[nightpool]

Actually, I upvoted this, but on reflection I think this is wrong. Here's why:

 - Most Chromebooks are freely bootloader unlocked, allowing any operating system to be loaded on them.

 - ChromeOS follows the same open source model as Chrome—Most core features open, with things like Flash/Wildvine/API keys held secret.

 - There are no native apps on ChromeOS—the correct question is not "Can Mozilla write a browser for ChromeOS", its "Can Mozilla write an app for ChromeOS" and "Can Mozilla write a browser for Chromebooks". Both of these statements are absolutely true.

So I fail to see how Chromebooks are "more extremely locked down" than iDevices.

[noteloop]

> There are no native apps on ChromeOS

This is not correct, you can run native apps for Chrome OS via Native Client (NaCL) or App Runtime for Chrome (ARC).

VLC, a poster child for native apps, will be released for Chrome OS in a few months using ARC.

Anandtech has already tested a beta version: http://www.anandtech.com/show/9082/the-chromebook-pixel-2015...

[jorgearturo]

> Anandtech has already tested a beta version

It's an interesting experiment but I don't think Google is aiming to please the crowd with the need for "native apps" anyways and they wouldn't be terribly interested in keeping the native VLC dependencies alive and/or compatible. It seems pretty obvious to me that Google is trying to push the mainstream consumer market into a "cloud computing/services lifestyle", it only makes sense because their whole business model revolves around web users. So VLC is out, Netflix/Playstore is in.

Not for me, don't get me wrong, I'm not that kind of consumer and it may be safe to state that most people within the HN crowd isn't either. I'm personally following and waiting for the Novena[1] laptop and open hardware to be launched.

Even if chromeOS is removed and Gnu/Linux is loaded instead, chromebooks' keyboards look abysmally ugly and useless to me, otherwise I would at least be excited about the inexpensive hardware.

So yeah, as a consumer I can distill my opinion about this product to "meh...", but as a web developer though, that's a different story, the possibility of Google hardware converting handheld mobile users to desktop-ish mobile users and reaching a broader international audience makes me almost enthusiastic about Chromebooks.

After all, until some potentially better hardware project (Firefox OS [2] or Indie Phone [3], who knows) expands to the netbook-ish form factor ("Lapfox"?/"Indiebook"?), the not-so-open inexpensive Chromebook hardware & affordable by hundreds of millions (potentially billions, we'll see) introduces and welcomes new demographics to the web and is better for the world (in the short run) than almost-fully-open expensive hardware that only a few million can afford (for now), don't you think?

[1]: https://www.crowdsupply.com/kosagi/novena-open-laptop

[2]: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/os/

[3]: https://ind.ie/about/

[fpgeek]

Hmm... If you can port VLC to Chrome OS with ARC, I wonder what happens if you try to shove Firefox for Android into it. Are there fundamental roadblocks that would prevent it from working, or would you just end up with a slow and buggy waltzing bear?

[amaranth]

I suspect their sandbox doesn't allow code generation since they statically verify you aren't using instructions they can't protect against and that would break it. That means that while you could probably get a Firefox running, it'd be with a Javascript interpreter, not a JIT.

[boulos]

While I don't work on any of the related pieces, it should be noted that NaCL has dynamic "check this code" support precisely so you can JIT-compile code and execute it safely.

[largote]

You'd have Firefox running on top of Chrome, so that doesn't make that much sense.

[KeytarHero]

> There are no native apps on ChromeOS—the correct question is not "Can Mozilla write a browser for ChromeOS", its "Can Mozilla write an app for ChromeOS"

Exactly - ChromeOS is a browser. "Can Mozilla write a browser for ChromeOS" makes about as much sense as "Can Mozilla write a browser for Chrome" or "Can Google write a browser for Internet Explorer".

...or it would have made that little sense before Mozilla wrote a browser in html: https://github.com/mozilla/browser.html

[jrockway]

The fact that the Chromium process is what's compositing windows is relatively uninteresting to the end user. It's Linux with a different GUI system. Ubuntu is ditching X11 also, as I understand it, so people other than Google appear to be prepared to redo Linux GUIs.

There's Native Client, so you can write native code. I believe there are things like Emacs for NaCl, though Emacs is relatively useless until someone also ports your favorite programming language, version control, etc. to this model. For programmers, it's tough to have to redo everything, and because we tend not to use the ability to run unaudited native code to install viruses on our machine, it seems like a lot of work for no reason. For the end user, though, things are a bit different. It's a long road but ultimately computers that are easier to use and get fewer viruses is a worthy goal, I think.

Someone could port Firefox to ChromeOS if they found it to be interesting. It would probably be quite difficult, however.

