Google OS

[mexLabs 0]

Lets have a sneak peek into the future of desktop computing. Imagine ur browser window being turned up into a desktop of it own, with sub-windows for other stuffs like chatting, browsing, office programs etc...But these things will not be bothering ur hardware resources much(infact not even little). Well such kind of online OS will be machine independent too. All u need is a gadget to connect to net, a screen and a keyboard.Just because net is in fashion these days and that this idea is sounding very great and innovative, doesnt mean that this can replace the Windows. Even small kids can write software for any purpose these days. But imagine such kind of product being carried on a billion-dollar budget at a place nobody is certain about. Yes i m talking about the very much speculated mythical Google PC that's allegedly being secretly developed in Silicon Valley—or in China or on a Ukrainian IRC channel.It makes sense for Google to develop a Web-based PC. To be clear, a Google PC needn't involve a new gadget like the "thin client" gear of the 1990s. Every computer in the world is capable of running a Web browser. We might not realize it, but we all already have Google PCs.You could still run Windows on a Google PC; it just wouldn't matter if you did or not. Most Google PC rumors imagine a low-priced, Windows-less, entry-level computer for the Wal-Mart set. That could be part of the plan, but it would just be one more option. Instead of trying to convince every consumer on the planet to buy a new machine, it makes a lot more sense for Google to build a super-service that you could log into from any computer, phone, or television, or car and airplane seatback. You would be able to access your files anywhere by logging in, calling up your desktop, and popping into Google's array of Gmail-like applications for word processing, photo editing, and anything else you can think of.If we try to analyze the advantages of an online OS then we might end up with the following conclusions:It could offer more file space, faster searches, guaranteed backups, cheaper software costs, login-from-anywhere portability, and far less home maintenance. Let's skip ahead, though, to the most counterintuitive advantage: Dollar for dollar, network-based computers are faster.And the most important backdrop is the requirement of a highly efficient network for the people who want to use such a thing.If this happens for real... then who wudnt mind saving $2000 from being spent on a Windows Vista.

[BitShift 0]

Everyone is so hyped up about this virtual desktop idea, where you can login to your "computer" from anywhere and access all your files and programs.To me, this does not seem like an entirely feasible idea at the moment. Not due to the lack of technology but in the lack of computer security and even internet speeds.The amount of data that would have to be streamlined over the internet would grow exponentially per user.Example: To burn a CD from files from your virtual computer would take alot longer. The average CD size is 700mb or around there.With internet speeds the way they are today, it would take much longer because your local computer would have to download the files to some cache or something before they could be burned.Same with saving files. Upload speeds are much slower then download speeds.The average Road Runner customer probably gets 3mbps download stream which awesome for home use. However upload speeds are usually limited around 400kbps which is much slower.Trying to send or recieve anything from your remote computer would take much longer.On top of this security is a big risk. Everyone wants to protect their personal information on their computer, and lots of people have sensitive files that they need to keep for work.Unless it was a secure connection that was encrypted, which would make downloads/uploads even longer, then there would be risk of someone being able to see your files.I think the reason Google has not released anything about this is because there are several flaws in the idea, and the flaws are out of their control unless they find away to give everyone faster internet at the same price.I know VMWare is working on the same kind of idea through a friend of mine who works there. However their implementation of it is in a work environment.Your company will have a mainframe computer in the building, or several computer that make up a mainframe, and the workstations throughout that building would connect to this mainframe and download their desktops or whatever type of system they work on, however it is done through an internal network so internet speed would not be an issue in this case.In my opinion, a lot of work, study and new ideas must come into play before we start seeing any signs of this anticipated Google OS.If anyone has objections to what I've said or anything please say so. There might be some factors I am not aware of or I could be totally wrong about something.

Edited October 3, 2006 by BitShift (see edit history)

[borlafu 0]

If we try to analyze the advantages of an online OS then we might end up with the following conclusions:It could offer more file space, faster searches, guaranteed backups, cheaper software costs, login-from-anywhere portability, and far less home maintenance. Let's skip ahead, though, to the most counterintuitive advantage: Dollar for dollar, network-based computers are faster.

I don't agree with some things you said. Network computing has many advantages, but it's not faster than personal computing at all.

It allows you to access your account or "desktop" from any place, share your documents, and cooperate. It also makes cheaper the client computer but, as BitShift said, Internet as we know it doesn't offers the bandwidth needed to bring this to reality.

In fact, multi-user machines are common on corporative and university LANs, because this networks offer high bandwidths and this way many users can be loged into the mainframe, working and using the services provided by the server instead of the ones offered by their local computer, so it could be minimized to offer only the required for connecting to the mainframe.


