Google Chrome OS: Too little, too early

By Carmi Levy | Published July 9, 2009, 12:25 PM

I so want to root for Google, but I'm having a tough time denying the power of history.

On the surface, Google's announcement this week that it's developing a new primarily-for-netbooks operating system called Google Chrome OS, is good news for an industry badly in need of an operating system rethink.

The paradigm that made so much sense a decade ago -- a full-service OS on PC-based hardware that generally sat in one place and connected to the rest of the world via a hardwired Ethernet or, gasp, phone cable -- has largely been replaced by mobile, wireless devices of all shapes and sizes. Whether it's a cell phone, smartphone, netbook or laptop, today's devices need to be instant-on, quick-to-connect, and universally compatible with a growing range of network-based software and services. The monolithic OS that helped build Microsoft's fortune is largely a relic of the past. Sure, we all still use Windows, and it isn't going away so quickly, but we know the days of ever larger platforms are over.

Carmi Levy: Wide Angle Zoom (200 px)Microsoft has already recognized this shift. Dust-ups over Vista's size, performance, and fit with mainstream hardware have driven a change of heart in the OS division. Windows 7, due this October, reverses years of unchecked feature/size growth and heralds a return to a leaner OS architecture that plays nicely with everyday hardware. It also fills a gap in the suddenly hot netbook market that forced an off-balance Microsoft to sell low-margin XP by the millions because Vista was just too big to fit on these petite machines.

The cynic in me believes Google pre-announced its upcoming OS to steal a little bit of Microsoft's thunder and tweak its arch enemy in the months leading up to what some are calling the most crucial product release in the Redmond vendor's history. That same cynic in me believes Google doesn't have anything approaching alpha code at this point, but couldn't resist the urge to rain on Microsoft's parade.

With the two companies squaring off in a growing number of product areas, including search, productivity software and mobile operating systems, it was only a matter of time before they started going at it in the OS space, too. I just don't buy the Google Kool-Aid that this one company will successfully dominate every aspect of our on- and off-line experiences. If this were the case, we'd all already be using Google Chrome as our primary -- and only -- browser, and we would all be chomping at the bit to dump Windows. But despite the broad-based whining over Microsoft's bungled Vista marketing effort, the world remained decidedly Windows-centric. And although the OS landscape is changing rapidly -- indeed, we all seem to wish the OS as we know it would simply fade into transparency -- Windows will own the market for the foreseeable future.

“The cynic in me... believes Google doesn't have anything approaching alpha code at this point, but couldn't resist the urge to rain on Microsoft's parade.”

An OS isn't a feature-stripped online productivity app. It takes years of partnership building to build a broad and deep ecosystem around it. To wit, it took Microsoft over five years and two ridiculously underwhelming releases until Windows 3.0 finally hit something approaching critical mass. For any OS to succeed in this day and age, the list of stakeholders who must be satisfied is long:

• Vendors Accustomed to a decade-and-a-half of near-total Windows devotion, they aren't about to disassemble a business model that's generated consistent revenue streams for them. I know Google's trotted out a laundry list of Tier-A vendors as proof that it deserves to play in the big leagues. But the heavy hitters on that list haven't committed to divorcing Microsoft and marrying Google. They're kicking the tires, keeping their options open and preparing for an inevitable tomorrow when Windows, Google Chrome OS, and any other OS look very different than what's available today. Google hasn't won them over just yet.

• Consumers/end-users After spending 15 years learning how to navigate through Windows, they're not about to chuck their hard-won knowledge in favour of a radically different environment and interface. If "free" was enough incentive to make the switch, we'd all be using Linux by now. When my mother-in-law says she hates Windows enough to seek out something else, I'll believe Google's value proposition. Until then, I don't see end-users running for the door.

• Developers The Windows ecosystem, battered as it is by the recession and ongoing doubts about the long-term stability of the franchise, remains the biggest player in town. And when you're programming, you focus your efforts on the largest possible market. Like any new entrant, Google may eventually get there. But for now, Windows puts food on developers' dinner tables, and that, too, won't change radically in the short term.

