Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols reports at Computerworld
Last summer Microsoft talked its partners into trying to stop the growing popularity of Chromebooks in its tracks by making a big push during the holiday season. While full retail results won't be in for a while, we do know the laptop sales results from the most important retailer of them all, Amazon. Guess what. With that retailer at least, Microsoft and its buddies failed. Miserably.
Amazon reports that its top three computers sold over the holidays were--drum-roll, please--Chromebooks. It was that way last year too. Oh, wait, I'm wrong; Microsoft did worse this year.
[...]The plan was to offer OEMs Windows 8.1 With Bing essentially for nothing. Why such a low, low price? Well, back in February of last year, Microsoft had cut the price of Windows 8 on low-end devices by 70% and that had failed to get manufacturers or customers excited. The goal of the holiday "we can't possibly go any lower" price was to enable vendors to sell low-end computers at bottom-of-the-rung Chromebook prices--from $199 to $249--and still make a profit. The plan sounded like a winner to Microsoft and friends.
[...]It's interesting to note that the makers of the three top sellers, Acer and HP, both supported the new low-end Windows devices. Yes, that's right: Both companies offered close-to-identical Chromebook and Windows 8.1 models at the same price points, but buyers chose the Chromebooks.
[...]It appears that Windows 8.x has done what Vista and other notable Microsoft failures couldn't do. It's managed to disgust once true-blue Microsoft customers so much that they are looking elsewhere for their PCs. And Chromebooks are becoming their laptop of choice.
Related Stories
With another of his graphs derived from StatCounter data, blogger and Linux advocate Robert Pogson reports
It was only a few years ago that the sycophants of M$ were trumpeting that */Linux was struggling to reach ~1% share of the desktop anywhere. Many of those were in USA.
Well, the chickens have come home to roost in The Year Of The Linux Desktop. */Linux has ~5% share. Are we there yet? Nope. FLOSS is still going places and growing stronger every year. Classical GNU/Linux grew rapidly until mid-year when Android/Unknown and Chrome OS took up slack. It's all good.
I would have said "He who laughs last laughs best" but, hey, it's his blog.
...and remembering how Chromebooks dominated the sales figures last Christmas, I can't wait to see how the SteamBox sales go this Christmas.
Previous: Given the Choice for Christmas 2014, Consumers Chose Linux
Big Jump in Bahrain: Linux Now At 16 Percent
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 18 2015, @10:03PM
They didn't choose Linux. Consumers chose Google's walled garden ChromeOS. Linux is about freedom of choice; ChromeOS is not.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 18 2015, @10:28PM
They were also choosing not windows 8.1. They would rather choose what is basically a crippled desktop over windows 8.1. I dont blame them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 18 2015, @10:46PM
They didn't choose Windows. Consumers chose Microsoft's walled garden Windows/mostly OEM version. FOSS is about freedom of choice; Proprietary Software is not.
(Score: 2) by sigma on Monday January 19 2015, @01:05AM
Linux is about freedom of choice; ChromeOS is not.
ChromeOS IS Linux and preserves enough of those freedoms for you to have a full Linux desktop alongside the Chrome UI.
Most people choose Chromebooks for their simplicity and low cost, but that's just another freedom that Linux and FOSS enables. If you're interested enough, you can use Crouton or ChrUbuntu to run a full Linux DE as well or instead of the pre-installed OS. Crouton in particular uses chroot to run both Chrome OS and another DE at the same time, so you can switch between Chrome OS and your standard Linux desktop environment with a keyboard shortcut - no reboot needed.
So please stop this FUD that ChromeOS/Android/Tizen etc aren't Linux. They ARE Linux where it matters, and the freedom to roll your own distro (which these OSs definitely ARE) is one of the core freedoms of Linux for hobbyists and corporates alike.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 19 2015, @02:22AM
"So please stop this FUD"
Indeed, I can feel the M$ sockpuppet accounts growing on SN. It's sad, really, they've consumed buck feta.
(Score: 2) by zeigerpuppy on Monday January 19 2015, @05:27AM
By that argument a windows pc is also Linux as you can install Linux "along side" windows.
