Google's Chrome OS: What Is It Good For? - BusinessWeek

By Om Malik

If Google expected a warm welcome for its Chrome OS and the new Cr-48 laptops it's currently giving away to select beta testers, it was wrong. The hardware has received a reception colder than Scrooge's heart. Folks at TechCrunch have given it a verbal lashing that would make a drill sergeant proud. For that past three days, I've been using the Cr-48. Here are my impressions.

The hardware:The boot-up is extremely fast and the log-on process is smooth and speedy, so long as one has a Google Mail account. (Google Apps ID doesn't quite work.) The screen is great, but the graphic capabilities are pretty limited. There is a single USB port and a flash memory card slot; frankly, having lived with the old MacBook Air with a single USB port, I don't see much of a problem. The trackpad is awful. I love the dedicated Search button and would love to see it on all computers. The laptop picked up most of the commonly used USB peripherals. Both a Logitech mouse and a Microsoft optical mouse worked just fine, without need for special discovery or driver installs.

The User Interface/Experience: The Interface is rough around the edges; what you see is essentially the Chrome Web browser. It takes too many cues from Microsoft Windows, which is understandable, considering that they are going after the mainstream and enterprise markets. The OS needs better font support and reminds me of some early Linux distributions. The user experience expects us to come to the idea of using browser tabs instead of apps—a weird notion, but not so strange if you have used the Chrome browser as your primary browser and are accustomed to cloud-based services. If you use Google Chat and Google Tasks, then you easily understand the idea of "Panels," a new feature inside Chrome OS that runs in small, easy-to-access panes at the bottom right of the browser. Even the best Web apps currently available at the Chrome Web Store are works-in-progress. The biggest challenge for Google's Chrome OS is going to be fighting against the many lifelong habits people have developed using a desktop OS.

The Cloud-Based Services: Despite being severely underpowered, one thing the device does very well is to let you use Google apps—especially Google Docs, Gmail, and other cloud services (from Google)—without problems. The YouTube experience is marginal at best. Netflix doesn't work. Most of your browser-based apps will work, but Adobe Flash on Chrome OS is like watching a toddler learn to crawl. It will be a long time before it reaches the maturity of Adobe on the Windows platform. Adobe has already stated that it plans to improve its integrated Flash performance in Chrome OS, essentially calling it a "work-in-progress."

Bottom line: Will I use Cr-48 or something like it as my primary computer? It would be tough for me to make Chrome OS my primary computing experience. I have a lifelong habit of using a full desktop operating system. That doesn't mean I won't keep an open mind, but for now it's a no-go for me. My more portable, 2.13 GHz MacBook Air is the machine I like. Even as I spend a lot of time inside the browser, I prefer a desktop with the Chrome browser and raw power. Plus my Mac has Silverlight, which lets me play Netflix and use third-party, native apps such as Reeder.

As Google stated very clearly, this particular device isn't going to be sold in the market; the company's partners are going to make the devices that consumers can buy. I hope they do a better job and come up with more attractive hardware.

The real story to focus on is the Chrome OS, what it really means, and whom it targets.

Google's growth has coincided with the shift to the Web. Google is a company that has been a believer in networked computing from its inception. Since 2004 an increasing amount of our focus and attention has been devoted to the browser and what we can do inside it. The so-called Web 2.0 concept helped enhance the inside-the-browser experience, slowly replacing the desktop as our primary focus of attention.

View the original article here

Google's computer programme: from search engine to operating system - Telegraph.co.uk

A relentless torrent of news has poured from Google over the last week. On Monday the firm announced a phone, made in partnership with Samsung, that it hopes will rival Apple’s iPhone; next it announced the release of its own operating system, which it hopes will in due course come to rival Windows, the software that forms the basis of most computers on the planet. Today it is back in its heartland of search, revealing the most and least looked for words and phrases online, from people to aspirations.

What is telling however is not Google’s ability to capture a year in review. Of course people were searching “I love football” and “I hate football” in a World Cup year, and of course David Cameron was another top term after the Conservatives formed a Government. But what’s much more interesting is how these results show that Google is now a part of the furniture. People type in “I feel lonely” or “I love dance”.

More and more people are entering those Google searches into Google’s own browser, Chrome, too. This week the company announced that 120 million people are using the stripped down browser that has set a trend that others such as Microsoft’s Internet Explorer have also followed. This time last year, just 40 million people were using Chrome, so the growth is extraordinary. Just as Google took over from incumbents such as Yahoo with web search, it could yet discover a similar trajectory for the browser, because switching is comparatively easy.

Far more challenging than that, however, is Google’s new ambition: Chrome OS is an operating system, which means it would form the basis of everything your computer does. Unsurprisingly for Google, it’s aimed at people who work mostly online. Speed, including booting up in seconds, security and simplicity are the key features.

Indeed, it’s because of the growth of the internet, itself catalysed by Google, that Chrome has come about. More and more applications are now web-based: so email, word processing, music and presentations all happen online. Google’s new phone, for instance, includes a feature called “listen to”. So say “Listen to Kylie Minogue” and it will go to the web, find what tracks you can access and start playing them. This is very different from previous models where users who wanted to listen to music needed to download specific songs, install programmes to play it and organise their libraries. Now, on the phone or in a browser very “thin” software is required, because the web does all the work. It’s a long way from just a few years ago when, say, installing Microsoft Office meant using countless floppy disks.