• Enterprises Like vendors, captains of industry pilot large ships that change fundamental technological direction very rarely, deliberately and slowly. They're so deeply invested in Windows-based hardware, software, and people skills that it'll take years to even begin to undo the process. Their tech conservatism (many organizations have only just completed migrating to Windows XP and remain committed to Office 2003) means they'd be the last to abandon the Windows ship, anyway.

Make no mistake, however: Change is coming. The long stagnant OS market is overdue for a huge shakeup. Tomorrow's OS will be smaller, cheaper and less prominent than today's. Seen from that perspective, Google Chrome OS should be a slam dunk. But announcing a product a year out is child's play compared to delivering on the massive global shift in resources required to make that product ubiquitous. Google's decision to move further outside its comfort zone and more directly target Microsoft is admirably gutsy.

Whatever happens, Google's just forced Microsoft's hand, which can only be a good thing for us all. But it would be a mistake to assume that Google's Midas Touch with search and online advertising will automatically extend to its OS, as well. This is one fight that's only just beginning, and it's far from clear who will remain standing when the dust settles.

Carmi Levy is a Canadian-based independent technology analyst and journalist still trying to live down his past life leading help desks and managing projects for large financial services organizations. He comments extensively in a wide range of media, and works closely with clients to help them leverage technology and social media tools and processes to drive their business.

Comments

View comments by with a score of at least

Wow, the anti-ms bandwagon has arrived in full force, giving anyone who doesn't drink the coolaid a thumbs down, and anyone who does a thumbs up.

"A lot of current Windows users don't need more than what Chrome OS offers. However they don't know anything about OS and as their machines come with Windows they don't bother to change"

I'm not sure what to say to this, other than your ignorance is astounding, and is proof that some humans can pass along genetic learning (or lack thereof) to their offspring because this surely took generations to perfect.

Score: -1

|

A lot of current Windows users don't need more than what Chrome OS offers. However they don't know anything about OS and as their machines come with Windows they don't bother to change. Probably they are not even aware that the OS could be substituted. Goggle is a well known name, its weight is enough to do one thing that all Linux distros cannot do so far: to make the customer aware that a computer can run with something else than Windows.

Score: -1

|

Well, seeing how the desktop market shrinks every year it's no wonder Google understood that the future is Netbooks. For what I read Microsoft with its Windows 7 didn't get it and think people is crazy in moving to such devices. Most probably they will change of opinion with this announcement.

Score: 0

|

There is a huge market for netbooks, and Microsoft is not allowing netbooks with a screen size larger than 10.2 inches to run Windows 7 starter edition. Intel is making chipsets for CULV laptop/netbooks with 13 and 14 inch - these computers will cost under $300 in the long run. There is no room in the budget for those netbooks to reach that price point if they have to pay for a full Windows 7 license. Until Microsoft lowered the price of XP for netbooks, all netbooks ran Linux. If Microsoft tries to force up the price of netbooks by not allowing an inexpensive operating system (XP will only be supported until 2014 - it will soon no longer be viable to be buying new netbooks that will only get 4 years of support), they will make room for Google Chrome OS or some other Linux to take over the netbook space again.

Score: 0

|

ChromeOS != Chrome. Chrome OS is the Android for netbooks. It is no real product that has to get a market but a very inexpensive investment to get headaches for Windows 7 netbook markets and a bridgehead for a Desktop Linux, more freedom in the field of the cloud bottleneck, the operating system which is controlled by Microsoft solutions. Chrome keeps the competition for (Google's sponsored) FF and IE and strengthens Apple because it uses the same Nokia technology.

And guess what, no problem, Win7 does not suit the netbooks anyway. So it is a optimized Linux with lightweight components and it is branded Google and crosspromotes the Google browser. And the hardware manufacturer as ACER, ASUS, HP, LENOVO and so on, are very happy. The could not sell booboontoo Linux with their laptop but a Google OS, that is cool as apple.