I look at anything made by google as an attempt to leverage open tools to direct people to their ecosystem and then close the gates by breaking standards (e.g. Google talk 'enhanced' to break standard xmpp).
In this regard, google are not much different to Microsoft and should ultimately be viewed as hostile to data freedoms (even if they leverage software freedom to do this).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 19 2015, @05:30AM
By that argument a windows pc is also Linux as you can install Linux "along side" windows.
Do you even know what chroot means?
(Score: 2) by arashi no garou on Monday January 19 2015, @12:27PM
In this regard, google are not much different to Microsoft and should ultimately be viewed as hostile to data freedoms (even if they leverage software freedom to do this).
I agree, and I'll take it even further: Microsoft has started embracing open source philosophies with some of their own products, and we all know that "embrace" is one of three steps Microsoft is infamous for. In my mind, Google and Microsoft are at opposite ends of a rope, with the rope getting shorter every day. Pretty soon they will come together and stand side by side as two facets of the same idea: Leverage open source to their own gain while simultaneously closing off their customers' freedoms. Google has their "we only release the source when we want to" ChromeOS and Android, and with the latter Google is starting to require hard dependencies on Play Services for core functions like messaging and telephony, so that even if you build and install Android from source, the phone is useless without Google's hand around your throat.
Microsoft, on the other hand, appears to be leaning more open source friendly, but in reality it's only where it helps their bottom line. And, they still have the same nonchalance about the safety of users' data, the same bedfellows in the government, the same reluctance to embrace open source where it really matters and could actually benefit them (their app stores).
And I say all of that as someone who uses Microsoft's and Google's services and devices on a daily basis, because the alternative is Apple, and I'm not going back to that insanity. Sure, I use GNU/Linux and BSD on my computers, but everywhere else it's a choice between Microsoft or Google, and I'm sick of choosing the "lesser evil" especially when they are pretty much equally evil.
(Score: 2) by ticho on Monday January 19 2015, @08:48AM
The question is how long will Google allow this to happen. Sooner or later, they might tighten the security some more, all while claiming that "alternative DEs dillute the ChromeOS experience" (yes, I know that this is a paraphrased Gnome motto, and that Google != Gnome).
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 20 2015, @12:23AM
I doubt they'd make that mistake, Chrome OS has only been increasing support for third party OS installs with each revision. The last one made it easier to boot from external hard drives for example.
Google knows that Chromebooks are an awesome weapon against Microsoft regardless of what stack you run on top of the kernel, and they are not going to shit the bed at this point.
(Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Monday January 19 2015, @08:50AM
Bullshit as you can take any Windows or REAL Linux PC and install ANYTHING on it. Can you do this on these Chromebooks? NO you cannot, they can only install a handful of distros with a hacked bootloader, how long do you think they will be supported? You can take any $199 Worst Buy Special and install anything from BSD to WinXP, can you do this? If the answer is no then the platform is restricted whether you like it or not.
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 19 2015, @01:39PM
Are you really this stupid?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 19 2015, @03:18PM
Why is he stupid? For a chrome box you have to jump thru a few hoops to get it to work.
While someone may enjoy doing that. I find it tedious and annoying. Even though I can, I still find it seriously annoying. Computers are to make our lives easier not be a technical challenge every time you turn around.
Look these are cheap boxes meant to be 'something cool for Christmas'. They will be landfill fodder in 6 months. Some people will love them to death. But most will toss them and move onto the next gadget. I got my dad an ipad for xmas this year. From what my sister says it is still in the box.
It is the netbook thing all over.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Tuesday January 20 2015, @03:05PM
If ChromeOS is Linux. Does it translate into that the drivers to make graphics, sound, disc, battery management, pointer device, usb, wifi, mobile etc are available as source such that one can port or modify them as desired?
Otherwise, if the essential drivers are binary blobs with a Linux kernel API then it's sure Linux but not in any way flexible way..
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Monday January 19 2015, @05:20AM
So, it's Springtime for Google and Android OS?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 19 2015, @09:05AM
You mean, Google tried to make Android a failure, but failed to do so? [orain.org]
(Score: 1) by DNied on Sunday January 18 2015, @10:23PM
So now at SoylentNews ChromeOS == Linux??
