistic user environment which always has been Microsoft’s to lose.

Or at least gallantly loosen to let live. But of course the scofflaws at MS didn’t do that, at least not anyplace where high attorney fees trump justice.

Well, now the signals are set. Microsoft clearly doesn’t have what it takes any more, anywhere.

All you Chicken Little MS fans out there, don’t keep repeating the “Billions of flies can’t possibly be wrong” argument. Your world’s not about to end, but strap down anyway:

Vista is the *one* Microsoft failure, you say? Puhlease. Try Internet Explorer, Outlook, Entourage, Office 2003 et seq, Windows Server, Windows Media Player, Windows Mobile, Zune, XBox – or rather, don’t. They are all abysmal deviations from coder ethics, presumptive and nasty parasitic pieces of marketing fluff instead of worth their cost, or the dreadful back-end cost of installing and trying to use any of them prior to deinstallation.

If poorly-crafted, virus-ridden, arrogantly inefficient operating conditions are the best America has to offer, we may as well all shut down right now. Really. Even NASA is fed up with it. The rest of the government is sure to follow. And we all agree about cutting government spending, right?


Linux is absolutely fine for command-line jockeys and enlightened IT Guys, but it relies on vast tracts of benevolence from third-parties to remotely keep pace with the lifestyle user end of things. Not everybody has the patience it takes to install and use it, while those that do, make out.

If Apple weren’t so busy marketing teen lifestyle products, cosying up to ATT and paying lip service to Outlook addicts, they’d have wiped the slate on the OS market. OK, so that’s not what they did. But if they wanted to, they could have, long since. Beats me, why not. Probably, the cost of re-educating masochists what to do with their time when they have no more viruses to deal with and a graphics library that actually works.

If Apple is leaving it to Google to sort out the god-awful mess Microsoft has made of “its” market, so be it. I have no doubt that Google can and will prevail over MS. It’s high time somebody did.

And the world will be a better place.

By: Vinod Thu, 09 Jul 2009 07:49:56 +0000 I think there is a lot of “hype” surrounding this announcement. Please consider the following:

1. Microsoft will be releasing Windows 7 next week – something that is already a hit by users.

2. Windows 7 works great on Netbooks!

3. Remember that Netbooks debuted with Linux Os on it, but failed. Most people returned it and installed Windows XP and Vista on them – these were not even built for Netbooks. Win7 OTOH has been optimized for Netbooks and can work great with it.

4. Chrome will have to deal with hardware as well – drivers for old as well as new devices (printers, scanners, bluetooth, etc.). Who’s going to supply all this?

5. Where will you actually use this? An Internet browser only device? My smartphone can do that as well as have installed apps on it.

6. What happens when there is no ‘net? Where are my docs, contacts, etc?

7. People have a problem installing Windows on their machine since they think MS has a monoply on their hardware. Well, think of Google on their hardware as well as having full control of their DATA!

8. Only Web applications can be written for it – not something that is truly rich enough for day to day computing.

9. What about existing LoB applications already written for Windows? Will users pay the cost of moving to one on the new OS?

10. Finally, what happens in the EU? Won’t they put anti-trust regulations on the new OS to remove the browser from it? After all they did it to Win7 to remove IE. But in ChromeOS case, if the browser goes, there’s nothing else left.

I don’t see this as a major threat to Microsoft. Instead I see this taking away share from the Ubuntu Linux market!

By: Marcus Thu, 09 Jul 2009 04:41:13 +0000 People who don’t really know very much about computers and academics bash Microsoft. People who actually develop for these platforms and work closely with MS have a lot of respect for the company. If you want reasonably priced computers (lots of different supported hardware vendors) then you’re going to have to go with microsoft and pay a little bit more for all the added hardware support you get with it.

Vista was a truly bungled marketing disaster yet they still command 88 percent of the market. Windows 7 will get them back up to around 90 percent. The fact that 90% of people choose to buy Microsoft is a pretty strong indicator that once again the vocal minority are on the march.

By: Chittaranjan Thu, 09 Jul 2009 03:12:04 +0000 Google claims that their new OS won;t pose security threats while on internet which is an important aspect of the OS. Truly going to hurt MS.

By: AC Thu, 09 Jul 2009 01:41:19 +0000 There already is a superior OS on the market…MacOS. Any one who has actually tried to use Google products on a regular basis will know that they even though they might get the job done without a standalone application, they are clunky and not powerful enough for demanding users. Scientists and artists have long used MacOS for their daily needs, and the new generation of Macbooks have made this argument even more compelling.

By: Juls Wed, 08 Jul 2009 23:42:12 +0000 Development tools … development tools … development tools. Microsoft’s lead remains strong because it is a great OS to develop on. If you can’t arm a legion of developers with great tools, then the next killer apps won’t be written for your platform. As a developer I like the open source tools and philosophy but when you come down to it M$ft’s development tools are far superior and work right out of the box. If ChromeOS wants compete with Windows then make an Eclipse distro for it that rivals VS2008.

By: Richard Grosser Wed, 08 Jul 2009 21:43:29 +0000 I have been in the computer industry since 1956 (Univac) and have used practically every computer and operating system in existance at one time or another. Whenever possible, I use Ubuntu Linux. I must still use Windows XP for most of my work due to software compatability issues. Linux could be a very serious competitor to Microsoft if (and it’s a big if) it had a wider range of applications that did not require the user to be a perl programmer. A good example is the inability to connect a Blackberry to Evolution mail or to easily plug in any common webcam or MP3 player. It needs to be seamless. Open Office has made a very big positive change. Ubuntu is getting there but has a long way to go. Perhaps ChromeOS will address these problems. It is difficult for system developers to remember that easy to use means absence of choice. They must avoid feature creep to be successful.

By: David Wed, 08 Jul 2009 20:22:41 +0000 What I don’t understand is the following: How is it that Google looks to gain money from distributing the OS, when it’s open source (and therefore free) ?

Will there be ads WITHIN the OS??