News - ASUS, HP and Toshiba to launch Haswell powered Chromebooks

[HEXUS]

Meanwhile Google maintains a fleet of 43,000 Macs for its employees.

Read more.

[bobharvey]

Hurrah!
I'd like a Haswell chromebook, and put Suse or Debian on it.

[crossy]

BGR reports that Google revealed, at the recent LISA ’13 conference, that it has to manage a fleet of over 43,000 Macs for the use of its employees. “There was a time when Macs were a small part of the Google fleet,” Google system engineer Clay Caviness said, “but as of now if you start at Google and want to use a platform other than Mac you have to make a business case.” It would inspire more confidence in ChromeOS if Google did a bit more dogfooding.

Couldn't agree more with that last sentence. Is it the case, Mr Google, of "do as we say, not as we do"? Actually would have thought that Google would have been on own-build Linux or perhaps Windows.

Hurrah!
I'd like a Haswell chromebook, and put Suse or Debian on it.

You mean ... upgrade it to a proper operating system! As you can tell I'm not a ChromeOS fan.

[scaryjim]

... As you can tell I'm not a ChromeOS fan.

Any particular reason? I've used the open source version on VMs a couple of times to check on progress, and I have to say I found it really very usable. A lot of people only need a computer to send emails, check facebook and play Angry Birds, and it fits that usage pattern very nicely indeed.

tbh having used ChromeOS a bit it doesn't surprised me at all that Google doesn't run on ChromeOS - that's a bit like expecting them to all run Android tablets as their main work PCs. ChromeOS has never been touted as a full desktop replacement OS, but as a companion device OS for small light notebooks. It's for keeping in touch with the mean office while you're off-site. For that, it seems pretty good...

[Brewster0101]

I thought Chrome OS can work without a web connection all the time - I was under the impression you can install apps to hard drive / Memory device and use them without a connection.

[scaryjim]

You can, but a lot of them will be a lot less use without a web connection. Don't forget that all apps are delivered - essentially, anyway - within a Chrome browser. So while you can cache a lot of apps and use local storage, the real power of it (ad pretty much of all Google's offering, tbh) is in coneccted use: docs, drive, gmail etc.

[smithy1158]

Mac's are pretty good for that kind of development. It's built on UNIX and supports pretty much everything. I've worked in CERN's IT department and most people there use a Mac unless they do work for a specific platform like Windows Server.

[crossy]

Any particular reason? I've used the open source version on VMs a couple of times to check on progress, and I have to say I found it really very usable. A lot of people only need a computer to send emails, check facebook and play Angry Birds, and it fits that usage pattern very nicely indeed.

tbh having used ChromeOS a bit it doesn't surprised me at all that Google doesn't run on ChromeOS - that's a bit like expecting them to all run Android tablets as their main work PCs. ChromeOS has never been touted as a full desktop replacement OS, but as a companion device OS for small light notebooks. It's for keeping in touch with the mean office while you're off-site. For that, it seems pretty good...

I've got a lot of objections to ChromeOS:
(a) It seems unnecessary - what's wrong with netbookifying Android (Asus seem to do all right on that score) or using Linux?
(b) there's the Saracen argument - use one of these and don't expect privacy;
(c) it's deliberately limited to those usage cases you identify in second sentence. Sure, probably okay for Joe/Jane Public, but I expect more from something that's starting to approach the cost of a budget laptop.
I could continue, but I don't want to bore you.

Mac's are pretty good for that kind of development. It's built on UNIX and supports pretty much everything. I've worked in CERN's IT department and most people there use a Mac unless they do work for a specific platform like Windows Server.

Yep (BSD actually by all accounts), but Google reputedly use a Linux distro in their datacentres so surely it would make even more sense to use cheap commodity laptops etc and slap Linux on them, rather than buying in an expensive (?) solution from a competitor. And please don't drag up the old "but Linux support is poor" nonsense - there's plenty of vendors who'll happily sell and support desktops and laptops running Linux.

[iamlorro]

tbh having used ChromeOS a bit it doesn't surprised me at all that Google doesn't run on ChromeOS - that's a bit like expecting them to all run Android tablets as their main work PCs. ChromeOS has never been touted as a full desktop replacement OS, but as a companion device OS for small light notebooks. It's for keeping in touch with the mean office while you're off-site. For that, it seems pretty good...

And because you're using googles services, you're helping them sell more ads/products - that's why its cheap!

As the reviews of the hardware so far have been mixed, I'm hoping the quality is improved by the competition

[Luke7]

I am interested in a chromebook and yes, I am aware of the pitfalls etc but, I do wonder if there is any news on an AMD APU powered device? I'm talking like an A4 not an A10, or even (and more likely) Beema cores.

[Percy1983]

What happened to netbooks, my AMD C50 netbook is epic and not limited by chrome OS.

[Brewster0101]

Personally I would have jumped on the Chrome OS band waggon sooner if Skype was available - but I know why its not and it a massive issue for alot of people who want a simple internet laptop.