Pathetic.
(Score: 1) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 18 2015, @10:31PM
While I agree it's an oversimplification, like calling Android "Linux", it's not made by MS or Apple and does use the Linux kernel which I think was the main point OP was making.
(Score: 2) by keplr on Sunday January 18 2015, @10:44PM
It's technically accurate, but misses the point of promoting Linux. All the reasons that make Microsoft Windows abhorrent still exist with ChromOS and (stock) Android. They are both controlled by totalitarian, anti-consumer, anti-privacy, companies plugged directly into the US Government's surveillance apparatuses. What does it profit us to score a point against MS if at the same time we enable a company which is essentially just as bad? Google is actually worse than Microsoft in a lot of ways. I don't care what kernel they use.
I don't respond to ACs.
(Score: 3) by Nerdfest on Monday January 19 2015, @12:13AM
I don't see Google as worse than Microsoft in any way ... although, I definitely see the potential for them to be worse. I do think that Apple is currently far worse than Microsoft for several of the reasons you mention (totalitarian and anti-consumer).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 19 2015, @09:08AM
As far as I can see, Microsoft is not (yet?) in the data collection (advertising) business. So that's at least one point where Microsoft is better than Google.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 19 2015, @01:44PM
Microsoft is not (yet?) in the data collection (advertising) business. So that's at least one point where Microsoft is better than Google.
They are in that business,but since they use Bing for their analytics, they're not doing it very well.
http://advertising.microsoft.com/en/home [microsoft.com]
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 18 2015, @11:51PM
In the Autumn of 2007, Wal-Mart offered a machine for sale.
You had the choice of Linux or Windoze preinstalled on the machine.
People walked past the identical hardware with Windoze and scooped up the boxes with Linux.
They were selling so many that they brought out the units they had planned to hold for Christmas.
Wal-Mart sold 10,000 units in 48 hours.[1] [archive.org]
When all the Linux boxes were sold, the identical boxes (with the exception of the preinstalled MICROS~1 OS) continued to sit on the shelves unsold.
[1] Ziff-Davis now owns that domain and, of course, has taken down the content.
So, what happened that Wal-Mart didn't continue to sell the hell out of Linux boxes?
No one outside the loop can say for sure, but a good guess would be that M$'s lawyers showed up in Bentonville with an agreement that Wal-Mart had previously signed that has some kind of anti-competitive clause.
("Mustn't damage the brand" or some such.)
-- gewg_
(Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Monday January 19 2015, @12:07AM
People really need to start to push the anti-competition complaints against MS. I don't think they go unnoticed, at least here in Canada. I filed complaints against a couple of big ISPs for bundling here and they were not ignored. (They were not resolved to my satisfaction either, but it was a borderline case)
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Tuesday January 20 2015, @02:31PM
So what action was taken?
(Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Monday January 19 2015, @12:10AM
Android *does* use the Linux kernel, as far as I'm aware, as does Chrome. Not that it really changes anything, as both run an extra layer on top that (in the case of Chrome) reduces users freedom.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 19 2015, @08:19AM
If people had listened to RMS, we wouldn't need to argue about this.
We would have: GNU/Linux, Android/Linux, GNU/FreeBSD (Debian did that one until recently).
(Score: 2) by Arik on Sunday January 18 2015, @10:41PM
NOW do you see why some of us keep trying to convince you to say what you mean?
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday January 19 2015, @01:31AM
And end up having to say thirty names just to tell someone what OS I use? Fuck no. Never going to happen.
GNU ain't special enough to warrant mentioning even if I were to want to add a second name. Your DE has a hell of a lot more impact on the flavor of the computer you have than GNU utils do.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Marand on Monday January 19 2015, @03:22AM
And end up having to say thirty names just to tell someone what OS I use? Fuck no. Never going to happen.
I don't know what you're talking about, it's not that bad. Shortcuts are just for the lazy.
