|
|
User Controls
|
New User
|
Login
|
Edit/View My Profile
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac
|
Articles
|
Forums
|
Links
|
News
|
News Search
|
Reviews
|
|
|
|
News Centers
|
Windows/Microsoft
|
DVD
|
ActiveHardware
|
Xbox
|
MaINTosh
|
News Search
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats
|
The Lobby
|
Special Events Room
|
Developer's Lounge
|
XBox Chat
|
|
|
|
FAQ's
|
Windows 98/98 SE
|
Windows 2000
|
Windows Me
|
Windows "Whistler" XP
|
Windows CE
|
Internet Explorer 6
|
Internet Explorer 5
|
Xbox
|
DirectX
|
DVD's
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips
|
Registry Tips
|
Windows 95/98
|
Windows 2000
|
Internet Explorer 4
|
Internet Explorer 5
|
Windows NT Tips
|
Program Tips
|
Easter Eggs
|
Hardware
|
DVD
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews
|
Applications
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002
|
|
Hardware
|
Intel Personal Audio Player
3000
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse
Explorer
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info
|
About This Site
|
Affiliates
|
ANet Forums
|
Contact Us
|
Default Home Page
|
Link To Us
|
Links
|
Member Pages
|
Site Search
|
Awards
|
|
|
|
Credits
©1997/2004, Active Network. All
Rights Reserved.
Layout & Design by
Designer Dream. Content
written by the Active Network team. Please click
here for full terms of
use and restrictions or read our
Privacy Statement.
|
|
|
|
|
#1 By
23603 (96.20.121.224)
at
12/8/2010 10:12:13 AM
|
Chrome OS = useless
My Windows 7 on my CoreI7 with 6 GB Ram is fast enough.
I don't need faster.
When I laucnh Word 2010, it takes 0.5 second to load.
When I lauch IE9 beta, it take less than 1 second.
When I boot , it takes less than 15 seconds.
People don't need a faster OS...
More secure????
Please give me a break
|
#2 By
37 (192.251.125.85)
at
12/8/2010 10:53:33 AM
|
EQ23 posts = useless
|
#3 By
2201 (82.45.132.196)
at
12/8/2010 11:18:01 AM
|
AWBrian posts = *yawn*
|
#4 By
8556 (173.27.244.6)
at
12/8/2010 11:33:52 AM
|
If one will be able to purchase a 12.1" Chrome powered netbook/notebook that sells for $199 and works well for consumers then Chrome will, possibly, be successful. Since the original Asus Linux netbooks were a failure due to people buying the machines with erroneous expectations (wondering why they couldn't run Windows programs on it) and the way-too-small keyboards and 7" screens, Google will need to educate prospective buyers that using a Google Chrome machine will only take them "to the cloud". If that's okay with buyers, then so be it. Ironically, Microsoft is aiding the cloud-only concept with their "to the cloud" series of TV commercials. With cheap $349 Windows 7 notebooks, available on sale, that run "good enough" the odds of widespread adoption of the Chrome netbook will go down as the price goes up. Keep it <$200 Google and many of us will give it a try.
|
#5 By
23603 (96.20.121.224)
at
12/8/2010 12:16:58 PM
|
@AW
wow!!! really constructive comment...
Keep them coming.
|
#6 By
9589 (68.17.52.2)
at
12/8/2010 1:07:22 PM
|
Wait a minute. Wait a minute. It's not the year of Linux? I'll call Munich . . .
Oh yeah, its the year of Apple iPads??
No, no, no.
Its the year of Google Chrome OS????
I am confused . . .
Meanwhile, Microsoft is on its way to sell 300 million copies of Windows 7 and press release after press release denotes widespread corporate adoption (you know the ones that actually think they ought to and do pay for software that they use).
|
#7 By
143 (216.205.223.146)
at
12/8/2010 3:12:59 PM
|
We don't need no stinking Linux.
|
#8 By
1896 (68.153.171.248)
at
12/8/2010 4:03:52 PM
|
#6: Surely is more the year of the iPad than the one of Windows Tablet....... unfortunately I would add.
|
#9 By
20505 (75.84.254.249)
at
12/8/2010 6:14:54 PM
|
Gents,
I believe that the only group who is enthusiastic about the prospect of a Google OS is the phone companies. As I see it, there is little or no money for Google in this deal. It might increase traffic to Google’s ads but I suspect that the change from current levels would be negligible. Certainly this is a race to the bottom for hardware makers meaning lots of devices with little or no profit.
The phone companies could find this a bonanza as purchasers would need an always on high speed data connection. These connections will be metered (now or certainly in the future) and if the concept catches on, the cost to the consumer for data would easily outpace the savings in hardware and software within months of purchase.
I expect that these devices will bomb in the market place but may do well if properly bundled with a data plan by the phone companies. If these are like cell phones which are heavily discounted to drive monthly service fees these may survive.
I personally wouldn’t bet on it.
|
#10 By
37 (192.251.125.85)
at
12/9/2010 11:20:39 AM
|
#5 By EQ23 "@AW wow!!! really constructive comment... Keep them coming."
I will if you will.
|
#11 By
428624 (70.67.12.154)
at
12/9/2010 9:21:12 PM
|
The year of "Anything But Linux".
|
#12 By
1896 (68.153.171.248)
at
12/10/2010 8:40:02 AM
|
#9: Thank you! Finally someone who sees as we are all putting our heads in the guillotine.... and we are doing it happily too!
Do not people see that DSL connections are becoming more and more limited and expensive?
Once everything will be "Cloud" related there will be no way to go back and AT&T, Comcast etc. will hold consumers by the balls and they wll be able to squeeze whatever they want.
When I first got DSL from BellSouth the connection was a straight, really unlimeted one; no pppoe, no hassle about how many computers were connected etc. etc.
More than ten years after prices are skyrocketing up, connections are throttled, capped and whatever they will invent to cash more money from users.
In the meantime the rest of the World is enjoying way faster speed and lower prices.
If you acted as a sheep..... the wolf will feast on you.
|
|
|
|
|