based on Linux no doubt ;-)

No OS will ever topple windows until there is bullet-proof, per application, built-in emulation for windows applications. VM's or dual boot are inconvenient. I think 75% of windows users have something in their "Program Files" that they just can't live with out or get in another way. Yes 90% of your time is spent on the web but it's the other 10% using thick apps that can't be replaced. MS was in the right place at the right era and there is so much lock-in that it will take a serious evolution before that changes.

Is it, or is it based on Linux? Read the chromeOS blog a bit more carefully

"Google Chrome OS, as it is currently known, promises to be quick to boot up and secure. It will run on x86 and ARM chips."

What, no love for x64 chips, a la 64bit processing?

Also, does anyone else think that an OS and a browser coming from the same developer with the same name will cause confusion to average plebs?

In all honesty, I really hope this goes well for them, as another competitor (at least, another big competitor) is always a good thing.

This sounds like a step in the right direction; Google obviously have their own commercial agenda, but this needn't be incompatible with the rest of the open source movement. After all, Linux always needs development funding and Google has deep pockets to help with that.

From a commercial point of view, the Google brand is a good one to sell to OEMs and consumers, if it's slick and delivers the netbook experience that people want then there's no reason it couldn't get a good slice of the market.

Windows XP on netbooks is less than ideal (especially on limited SSD space) and IMO it's success there has more to do with Microsoft's OEM marketing and users familiarity with the Windows XP brand than any real advantage.

I have an Asus eee 901, bought with XP installed as it was on offer (thanks eBuyer), but I find myself using Presto more often these days.

There will never be a one-size-fits-all operating system, so if Google's marketing power can move the Linux case forward this can only be a good thing.

Quoted as "running on a Linux core".

So this differs only from things like Linpus Lite on the Aspire One in that it only runs a browser. And while a lot of things can be run in browsers, it's still a little limiting....

So Google are finally releasing their own Linux distro. Though none of the media reports I've seen so far have mentioned that this "new OS" is, in fact, Linux.

From the official Google blog: "Google Chrome running within a new windowing system on top of a Linux kernel"

It sounds like a perfect match for the Crunchpad.

As I assume the EU have to prevent any near monopoly seeking to unfairly extend its

predations, the inclusion of Google search has to be disallowed in European versions.

"Even more importantly, they don't want to spend hours configuring their computers to work with every new piece of hardware"

How on Earth are they going to address people's hardware configuration woes when every other alternative OS offers less compatibility than Windows ? "Every new piece of hardware" already works with Windows and seldom takes "hours of configuration".

According to FT the kernel will be Linux. The way it's written hints it won't use GNU but why wouldn't they. They have said they will release source so likely to be free software.

I wonder how much bandwidth the OS will eat up with it constantly phoning home to Google sending them all your usage data?

To a large degree I agree with you. However, MS Office on the Mac is regarded by many as superior to its Windows counterpart. And Office is possibly the most 'business-related' bit of software a majority of home users actually use (normally to pen complaint letters to the Daily Mail, I suspect).

However, don't forget that PC users are becoming more and more tech-savvy. Before long the PC-using populous will be at the point where they'll be more confident to choose which OS they use. Despite Linux (et al) flavours being far less popular, they're still, themselves, gaining in popularity. Factor in Windows' clunkiness and users' disillusionment and other OS's start to look like contenders.

Time will tell, I suppose.....

maybe it's one for the squint-eyed mini-platform crowd.

..... games?

I tried to purchase a Linux netbook some months ago here - ALL the shops, without exception only had netbooks with XP on them. When asking the shopkeepers why you get no sensible comments, apart from 'they come delivered like that'. Another monopolistic strong-arm tactic no doubt.

Did I buy one? NO. First give money to Microsoft and then put the time in myself wiping their shite off it and installing everything myself? Why should I?

I'm still a potential customer for a Linux netbook. Anyone?

(and no, I don't want to order one online from some other country)

Had a bit of trouble getting my mate's Huawei 169 3G modem working on acer aspire one's Linpus. Took 5 minutes. Strenuous.