-- sent from Iceweasel 31.3.0 ESR on Debian 8 Jessie (testing) GNU/systemd*/Linux + Xorg X Server 1.16.1.901 + KDE SC 4.14.2
* Just kidding, I'm still using sysv-init.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 19 2015, @08:26AM
In general you may have a point, but in this case, the OP was arguing about freedom, not desktop environments. And when it comes to freedom, GNU says more than Linux. Android/Linux IS Linux, but it is not GNU/Linux.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by TheRaven on Monday January 19 2015, @10:11AM
GNU ain't special enough to warrant mentioning even if I were to want to add a second name
A typical Linux distro has more GNU code than Linux code, even in a bare-bones configuration (coreutils + glibc is bigger than the kernel, throw in bash and the rest of the GNU stuff that's typically bigger, and it's a lot more). If you replace the GNU coreutils with the BSD equivalents, people will notice quickly (even people who avoid the command line, because most of their init scripts won't work and their machine won't boot). In contrast, Debian/kFreeBSD has shown that you can replace the Linux kernel with a FreeBSD kernel and most end-users won't notice. So which is special enough to warrant mentioning?
sudo mod me up
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Tuesday January 20 2015, @02:34PM
If you replace the GNU coreutils with the BSD equivalents and BSD init scripts. It will work a lot better .. ;)
But your point with Debian/kFreeBSD is neat :-)
(Score: 2, Offtopic) by FatPhil on Sunday January 18 2015, @10:45PM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 1) by edIII on Sunday January 18 2015, @11:37PM
It would be zero. Which is also the range of Chromebooks that effectively contain Linux.
Just like Apple computers don't actually come with BSD, Chromebooks don't actually come with Linux. Don't get me wrong, it's going to very similar under the hood. If you can get there. If you can get root. If you can bypass the controls put there by others preventing you from replacing firmware to get root. If you can find a manufacturer willing to give you a completely free system. If you can trust the parts that are binaries and not even open source or even close to FOSS. If you don't have something like UEFI and Secure Boot preventing you from running your own OS. Ohh, and IF Microsoft is such a nice big guy and signs your code for you. Such swell people.
There is no way you will ever convince me and some others that ChromeOS == Linux. It's doesn't, and it's only a derivative of Linux at most modified to serve the goals of Google. Guess how much I'm interested in serving the goals of Google while I enjoy my personal computing? Also zero.
Look, while we all know that BSD isn't exactly Linux, we also know there is a big damn difference between BSD and Apple BSD. There are many people arguing that Apple's contributions towards BSD are in fact killing it as part of an embrace, extend, extinguish (whatever that saying is). It's debatable, but it's also an issue in that community AFAIK. Is Apple technically running something akin to BSD while also technically supporting free software? Yes, however we do not consider Apple's operating systems to be free and unencumbered from controls put in place by Apple. Steve Jobs didn't want personal computing, he wanted Jobs-Computing. No massive highways of freedom, just train tracks and trains. All shiny and rounded, but they go where Steve says they go.
Android is shackled by Google and the manufacturers, as the last time I checked it's still not a trivial matter to get full root on an Android smartphone or tablet. All I ever heard is that Google for awhile manufactured a fully unlocked phone with fully unlocked hardware, but then stopped selling it. I was forced to open up my own Droid Bionic, and I didn't have root right out of the box. Likewise, Apple's operating systems are also shackled and worthless, and we all know giving patronage to Microsoft is to give patronage to the NSA and the people who would enslave your computing experience. Unless you choose free hardware and pure Linux, you need to break the law to own your own hardware. It took the Supreme court to say jailbreaking is allowed in specific circumstances, but they didn't open up the idea of free computing elsewhere at all.
Google isn't interested in creating freedom in computing anymore than Microsoft or Apple. They're interested in providing for the shareholders, and that means serving their true customers. Advertisers pay. Free users don't. It's that simple. They serve the money, which isn't hyperbole. In Capitalism, corporations serve nobody but themselves. It's shareholders, board members, and then executives. In that order, nobody else is served. Business in America.
When we say pure Linux, especially in the context of the article, what we are championing is freedom in computing and the release of the shackles that closed source behemoths like Apple, Microsoft, and Google create. So when an article makes the fantastic claim the 2014 Christmas season might be the beginning's of the Year of Linux finally, it's completely disingenuous as an argument supporting Linux .
