Who is betting that Chrome OS is a failure

I disagree. Android OS has worked brilliantly on cell phones and has become a strong alternative to both Apple and Blackberry. I use Google Chrome web browser and it is by far the best browser I've used. I think Google is an amazing company

Chrome OS will be a niche browser. It will never be as big as windows because people are generally stupid and too inept to learn new things.

I use Chrome. not sure what the market share is though...2%?

The issue is how inept and ignorant the common consumer is. Ever worked as a sales associate at Best Buy? You can sell anyone anything; buying a laptop, rarely will a single customer ever ask you about RAM, the difference between video drivers, or different processor speeds.

That carries over to browsers. People just see an automatic, Windows-licensed update and go for it, regardless of how good or terrible the product is.

I use Chrome. Correct that, I used Chrome. Now I'm on RockMelt, so technically I guess I still am since it's a third-party browser built on the open-source Chromium language. Both are genius, but I prefer RockMelt for it's integration.

I'll have to check out rocket. I was a big firefox fan, but now I used Chrome exclusively. Looking to go with android also (from an iPhone).

I think the Chrome OS will be niche, but I also think google is using it to test other services. Just like wave failed, but they are incorporating parts of it in different things.

I use Chrome, it's faster than Firefox (which suffers from feature bloat) and using my gmail account to sync across browsers is key. I know Chrome recently passed Firefox as the most popular browser for Techcrunch readers - I'd be curious what the stats are like for WSO, Patrick.

I'm a pretty devoted Chrome user. I've tried RockMelt and it's a nice experience, but there's just something that skeeves me out about everything I run through my browser going through Facebook first. (For those who don't know, RockMelt is a heavy-social build that won't even open without logging into Facebook first. It also lacks reliable Gmail notification - although this may have been addressed by now, I haven't used it in several weeks.)

For those who are interested in testing out the Chrome OS, Google has quietly launched a pilot program seeking Chrome OS testers. I think you get a free computer out of the deal. Anyway, here's the link:

http://www.google.com/chromeos/pilot-program.html

If anyone gets in, let me know. I'm curious about it as well.

And, yes, I'll probably convert my Ubuntu computer to Chrome OS when it's available.

I love Chrome, but after taking a look at RockMelt I may have to upgrade

RockMelt is based on Chromium.

I don't see the need for further Facebook integration; in fact, one of the few add-ons I have installed on my Chrome is an app to block Facebook integration. I have no desire for a corporation to know my browsing habits if they're not willing to pay me for it.

I use Chrome, best browser out there. Simple, quick and efficient. I also just got the Droid X phone; unbelieveable processing. I had the iphone and very much enjoyed it, but I think the new Droid is a noche better.

Yes to be honest I don't see Chrome OS as a generally a good idea. It is obviously a niche OS, but they probably want to capture a significant market for netbooks..and I don't see how. I agree that cloud computing/storage is the future, but it will not completely wipe-out the need for offline usage for many many years. Chrome OS wouldn't even let you connect a printer through USB ... but what if the only printer on the spot is an old printer with no connectivity?

Ultimately, the limiting factor of these cloud operating systems is mobile internet. Until mobile connectivity will be cheap, very fast, and RELIABLE, I would never consider this. By the time the infrastructure will stop making you doubt whether you'll have internet somewhere, hardware speeds will be more than sufficient to run full-scale systems on even the tiniest netbooks. Even today, top of the range netbooks have no problems running full Windows 7, and if you dig around Microsoft probably has just as many cloud features, maybe not just integrated that well. Basically Chrome OS is not an innovative system, it is a system that got rid off any functionality that is "last generation", pretty much forcing you to use it in an innovative way. But nothing stops you from doing the same on Windows or Linux

The main problem is that the selling point for Chrome OS is simplicity and price. Simplicity is useful, but the extra five seconds it takes to boot a stripped down Windows install isn't really going to make up for a lack of full compatibility. Price is nice, but the issue is that the people who are tech-savvy enough to use Chrome OS haven't paid for a copy of Windows since BitTorrent was invented.

I think that IE number ought to be lower for the WSO guys. I access from work quite a bit and if I had the choice to use anything but IE, I would. I'm sure there's plenty of people out there who are restricted to signing on with IE just because MSFT has a monopoly on corporate systems.

I'm with you - pretty certain it will stagnate (fail is a strong word).

Yes, I was going to make the exact same point. The IE numbers are undoubtedly inflated due to people browsing at work. Why IT departments think IE is the safest option, I will never know.

i use chrome and fire fox

I thought Chrome OS couldn't be purchased - it would come pre-bundled with whatever hardware it is supported by?

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/11/releasing-chromium-os-open-sourc…

I actualyl meant chrome OS as a operation system. I don't think that people will like the idea of having: - no privacy (okay, they don't care usually) - to pay for really everything ( I don't think they let you store "free" software and music on your online drive) (if they do, they will probably sell the statistics and then the market knows how profitable is to introduce better anti-piracy measures)

If they succeeded, they would have a way to prove originality of everything though. Like who wrote an article first, who came up with an idea first. That would be interesting.

But apart from that I see no real benefits.

Especially when it comes to powerful computing. Video-Editing, Music production and stuff like that isn't really going to be done online yet. At least I guess so. Maybe in 2 years, but right now. Nope. Also, what about running calculation extensive programmes like mining algorithms, spiders...

well, ok, I guess the average user doesn't do that. But I would claim that automated processing made easy for end-users will be more of a buzz than clound computing is right now and abandoning the hard disk is plain silly to me.

Apart from that it might work. But the anti-harddisc concept is ... well.. (given you are working on a video project and 3 music production project and are mining for news on twitter, then you need more than you average 4-8 GB RAM ... but you don't have a hard-disk..so..yeah, I don't know. )