Brian Rakowski, Google’s director of product development, says, “We launched Chrome because many of us were spending all day in the browser and the browsers weren’t quite up to the task. We wanted them to be simpler, speedier and more secure. Now we’re seeing that a lot of people who are just living in the browser don’t need all the other features in an operating system.”

Sundar Pichai, Google’s vice-president of product management, adds that the approach is genuinely novel compared to how an operating system such as Windows currently works. “The model is fundamentally different because it’s a whole different approach to security. With other operating systems, users have to maintain their applications, protect their data and so on.” Pichai says that with Chrome OS, there’s only really one application, Chrome itself, and therefore everything else is online.

If that approach meets users’ needs, it could almost spell the end for computer viruses, because the prospect of downloading anything would become a thing of the past. Chrome OS also uses a clever technique that means it verifies everything is as it should be every time it starts up. And because Chrome OS is so thin itself, it’s very quick. Such speed and security means it will allow Google to continue to push into business uses, too.

Not everyone is convinced of this plan: Ovum analyst Mike Davis says “Will these workers want Chrome OS on a device such as netbook? No they will want a tablet. Whether Google likes it or not, its former 'partner’ Apple has all of the current mind share on web connected devices with its iPad tablet, and it will have a second version of the iPad with an updated version of its own iOS before Chrome is officially released to the world in the second half of 2011.”

Indeed, Google’s current plan is to test a version of Chrome OS in limited markets on a bespoke laptop. Frequent updates will iron out issues with what is currently unfinished software. So Chrome is currently a long way from challenging Microsoft. But Google’s agenda is clear. As Pichai says, “Google has direct benefits when more people use the web; when people use Chrome and Chome OS we see a direct rise in revenue.” Internet searches are what the company is all about; whether it is making phones, laptops or tablet computers, getting more people online is the one ambition. Users pay for it by clicking on adverts.

View the original article here

What Google's NFC Android Phones Will Mean For You - PC World

Grab your hoverboards, gang: The next generation of Android phones is on the way, and it's going to feel a bit like something out of Back to the Future II.

Google CEO Eric Schmidt gave us a sneak peak at what's in store for Android's newest handsets during a session at the Web 2.0 Summit on Monday (video here). In addition to providing a few new clues about the hotly anticipated Android Gingerbread release, Schmidt revealed that upcoming Android devices would include support for something called Near Field Communication.

Near Field Communication -- better known by its acronym, NFC -- uses a combination of hardware and software to let you essentially turn your phone into a wallet. Future Android phones will have NFC chips built in, Schmidt said, and the Android Gingerbread release will provide the software needed to allow them to function.

So what's this NFC stuff all about, and how will it actually work with Google Android smartphones? Here's a quick primer on what you can expect.

Google's NFC Android phones will let you make contact-free payments.

One of the primary ways NFC will be used within Android will be as a mobile payment system, Schmidt says. Thanks to the chips' short-range wireless capabilities, an NFC-enabled smartphone will allow you to simply wave your device in front of a retailer's sensor and have your purchase immediately placed onto your credit card or banking account. It's something Schmidt refers to as a "tap and pay" method of purchasing -- and its impact could be enormous.

"This could replace your credit card," he says.

Google's NFC Android phone-based payments should be secure.

Schmidt and others contend that having your payment system on your phone is actually more secure than carrying it around on a piece of plastic, as it provides a greater level of authentication. And rather than imprinting your account number on a easily readable card, an NFC-enabled device keeps it encrypted and password-protected inside the phone.

"The credit card industry thinks that the loss rate is going to be much better. They're just fundamentally more secure," Schmidt says.

Google's NFC Android phones will allow you to retrieve information.

Google's NFC-enabled Android phones won't only be about commerce: The systems will also allow you to "check in" with sensors around a city to instantly load information onto your device.

During his demo, Schmidt tapped a phone to a specially marked Google Places placard. It immediately caused location information to pop up on his Android handset. The same principle could be used to exchange information with retailers or other smartphone users.

Google's NFC Android phones could work as keys.

A Swedish company is currently testing the use of NFC-enabled smartphones as hotel keys. As reported by PCWorld earlier today, the system lets guests "check in and receive [their] key directly onto their mobile phones" before ever setting foot in the building. Similar usages have been envisioned for ticket processing -- and all of this is likely only the tip of the iceberg.

"People don't understand how much more powerful these devices are going to be," Schmidt says.

Of course, it's too soon to know exactly what other usages might appear. Even Schmidt himself admits the idea is simply too new to predict what types of applications Google and others will invent.

NFC technology isn't just for Android.

While Google's NFC vision is taking center stage right now, other smartphone companies are taking steps toward implementing the technology, too. Nokia has said it plans to have NFC-ready Symbian phones on the market by next year, and rumors have pointed to Apple quietly developing an iPhone-based NFC implementation for some time.