The 2014 Christmas season did NOT see people embracing Linux. What it showed is how much people do NOT like Windows Metro and how much Win 8.1 just plain sucks. What they did was to embrace Google, in the same way the movement started for people to embrace Apple again. It was the choice of a shiny fancy UI from a known corporation that also happens to serve much of the more popular services elsewhere.
Now when you can actually show that people are choosing freedom in computing by taking hardware for sale and choosing a pure Linux OS like Ubuntu, then I might believe you that the Christmas season showed Linux ahead of the others.
Linux/BSD == Freedom (The only OS that actually does BTW)
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Monday January 19 2015, @08:12AM
And who said "pure Linux"? Nice attempt at a goalpost move. A failed one, as "pure Linux" would need to be defined first in order to actually mean anything. The nice thing about Linux is that you can tweak it, even if you're tweaking it for nefarious ends.
And when it comes to "championing freedom", there's one outspoken person who knows a lot about Linux, and thinks that view is just bollocks. You may have heard of him - his name's Linus Torvalds.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by Pav on Sunday January 18 2015, @11:42PM
There are several English-based sign languages - try selling those skills under a "Learn to Speak English" shingle and be amazed at how people think you're being disingenuous.
(Score: 2) by tibman on Monday January 19 2015, @03:09AM
Whoever marked FatPhil's post as offtopic should never receive mod points again. However, if this post is marked offtopic then that would be okay : )
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 1) by FatPhil on Monday January 19 2015, @08:07AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by jcross on Monday January 19 2015, @12:39AM
But what did we think the "year of the Linux desktop" would look like? For something to go mainstream, it has to adapt to the marketplace, to what most people want. Yes Chromebooks are walled gardens, but on the other hand, they just work. There's no wrangling audio/graphics drivers or installing non-free package repos just to watch a youtube video some friend sent you. Your data is automatically backed up without you having to configure that or even think about it in any way. They are cheap and fully ready to run right out of the box, no installation media or service packs required. Hey, I love Linux/BSD despite the occasional hassles, because I know how to take advantage of some of the freedoms they give me, but frankly most people don't know how and would see time spent learning how as a waste.
This reminds me of my friends who used to push organic produce complaining that the standard means nothing anymore. I agree it has been watered down, but on the other hand, Walmart is selling organic produce. Walmart! At a price ordinary people don't see as too high to be worth it. What was formerly a marker for the elite few is now becoming a mass-market commodity. Now you need to buy local veg to stay on the cutting edge. Hell even that's lame, you need to grow your own in your backyard, or maybe even wildcraft edible weeds from some empty lot. Yeah, I've done all those things, I think more for fun than to set myself apart from the masses. But I still see organic carrots at Walmart as a win of some kind, and I think the same of Chromebooks. Maybe this is just what winning looks like at the moment. It surely wasn't going to be a Stallmanesque utopia.
(Score: 1) by DNied on Monday January 19 2015, @11:25AM
Sure, in uninformed layman terms, ChromeOS is a sort of Linux.
But we're (supposedly) on a "news for nerds" type site. Among computer geeks, you can't call ChromeOS "Linux" and hope to not get laughed at / flamed. It contains Linux, or it is Linux-based, but it is not Linux.
There is no way a consumer buys a ChromeBook because he wants Linux. Let's not kid ourself on this, please.
It would be like saying that - by buying a TiVo - a consumer "chose Linux".
You choose Linux when you pick a device where you can (and are allowed to) install the Linux distro of your choice (and install it, if not preinstalled).
(Score: 2) by jcross on Monday January 19 2015, @01:38PM
Yeah, I do agree that the headline could have been more specific/accurate. However, if we agree that ChromeOS contains Linux but is not itself Linux, then the same logic can be applied to every other desktop distro. Every one of them stacks a not-linux desktop environment on top of a not-linux set of "not-unix" user-space utilities. The main thing that sets ChromeOS apart from other distros is that it's signed to prevent unintentional or unauthorized tampering, and in this sense I would say it's not that different from a theoretical laptop shipped with its OS on a live CD pre-installed in the drive with no obvious eject button. I think most if not all Chromebooks do have a hardware switch somewhere that allows you to disable the signing checks and hack on it, just as our live CD laptop might have a little hole where you can stick a paperclip in to eject the disk and put in a modified one. I guess what I'm saying is that maybe for the majority of Chromebook customers, ChromeOS *is* their distro of choice, and it conveniently comes pre-installed on the machine.
