Google Operating System

[David]

It has been roumoured for some time that Google were working on a full-blown operating system (and I'm not talking about Android). Well, it seems that Google are looking beyond the desktop and towards a "cloud computing" model. Yesterday, they announced a new operating system based on the Chrome browser that will allow users to run online applications. It's planned to debut on some netbooks next year (http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10281744-2.html).

Rather than choosing to compete with Microsoft, it looks as though Google have chosen to leap-frog them by designing an operating system for the future.

[James]

I can’t see it replacing Windows quite honestly. Windows is embedded in corporate IT culture and for the most part is well suited for desktop computing.

I think the Google OS will crop up on mobile devices but I can’t see it being powerful enough to run desktop apps like Photoshop and other hungry programs. Software manufacturers will have to invest in making their programs work on Google OS – and I don’t think the incentive is there for them to bother.

I think it will find a niche rather than become mainstream.

[David]

...I can’t see it being powerful enough to run desktop apps like Photoshop and other hungry programs.

But that's exactly the point. It's not designed for those type of apps. It is specifically designed for "cloud computing", online applications. Google see this as the future and I think they have a point. Most computer users are not "power users" and lightweight, online applications are likely to satisfy them. It's another instance of Microsoft not thinking ahead or reacting quickly enough to current trends.

[Tom]

I think the Chrome OS will do well, and since it has Linux/Unix under the bonnet, I don;t see why it shouldn't do almost everything in the fullness of time. I plan to get a Windows 7 machine and try and hold onto it until Chrome can do all the things I would like it to do.

[Matthew]

Now that should get up Microsoft's nose, I wonder how long it will take before the solicitors are engaged?

Actually, a new operating system would be interesting to through into the IT soup, but will it be another LINUX copy?

[Tom]

Since Steve Jobs did so well with Unix/Linux, I am greatly puzzled that no one has yet produced a decent frontend to use this OS on 'windows' boxes. For example, why didn't IBM take their revenge on the west coast upstart? Part of the trouble was the reluctance of OEMs to produce dirvers. But they can hardly refuse to do it for a Google OS.

[David]

Since Steve Jobs did so well with Unix/Linux, I am greatly puzzled that no one has yet produced a decent frontend to use this OS on 'windows' boxes. For example, why didn't IBM take their revenge on the west coast upstart?

Have you forgotten OS/2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS/2)?

[Tom]

Now that you mention it - I do remember OS/2. But it was not a front end to Unix and might well have done well if it had been.

[Stewart]

Google are an incredibly powerful company and to be honest if you'd asked the mobile manufacturers a few years ago if they'd expect a play from Google on a handset OS they'd have laughed - I know I was there... They may not be able to access the corporate market immediately but they have the 'smarts' to engineer the s/w and existing contacts via their advertising activity with all corporates. Combine this with with a trendy and innovative brand image which can raise any amount of money on the capital markets to fund acquisition and any move which they decide to make is likely to be significant.

MS just want to maintain the status quo and continuing making money on upgrades to their current business model, but Google are looking for a major market disruption such as a push towards cloud computing where they can gain a significant entry point.

Google are already being to adopt a more 'corporate' mentality when it comes to exploiting financial opportunity rather than the 'morality' angle of its founders... "big brother really is watching us all!''

[Tom]

All true but MS still have a bigger market cap and higher revenues than Google.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=Goog
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=MSFT&=

[Stewart]

MS are still significantly bigger, their GP is approx 3x that of Google, but looking at GP growth over last 3 years Google have achieved over 100% whilst MS achieved 14% - its clear who's growing and who's in a more defensive position.

[philipjcowan]

The trend in computer software has been for an established leader to remain dominant once it has gain a major foothold in mind and behaviour of consumers. Think of Microsoft Office, Photoshop and, of course, Windows. Even when a new opportunity arises, consumers are inclined to wait until its advantages are integrated into the latest version of their existing software and then upgrade.

This conservatism is rational from an individual point of view, even if the collective result mitigates against positive innovation. Few of us have large amounts of time to devote to learning new software and will do so only if there is a powerful incentive.

As for the Cloud operating system, Google would be best to offer advantages in parallel to Windows so consumers can switch between their home computer's own operating system and a shared cloud. That way, the competition is played out gradually rather than the consumer being faced with a single choice — stay with Windows or go over to Google's cloud. If those are the two options, my money would be on Microsoft's dominance continuing. I suspect, however, that Google is too smart to go head-to-head with Microsoft.

Ten years of trying to break into Troy proved futile, until some guy had an idea of a wooden horse and the rest, as they don't say, is myth.

[David]

Well, you can consider Chrome to be the wooden horse. If Google can position their Chrome browser as being the default application for cloud computing applications, ultimately, Windows may become irrelevant.

[Tom]

That's what I've been thinking re Chrome. But Googledocs are not very wonderful and MS plan to put up versions of Word and Excel in an Azure cloud-computing land http://www.microsoft.com/windowsazure/ . MS products could be very serious competitors for Google's flakey cloud products.
With regard to Google's future I think their key asset will be Googlebooks. In fact I am not willing to buy an eReader until Google either come up with an eReader of make available software (as they are doing with Android) which powers other eReaders. What I want is to be able to download all those public`domain works they have scanned and have them as eBooks.
For those of us who create content, I also think eReaders will be highly significant, though how we will get revenue from it is another matter altogether! At present, the main thing is to take whatever decisions we can to facilitate future content distribution on eReaders. For me, it is the same kind of hunch I had c1982 when making sure all my content was digital and c1996 when I began getting ready for electronic content distribution. I do not know how it is going to work but I have a strong feeling that the game is changing again. Nokia seem to think a GSM notebook (which I fancy: http://europe.nokia.com/find-products/mini-laptop ) is the way forward but for 'just reading' I think the superior screen/weight/size/battery life of an eReader will be irresistible. For example, it would be great to have an Autocad manual on an eBook reader (1) to read on the train or plane (2) to have beside one's laptop (3) to sell if one is the content creator!

[David]

MS plan to have online versions of all their new Office apps. Interesting to see how they will compare but initial reviews are positive.


For example, it would be great to have an Autocad manual on an eBook reader (1) to read on the train or plane (2) to have beside one's laptop (3) to sell if one is the content creator!

I guess that's a hint! But I'm now convinced that as far as software training is concerned, text is dead. That's why I'm now concentrating on videos. So, I'll get an eBook reader when they can also play video.