America's mobile carriers are getting on-board with NFC as well. Earlier today, AT&T, Verizon Wireless, and T-Mobile announced the formation of a joint mobile commerce network that'll be structured around NFC technology. The network, called Isis, will encourage retailers to provide NFC support in their businesses.

Ultimately, that retailer support may be key to NFC's success. No matter how many phones offer NFC and how cool it seems in theory, if stores don't have the sensors to enable mobile payments, it won't do much good in the real world.

Still, the first steps are underway, and the next few years hold plenty of potential. Or, to borrow a phrase from a certain wise scientist: Great Scott! The future looks bright.

JR Raphael is a PCWorld contributing editor and the author of the Android Power blog. You can find him on both Facebook and Twitter.

View the original article here

Satisfied with Google's promise to restrain Street View, FTC drops privacy ... - Washington Post

The federal government has ended an inquiry into a privacy breach involving Google's Street View service, satisfied with the company's pledge to stop gathering e-mail, passwords and other information from residential WiFi networks as it rolls through neighborhoods.

Wednesday's decision by the Federal Trade Commission is a sharp contrast with the reaction of regulators in Europe. The United Kingdom has launched a new investigation into Google's collection of unencrypted WiFi data, exposing the company to potential fines. Germany told Google to mark its Street View cars that take pictures of neighborhoods and homes. The Czech Republic banned Google from expanding its mapping software program.

The differences highlight an increasing gap between regulators in the United States, where the freewheeling Internet culture has birthed many of the social networking sites and search engines used worldwide, and governments in Europe and Canada, which tend to be much more aggressive about privacy.

"Part of it is cultural, and part of it is that the U.S. and Europe have radically different privacy regimes," said Chris Calabrese, legislative counsel for the ACLU. "The European model is extensive data protection in private information, and the U.S. model is piecemeal."

The result is a rising number of trans-Atlantic conflicts. The Obama administration has been criticized for its efforts to allow law enforcement to surveil Internet networks, for instance. In addition, the European Union is pushing back against U.S. demands to share data about U.S.-bound air passengers.

Many European nations have laws that sanction or fine companies for learning too much about Web users and sharing that information with other companies. Regulators there tend to focus on consumers' rights to their own information on the Internet. In the United States, companies argue that consumers lose their rights after information is shared with a third party.

U.S. regulators are working on suggestions for how far companies can go with information they collect, store and share about Internet users. Those suggestions, to be released in a report by the FTC in the coming weeks, could result in a legislative road map for Congress. But because of the agency's limited rule-making power, the FTC's report could have limited impact, privacy groups fear.

The advocates also argue that U.S. companies have a strong voice in debates at the FTC and on Capitol Hill over privacy legislation. As a result, critics say, the U.S. government has been more sensitive to how privacy regulation or laws could affect the businesses of Web sites like Facebook and Amazon and media sites, such as The Washington Post and CNN.com.

"We are trying to develop a framework with input of many stakeholders that would be useful as we all go forward on privacy," said Jessica Rich, deputy director of the FTC's Consumer Protection Bureau.

In a letter to Google on Wednesday, the FTC said privacy concerns from its Street View cars' data collection were allayed when the search giant announced that it would beef up privacy training for employees and not use any collected data for any Google products or services.

"This assurance is critical to mitigate the potential harm to consumers from the collection of payload data," David Vladeck, head of the FTC's Consumer Protection Bureau, wrote in closing the review.

While taking photos of cars and homes, Google's Street View cars were also collecting information about the placement of WiFi networks. After German authorities investigated the practice, Google said its cars had accidentally also collected Internet user data - or payload data - while passing homes.

"We are deeply disappointed that FTC dropped the ball on Google," said Jeffrey Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy. "It took other regulators in Germany and Canada to expose the extent of the privacy violation. And the U.S. is saying it will continue to be absent on this issue."

View the original article here

WebP: Google's new attempt at speeding up the web - ZDNet (blog)

In their latest attempt to make the web even faster, Google has devised their own image format to rival JPEG. Since forever, JPEG has been doing a great job of compressing photographic images — it doesn’t support transparency, like other formats, but it does what it was meant to do very well.

Google has determined that JPEG isn’t the best format for that anymore. WebP is a new compression that achieves an impressive average 30% reduction in file size for images. Google will be proposing an update for WebKit that will make viewing those images in a browser actually possible.

Now, I’m not complaining here — anything to make the web faster is good in my books — but I have a question. Why are we worried about fractionally speeding up the web when we live in a broadband world that’s just getting faster and faster anyway? The web is speeding up far more quickly from just network speeds improving than tweaking compression on files that are usually only used to show photographs online.

Sure, Sites like Flickr might see notable speedups — with each page showing several jpeg images typically — but most webpages largely use png or gif images (when you can’t do something in CSS).

I’ll stop whining now. WebP is still cool, and like I said before, anything to make the web faster is good in my books.

Garett Rogers has always had a deep interest in computers and the Internet, which led him to a degree in Computer Information Systems. He is currently employed as a programmer for iQmetrix.

View the original article here