P.S. Another analog would be those computers back in the day that shipped with their OS on a ROM, like the Apple II. Man, I used to love how no matter how much you trashed the system, you could always cycle the power switch and everything was okay again. I feel like OS's didn't get that way again until virtualization came along.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 20 2015, @12:30AM
If you don't like it because it doesn't contain the GNU userland that's fine, but to deliberately conflate uses of "Linux" for dramatic effect? Pathetic.
(Score: 1) by Gertlex on Sunday January 18 2015, @10:27PM
I don't recall there being comparable cheap alternatives (like Chromebooks) when Windows Vista appeared... Also 8.1 is far too similar of a name to 8.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Sunday January 18 2015, @10:33PM
Agreed, nothing attractive since windows 7, and windows 10 did not arrive in time for this holiday season.
But the focus of window 10 is business anyway.
Still it wasn't a win for Linux, as Chrome may have had some roots in Linux, but its not linux today, its more or less based on the Chrome browser running as pid one.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 19 2015, @08:30AM
It's also far to similar a desktop environment. The name fits.
(And I said that as the "lucky" owner of a Windows 8.1 tablet. Buying that was my mistake of the year 2014).
(Score: 4, Insightful) by darkfeline on Sunday January 18 2015, @11:01PM
Not only is ChromeOS not Linux, but Chromebooks aren't even laptops; they're netbooks, as in completely useless when not connected to the Internet and at best can be used to browse Facebook, check email, and edit Google Docs. Basically, people are realizing that they don't need computers, they only need a Facebook/email machine.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 2) by joekiser on Monday January 19 2015, @12:41AM
Most computers are useless without internet. What, are you going to install Encarta and Microsoft Bookshelf to get around?
Chromebooks have a lot of unique problems, from the locked down OS to the quality of everything that doesn't have Pixel in the name. Internet connectivity is not one of those problems.
Debt is the currency of slaves.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Monday January 19 2015, @01:30AM
Well, much of the time I don't need the internet for what I do...one doesn't need it for word processing or program development...though it certainly makes program development easier.
OTOH, most people depend on email and web browsing for most of their computer use, so it's a reasonable claim if slightly rephrased.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday January 19 2015, @01:34AM
That's why I save all the really good porn locally.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 19 2015, @09:26AM
Really? For a very long time I've used computers with no internet connection. And I didn't consider those computers useless. And even today, a considerable part of my activities on the computer is not dependent on the internet. And if I count only the useful activities, I'd say non-internet wins by a large margin.
If I had the choice between a PC without internet connection and a computer that is useless without internet connection, I'd choose the PC.
Maybe we should stop calling those internet-relying machines computers and instead call them by their function: Internet terminals. And yes, it is true that they contain a computer. But so did the X terminals of the past, and I think even the pure-text terminals that preceded them. Also, if your TV isn't too old, it also contains a computer, and yet you wouldn't call your TV a computer, would you?
(Score: 1) by Synonymous Homonym on Monday January 19 2015, @10:31AM
If I can program it, it is a computer.
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Tuesday January 20 2015, @12:27AM
Computers are people!
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Tuesday January 20 2015, @02:48PM
If I don't have to spend months reverse engineer the machine I might call it a useful computer. Otherwise it's just a single purpose brick.
(Score: 2) by joekiser on Monday January 19 2015, @02:19PM
As a matter of fact, my TV *is* a computer, and it's been that way since 2009 or so, when I hooked up an old Thinkpad and installed XBMC.
What can you do on a PC that doesn't require internet? Play a few video games? Edit videos? Program in a non-scripting language? Okay, maybe half a dozen things if we stretch it. You're not going to do any of that on a $200 Windows PC either.