PD: Excuse me for my english, I need more practice :S

[Levis 0]

I don't agree with some things you said. Network computing has many advantages, but it's not faster than personal computing at all.
It allows you to access your account or "desktop" from any place, share your documents, and cooperate. It also makes cheaper the client computer but, as BitShift said, Internet as we know it doesn't offers the bandwidth needed to bring this to reality.

In fact, multi-user machines are common on corporative and university LANs, because this networks offer high bandwidths and this way many users can be loged into the mainframe, working and using the services provided by the server instead of the ones offered by their local computer, so it could be minimized to offer only the required for connecting to the mainframe.
PD: Excuse me for my english, I need more practice :S

I completely agree with you, first off users would need to have a connection using vDSL which can offer a stable connection up to 52MB. To run such a service you wound need a connection of that speed. Upload small files with a 1 to 6 MB connection is okay. But running an application like Microsoft Word or Photoshop, or a burning program will slow you down by 73% stated by some independent research companies. As Borlafu mentioned its quite easy to run such a service. Many companies & schools are switching to such systems to simplify the lives of teachers & workers. Also, what about the servers that Google will run. Itâs possible to run a network of 200 computers on a server system but what about millions? Also, what about security and 100% uptime? What about software to OS compatibility? If Google can answer the following question then Iâll switch over, maybe not I like Linux and running my own equipment.

[borlafu 0]

About software compatibility, I'm sure that win32 executables will not work natively on those sistems, but they may me supported with a runtime interpreter or something like that (something like wine on linux).

[beatgammit 0]

I love the idea of an online OS, but as mentioned earlier, this is not feasable. Speed issues, security issues, and whatnot remove the possibility of such an OS. I don't trust my computer to any website, not even Google. I do like the idea of a basic OS with settings and preferences stored on the net. This is just like an expansion of Google or Yahoo! where individual profiles are maintained and each person has their own personalized website. This could be coupled with ideas from Sun Microsystems, who make "workspaces" where a user logs on and specialized data is loaded from the network. If this were expanded, with a basic OS, this idea could be realized.The new Docs and Spreadsheets by Google is definitely a step in the right direction. Online applications are the future. They are relatively fast if done correctly and greatly increase efficiency by being able to access the same resources anywhere around the world. We can now store documents, music, photos, and bunch of other stuff online that we could not before. I see this expanding to include every imaginable resource, from source code to home videos. Google found a way to profit off its services directly, and since they have been keeping this information safe and secure, I expect other companies to join in.All in all, an online OS is not feasable, but online accounts are the future.

[borlafu 0]

I agree with what you say about Google Docs and Spreadsheets, it could be considered as an other step to online user PC sessions. Anyway I think that it's implementation is far away from a perfect one, well but that's an other discussion...

[Alegis 0]

What I think, is that Linux needs to get more graphical. I don't believe in this virtual OS. It shows though from my Beta Programs I do like Microsoft programs (as many do but claim otherwise) and Vista is incredible - OS wise.Online office programs did not replace the standard software ones (writely vs Microsoft office). If not for even something as small, I have no expectations for other systems.

Edited November 22, 2006 by Alegis (see edit history)

[borlafu 0]

What I think, is that Linux needs to get more graphical.

This is a bit absurd, and has nothign to do with Google OS...

I don't believe in this virtual OS.

Is there any non-virual OS? Is any OS phisical or tangible? Every computer program (and an OS is a computer program) is virtual.
Windows Vista is not incredible at all... I've been using the final version ad it is just as windows XP, adding some Mac visual effects and using 780MB of memory just for playing a song on WMP and having 2 explorer windows opened...

[Levis 0]

What I think, is that Linux needs to get more graphical. I don't believe in this virtual OS. It shows though from my Beta Programs I do like Microsoft programs (as many do but claim otherwise) and Vista is incredible - OS wise.
Online office programs did not replace the standard software ones (writely vs Microsoft office). If not for even something as small, I have no expectations for other systems.

What do you mean more graphics, have you looked at the new KDE desktop? Add that to any distro and your good to go. With the way KDE is going ill be able to play any windows game i want. I can already load CS, Midtown Madness, and at times Flight Simulator X. Though it needs more work, the games function better on linux systems then on windows systems.

I mentioend before that i am against a Goggle OS for advanced users, but for basic users its the best thing in the world. If they come through with such an idea, all they have to do is preload their OS onto a basic system and just require you to go online to use their applications. Once your done with your document, you could either upload it online or download it to a private removalbe flash drive. See most people use their computers to browse the web or type up a document. If thats all they need, then why the heck would they need windows? Also, they wouldnt have problems with virus's or spyware. Especially if google uses a linux distro.

Sorry, i am running late, and don'y have the time to check my spelling and grammer.