Now, stick ChromeOS on my machine, and I bet root-Fuc*k-All of the hardware will go. Skype with video? Printers? 3G Modem?. Nah

Yow! Just got hit by a flying pig!

Competition laws on free software?

Quite right, and considering that a lot of desktop virtualisation packages are resource eaters you have to query what the performance of a virtualised solution'd be anyway - especially in light of the mixed support or lack thereof for virtualisation in current netbook processors (I'm looking at YOU, Intel...). Look at http://ark.intel.com/ProductCollection.aspx?familyID=29035. Unless there's a confluence of better hardware support and seamless software support for that sort of virtualisation, I can see ANY form of Linux having problems making headway against XP. That's the thing; SCCs/netbooks/nettops are just powerful enough to run Windows acceptably quickly - never mind that it's only XP, it'll still do what people want in a familiar environment. Google can make headway in phones more easily, since there's a greatly limited functionality set by comparison, and people are used to getting a new (for example) Sony Ericsson where the Address Book or whatever looks different than the Nokia they had. The Netbook/top has developed into a machine which they don't just use for accessing the web/cloud/amorphous gob of data; it's powerful enough to do a lot more locally, to run stuff like Office or whatever, and people expect to be able to do that in a familiar setting.

Enable S3 sleep in XP and it should be fine.

http://www.tek-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=1469199

or install the Windows 7 RC it's free for a year, it runs better than XP and i've got all the apps you listed running. you can also buy it soon for £50 which is actually a fair price for an OS if you ask me.

Seeing as it's based on the linux kernel is this an OS in the same sense that KDE, Gnome and Ratpoison are?

As long as I can get bash on it I guess I'm happy :)

P.S. I was just about to flame a BBC website journalist for writing in an article this morning that Google Chrome OS was a threat to Linux on netbooks but I see they've since removed that bit :)

If its a Linux core then Linux is actually the OS. However, to the unwashed masses chrome will be the OS because only this will actually launch any applications - Google Docs, Google Mail, Google everything! And everything will run over the web (with cached local versions). Its what Microsoft wanted to do but never achieved!

I dont see a problem with this. May even be a good thing in general, especially for the OSS movement.... probably bad for Microsoft though.

And if Google get too big for their boots and try and EEE (Embrace, Extend, Extinguish) Linux, then there is always Haiku ;-)

Does this herald Web 3.0?

PS: I used Web 3.0 first so i claim dibs. Anyone else wants to use this please send me £5 per usage and kiss my patented ass.

The name's fine, no problem at all. Lusers will know the difference...

Tech Support:: “What operating system are you running?”

Customer: “Pentium.”

thats gonna suck.

if it allows native code then this "web os" crap is just marketing spiel, its no different to any other os except you put explorer running in a web browser.

i imagine you wouldn't be able to run scriptblock/adblock either... argh

I actually can't wait to test this out on some of the low powered P3 machines and other obsolete hardware I have kicking around.

Could it be a good way to turn last centuries PCs into reasonably nimble web machines?

Of course, this would only be to satisfy my own geeky curiosity rather than through any kind of necessity. If I actually wanted low powered web machines I'd buy ones based off the atom chip. As it turns out, I don’t.

So will it succeed? On netbooks, quite possibly. On desktop PCs? No. Despite their grandiose claims.

"How on Earth are they going to address people's hardware configuration woes when every other alternative OS offers less compatibility than Windows ? 'Every new piece of hardware' already works with Windows and seldom takes 'hours of configuration' "

Not true.

Every single camera or mp3 player I have bought in the last 5 years has worked fine on linux and failed to work on windows XP.

Yeah, printing is still an issue on linux, but generally linux has better hardware support out of the box than windows. And if something doesn't work with linux, at least you have the chance to fix it.

"topple MS my arse [...] I for one don't want all my stuff controlled and indexed by an advertising agency."

You seem quite happy for it to be controlled by a marketing agency though.