Most people see me as a Linux fan. And to Windows and OS X users, I can see why. I like to use select distros full time and it has served me very well over the years. But I’d also remind you that Linux purists hate my guts and see me as a shill for anything not including the words GNU attached to it, as I advocate software freedom that includes paid (proprietary software) on the platform, in addition to the open source stuff. So to be clear, everyone thinks I am working for the other guy. Got it. Moving on.
Why is anyone going to raise an eyebrow to the idea of Google Chrome OS, to be released in the not too distant future. No, seriously? How is it really any different than simply running Google apps from any other OS? Honest question — I still don’t get it? It’s based on Linux, yet takes a more “Mozilla licensed approach” than most distros. And at the end of the day, it’s a tool to get you to Google applications and perhaps, eventually, a Google App Store. Being these apps would all be Web apps, why not just use a browser and my existing OS?
Unlike Android, where the app store is built into a phone’s experience, is this depending on people to install or buy, pre-installed, a copy of Google Chrome OS? Is the option of access to Web apps from a store really enough? Call me skeptical, but I think that Google will need to provide a very clear experience here and one that does not overlap over existing Android netbook offerings. Just saying…
[awsbullet:london calling clash]