I use ChromeOS as my primary workstation because it removes a lot of headaches I have with computers. I hate configuring things. I just want a terminal with Emacs and a web browser. ChromeOS gives me this. I log into my laptop and it has the exact same configuration as my desktop.

ChromeOS auto-updates and takes 8 seconds to reboot afterwards. It doesn't nag me about auto-updates or checking that Windows Defender is up to date. All my work is saved somewhere other than my desktop/laptop, so if I lose the computer or get another one all I have to do is log in again.

It's very much a thin-client thing, which some people hate, but I find quite suitable for my normal workflow. sshing into a Linux box is generally great for doing work. Using the GUIs is an effort in frustration. ChromeOS solved that issue for me. (Yup, I need an Internet connection to get to my ssh-able Linux box somewhere. I always have one.)

If you are convinced Google is out to get you with configuration syncing, SSH clients that run "in a web browser" (but are native code and preserve all keybindings that you're used to), and "cloud storage" then ChromeOS is probably not for you. Enter developer mode (one keypress) and install your favorite Linux distribution instead -- all the patches necessary to make the devices work are in the open source tree, and unlike with Linux on random Windows laptops, your WiFi will work and you'll get the advertised battery life.

I have given ChromeOS laptops to family members where my previous attempts at giving them computers have failed. A year later their laptops are running the latest version of the OS and didn't have any viruses. I even got them using two-factor authentication with security keys! I was surprised.

Disclaimer: I work on ChromeOS as my 20% project. But I work on it because it solved a lot of my computing problems and I find it worth my time. I wouldn't waste my time advocating to help my employer sell $149 laptops.

[wstrange]

Totally agree on the family thing.

I purchased my 88 year old father a chromebook two years ago.

It just works, and is the only computer he has not messed up.

Highly recommended.

[Scarbutt]

I guess the terminal is just a browser tab? can the configs made to the browser terminal tab persist? like font, text size, color, etc...

Also, when running emacs in the terminal through ssh, doesn't emacs keybindings interfere to much with chromeos's browser?

[jrockway]

Apps running in a window can capture whatever keys they want. So Control-W is interpreted by your shell/app, not by the browser (closing the window). In a tab the browser keybindings still exist, so be sure to set "open in new window" by right-clicking the app before running.

Terminal settings are configurable and persistent.

You can have as many windows open as you like.

Here's the app: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/secure-shell/pnhec...

It works on any machine running Chrome. Things don't quite work right on MacOS, I'm told, but it seems native on Windows and Linux. (And CrOS of course.)

[Scarbutt]

cool, I think I'm getting one, one last question :)

you said it is your main workstation, I'm guessing you are an external monitor, how well does external monitors work?

[jrockway]

I actually use a Chromebox: http://promos.asus.com/us/chrome-os/chromebox/

I have the i7 model at work and an i3 model at home. Both are fast. I also have a Chromebook Pixel for situations that require a laptop.

As for monitors, both the desktops and laptops handle my 4k monitor OK, but only at 30Hz (because it's a Displayport MST model which are horrible hacks and are thankfully no longer made). At work I use a 24" and 30" monitor. Works as expected.

You can tune the density per-monitor, so you can run your 4k monitor at 1.25x or 2x density and your normal monitor at 1x density and it Just Works.

It's a pretty nice OS.

[pgeorgi]

Fine.

There's a dialog for setting up resolutions and relative position of the screens to each other. Attaching a screen means that it's automatically fired up with its default settings.

Each screen has the window bar, and clicking on icons there opens the respective website/app on that screen.

When closing the laptop with an attached screen, it merely disabled the display (instead of going to sleep completely) which was confusing the first time but actually makes sense and is how other devices handle the situation as well.

[bandrami]

> Can Google write a browser for Internet Explorer

Sure they could; it would just be an ActiveX control, or whatever they call that this week.

[zyx321]

They could, and they pretty much did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Chrome_Frame

[aikah]

> - Most Chromebooks are freely bootloader unlocked, allowing any operating system to be loaded on them.

So do most Windows Notebooks. I just bought one recently at 250$, installed Linux. so there is nothing special about chromebooks in this regard.

[russjr08]

They weren't saying such.

"So I fail to see how Chromebooks are 'more extremely locked down' than iDevices."

[michaelt]

  There are no native apps on ChromeOS—the correct question
  is not "Can Mozilla write a browser for ChromeOS"

Ah, so we're back to "the browser and the OS are inextricably linked, so the browser can't be replaced with a competing product" ?

It's just like the old days!

[sireat]

Which Chromebooks are freely bootloader unlocked?

I am asking because it was a major pain to get Lubuntu installed on Acer C720, Windows is not an option at all.

Chromebooks feel extremely locked down I'd say close to iDevices.