[sujith 0]

I think what he intended to say is that it is not possible to do everything in GUI mode in Linux...I also have the same opinion as him because the Linux command line is not really easy to master..and I felt the documentation is also very hard to understand.Getting help on Linux is also difficult

What do you mean more graphics, have you looked at the new KDE desktop? Add that to any distro and your good to go. With the way KDE is going ill be able to play any windows game i want. I can already load CS, Midtown Madness, and at times Flight Simulator X. Though it needs more work, the games function better on linux systems then on windows systems.

Leave advanced users everyone who needs to burn a CD(OR DVD, Blu-Ray , HD-DVD ???) can't use such services successfullly because it will be incredibly slower.Then where can it be used In my view it will only be useful for business users who need to share documents and access text data and like.From what we are seeing Google is developing sucha thing, I think the Google Spreadsheet etc are just the parts of an unfinished jig saw.They will include more and more applicaation to it and finally after they develop everything they will make it as a suite and will offer an integrated sulution and collaboration enviornment for business users.

I mentioend before that i am against a Goggle OS for advanced users, but for basic users its the best thing in the world. If they come through with such an idea, all they have to do is preload their OS onto a basic system and just require you to go online to use their applications.

[Levis 0]

Well, what i meant earlier is that Google could create a system where you can do basic things such as videos, music, burning, chatting and typing. Thats what most people need. I like the extra horsepower on my computer, but as i said earlier, why would a grandpa need a 1.73 GHZ system with 512 mb ram and windows xp. Why not go light on the OS. Hey, but what about the Debian and Ubuntu, Kubuntu forums. If you can't find it in any guides, then you could always ask on certain forums.

[SP Rao 0]

Must say quite a blizzard idea.... Creating online OS. Let us imagine the possibilities. How will you connect to net without a OS??? The only possibility is, whoever is hosting the OS should provide a machine which can access the Online OS. In other words, we need 2 OS instead of one!The other thing is, why would we need such an OS? It sounds too stupid to me to install all my favourite software in one corner of the world which doesn't even belong to me! Come to think of it, what will be the end system? What good will it serve to have an OS up there in the net? When someone asks about what's the system config of yours? What are we gonna tell? My OS runs in one corner of the world about which I have no idea? Of what use will our processors be?Having softwares online makes sense. But, OS? Give me a break... We can already share pics, data, videos and what not? There are so many hosting servers who offer us space. Agreed that applications like Google spreadsheet are really handy(Very useful in status reporting and all as multiple users can update the same document from across the globe). Irrespective of having OS online, we would still need another machine with an OS to connect to this OS.How do you expect these so called "Online OS" to run? Will the apps get downloaded onto your machine and run there or will they be running on one remote server and you are just watching the "Logs/results" of your operation? Having an online OS doesn't make sense. Having online applications do. As far as Linux is concerned, it would have reached heights if everyone focused on having single Linux. Now every Tom,**** and Harry want to have their own linux. There are so many flavours of Linux but none too perfect. (The only Linux/Unix OS which I found amazing was Solaris.) Otherwise in one way or the other Linux bugs us. When I got my PC recently I died hard installing various Linux versions... They didn't help me much. They all gave funny errors in one way or the other. (Tried Ubuntu, Fedora Core 5, Mandrake, Suse...) The only thing about linux is it will not hang like windows but throws funny/irrelevant error messages. All linux flavors are good in their own ways but none too perfect. That's the only problem with Linux. And honestly Support for linux is really bad. Linux has potential, let us see how future of Linux goes...May be I blabbered too much;may be I was incoherent, am too busy, no time to focus. Just wanted to put my views forward.

[sujith 0]

Don't advice me about asking at the forums I don't find the people there really helpful, I have tried such options but response is very low (at most times zero).But I will learn Linux because I am determined but I won't be able to make it come my way.
I really didn't find "any" need for replacing my Windows box to Linux.

Hey, but what about the Debian and Ubuntu, Kubuntu forums. If you can't find it in any guides, then you could always ask on certain forums.

Are you telling that burning CDs is a light task.Anyway you need a CD-RW then why stream data from another continent and slow the whole process down.If people start to use it so massivly it will not be a viable business idea too.May be they can survive using advertising revenue..but if it becomes intrusive in some way thier business is DEAD.

Well, what i meant earlier is that Google could create a system where you can do basic things such as videos, music, burning, chatting and typing. Thats what most people need. I like the extra horsepower on my computer, but as i said earlier, why would a grandpa need a 1.73 GHZ system with 512 mb ram and windows xp. Why not go light on the OS.

[Flawless 0]

cool, the google operating system sounds wierd like their a search engine/site advertisement, its wierd how they are now going into operating systems. I like googles adsense though. really cool how u get paid per click. my new computer-----Windows XP Media Center2GB RAM2.2 GHz dual core AMD 64 Live!250GB SATAHPits a good computer for itsprice i bought it on http://www.bestbuy.ca/ on Christmas Day.I like this forum many things to talkabout by the way how do i get the hosting when i get 10 or 30 credits?