I remember the days of no internet on a computer. Those days sucked. We used encyclopedias to look things up, and a bad power outage could wipe all of your data. We've moved on. Personal banking, financial trades, communicating with family back in the US, scheduling, all require the net. I've lost so much data due to bad HDDs or power outages over the years that a 1:1 copy of local data in SpiderOak is a must. Even GNUCash syncs with my bank from time to time. If I ever bought into the Google ecosystem (na-ga happen for personal reasons), I could totally get all of our personal computing done on a Chromebook.
And yes, my work workstation has more gigs of RAM than storage I have on my SSD, but that's not what we're talking about.
Debt is the currency of slaves.
(Score: 2) by Zyx Abacab on Monday January 19 2015, @09:12PM
There's way more than "maybe half a dozen things" that I do, and have done in the past, on a computer; and almost none of them required an Internet connection. Obvious things like paperwork, taxes, resumes, applications and other stuff you do with an office suite; but also artsy things like writing, drawing and music. Computers have also been involved in the Dungeons & Dragons games I host; they're as useful for rolling dice as they are for avoiding printing off maps you've drawn.
Then there's more involved design work, like video editing (for home movies), newsletters and posters. Also technical stuff, like programming (both interactive/interpreted and old-fashioned compiled, despite what you said), circuit modelling and CAD.
I also do my schedulling on Lightning. It's shared over CalDAV, sure, but still works just fine without the Internet.
The Internet sure makes doing these things more convenient, especially when we're sharing whatever we've made or researching how to do something, but it's not like the Internet somehow inherently makes the task better.
If I had to choose between a lame computer that worked without the Internet and a shiny computer that didn't, I'd take without hesitation the lame one.
(Score: 2) by Teckla on Monday January 19 2015, @03:37AM
...they're netbooks, as in completely useless when not connected to the Internet...
That isn't true.
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Tuesday January 20 2015, @12:20AM
Please excuse my usage of the literary/rhetorical device called hyperbole. Please excuse your education system for not having taught you about literary/rhetorical devices.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 2) by Wootery on Monday January 19 2015, @11:07AM
Not only is ChromeOS not Linux
Uh, yes it is...
You may not like it, but it uses the Linux kernel. That isn't up for debate.
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Tuesday January 20 2015, @12:25AM
Sorry, shall I say Linux distro, or Linux computer, or Linux personal computing device, or GNU/Linux, or UNIXy Linux? I mean Linux as in the OS, excluding most embedded devices, household appliances that happen to use the Linux kernel, Android, and yes, ChromeOS (and SteamOS I think), which is the generic (and ambiguous) definition of Linux with which I am familiar in common parlance.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 2) by Wootery on Tuesday January 20 2015, @11:34AM
Yeah, Linux has always has an issue of unclear branding. (GNU/Linux, and all that.)
Uses the Linux kernel but its Unix-ey components are concealead from the user-interface doesn't quite roll of the tongue.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 18 2015, @11:03PM
ChromeOS has the Linux kernel, but other than that it's the complete opposite of FOSSies advocate -- it's a walled in garden where you can't install programs you want. Also, it's usually quite difficult to install a Linux distro on a Chromebook (even on a x86 one) compared to a normal PC, with guides for specific models and the entire process being very hacky (IIRC, it can void the Chromebook's warranty in some cases*).
* "Installing Linux on a computer pre-installed with Windows can void your PC's warranty" -- I believe that was because the distro being installed deleted the "recovery partition" on the hard drive, i.e. where the OEM throws a backup of the Windows installation for safe keeping.
(Score: 2) by present_arms on Monday January 19 2015, @01:25AM
http://trinity.mypclinuxos.com/
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Monday January 19 2015, @01:34AM
This sort of depends. For some people you are exactly correct, but for others...there's nothing wrong with a walled garden if you can get out of it if you so choose, and ChromeOS allows that, though it is an extra step. You don't even need to "jail break" the OS, as you can do it in an application installed within the ChromeOS.
(N.B.: This is second-hand information. I haven't actually tried. I still believe it to be true.)
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by jimshatt on Monday January 19 2015, @12:24PM
Some might have chosen not-Microsoft or not-Apple, though, so that's something at least.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 20 2015, @12:41AM
"Candidate A didn't win the election. Candidate B lost". What kind of fancy laywer-talking nonsense is that? Consumers did indeed chose notebooks running Linux. The reset is loser theory-crafting.