Google does not commercially depend on Google Chrome OS. It gardenes the larger commercial environment quite nicely and the hardware manufacturers are lovin it. It generates the brand value Google needs.

Score: 1

|

I think they could neatly solve the Developer problem if they could make it so apps developed for the Google OS also run on other browsers. If the programming language is JavaScript, or its next more robust iteration, and browsers have Gears and other more powerful client-side hooks, they would have an easy to program, powerful platform with virtually universal reach.

Score: 2

|

At a brief glance, there are three options for a personal computer OS that I can see:
1. Windows
2. Linux of some flavor
3. Mac

Currently, Linux and Mac do not serve my needs. Windows has its own issues. Beos looked interesting, but like the article says...supporting a new OS, be you a regular Joe, a vendor, a developer...it's a big investment for everyone. It's not like churning out a new flavor of ice cream and if nobody likes it, oh well no big deal.

Good luck Google, but I think maybe we would all be better served if the existing OS manufacturers maybe reexamined what they are offering people. Some may want a fully loaded OS,with all of its mass, bloat, whatever you wish to call it. I had hoped that Windows 7 would install very lean, and only install features as you wanted/needed them.

And while the Apple faithful may initially cheer "hahaha take that Microsoft", it would only be a matter of time before Pope Jobs would declare the Google OS a heretic once it actually became more successful.

Score: -1

|

I agree that it is an uphill battle. But nothing like a little competition to make things interesting. Microsoft has dominated largely because there was no one comparable to the juggernaut. Winning by default is still a win, mind you; but how long can you continue to do that?

My guess is that Google won't recreate the wheel, but they will make it more user-friendly, less prone to bugs and crashes, accessible, and more barrier-free. I also think they will use crowdsourcing to make this a product that speaks to the consumer and one the end-user has a stake in both product-wise and maybe even, emotionally.

I also think that Google has the populous pulling for them. The public is ready to see someone with the power and knowledge to give ol' Bill a run for his money. It's a great David and Goliath story, albeit David has put on some weight for this fight.

These are just a few of the thoughts from a non-techie with a gripe or two about Windows. Did I mention I'm buying a mac this fall? hahaha

Score: 1

|

Google Chrome 4: Yes, it's fast, but is it usable?

As Betanews readers have responded to our stories about Chrome's JavaScript superiority...Does that mean we'd actually use this browser? Well...

Video: Netflix on PlayStation 3

Netflix has come to the PlayStation 3 via Blu-ray and BD-Live.

Verizon Wireless launches new Android, Chocolate, and ruggedized phones

The lower-priced Eris joins the Droid, while the Chocolate gets a touchscreen and more music playback.

Early sales figures for Windows 7 nicely high, but do we know why?

Fans of triple-digit surges in figures quoted by Betanews will love this one, as it appears Microsoft rediscovered how to pull off a software launch.

Myka announces its latest Linux-based 'net top box'

Myka's ION brings Boxee, XMBC, and much more to HDTVs.

What hath Mac wrought? A remembrance after a quarter-century

The reason there's a Macintosh today is not because of some brilliant flash of engineering genius, but because Apple had the audacity to learn from its mistakes.

Early build of Moblin 2.1 improves connectivity, but not device support

The Linux Foundation's Atom-centric OS yesterday received a major overhaul with the project release of Moblin 2.1 for netbooks and nettops.

The iPhone's China syndrome: Sales of 5,000 and climbing

There's actually a country where Apple's device is not a godsend, where sales can be measured in the dozens.

New European counterpart to FCC will ensure 'a more neutral net'

Late Thursday night, the ruling telecom administrators of the EU's member nations signed away their final authority to a new entity overseen by the EC.

Sophos study suggests Windows 7 UAC's default setting is self-defeating

Without any anti-virus installed, a Sophos test showed, User Account Control was only capable of thwarting just one malware package out of ten samples chosen.

Indiscreet tweet trips awareness of Web SSL vulnerability

A group of high-level security engineers had been making progress on thwarting a low-level threat to the Web, until somebody blurted it all out on Twitter.