[geeks] Google announces Google Chrome OS

[Shannon Hendrix]

On Jul 8, 2009, at 03:24 , Mark Benson wrote:

> That depends on what they do with it. If they can muster the  
> community energy to push Linux forward from where it is today to  
> something more akin to OS X in terms of

OS X runs my apps native, Google wants them in the cloud.

> Google publish a clear privacy policy for Chrome that is easy to find.

It's easy to find out it isn't true as well.

The last time I snooped my network while using Chrome, it did not do  
what Google claimed.

Maybe they've fixed that, but it wasn't compelling enough to bother  
with anyway.

> Why pick on Google alone anyway?

Because that's what this thread is about.

> Are you sure the other browsers you use don't do anything like that?

In my testing, the others aren't doing that, no.

Could they?  Sure, but people check them out all the time.

The cry went up against Chrome for good reason.  I never bothered to  
see if Google fixed those issues or not, but they were definitely there.

> Every used Apple software? What about using IE8? Here's one - did  
> you know every webserver you ever use logs your IP address and what  
> you accessed?

That's a function of the technology, not extra data collection for  
other purposes.

My router logs my IP too, and yours if you access my systems.

I can also hide my IP address if I really want to, and as it is... the  
one reported is not mine.

> Are you sure every website you access is trustworthy too? A large  
> number of pieces of software, including browsers, do stuff like that,

That's why I have software which intercepts that and don't allow  
it... :)

> Picking on Google alone because they use some of the info you  
> transmit *all over the internet anyway* to make your browsing more  
> useful and add features, and also tell you exactly what it is they  
> are doing while they are at it, is hyperbolic FUD.

No, it's discussing the current topic.

> I agree the OS should (and probably can in all major cases) handle  
> integration of this nature without too much fuss. If it was a poke  
> at Windows specifically then that's just petty, standing poking  
> competitors in the eye with a sharp stick just makes you look stupid.

If it was a poke at Windows, it was a very accurate one.

Stupid in its presentation, yes, but still correct.

Windows really is poor at doing the required job.  It's a horrible  
design, except some of the bits underneath it all which are actually  
not bad.

> I say give it a chance, it *might* be really good, and it *might* not.

It's Linux.  We already know what it is.

It's yet another platform, and we already know we don't need it.

If it is cloud computing, we already know (most of us anyway) that we  
think that sucks, and even if we like the idea, we know it isn't a  
good idea.

If it's fast and reliable, then it might be great for kiosks and  
netbooks, and maybe people can put native apps on it if Google doesn't  
do anything to block that.

But then see above: more redundancy in an already screwed up world.


-- 
Shannon Hendrix
shannon at widomaker.com