Google Plans a PC Operating System

Marc Lanctot lanctot-yfeSBMgouQgsA/PxXw9srA at
Wed Jul 8 19:35:40 UTC 2009

On Wed, 8 Jul 2009 15:16:30 -0400 (EDT)
"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday-L09J2beyid0N/H6P543EQg at> wrote:

> On Wed, 8 Jul 2009, CLIFFORD ILKAY wrote:


> > To about 90% of the population, it is a new OS so why dismiss it?
> > With Google's market reach and PR, this is a very positive
> > development.
>   i disagree, since that article makes no admission whatsoever that
> their "new" OS is simply a repackaged linux.  while, *technically*,
> they have the right to do that, *ethically*, i think it sucks.
> they're announcing this exciting new development without giving credit
> to all of the linux developers who made it possible.  i find that
> incredibly sleazy.  but that's just me.


I agree with the sleaziness of the /article/ for the reason you state,
but it's the New York Times journalists who are at fault, not Google.
The first link of the article refers to Google's actual announcement
[1], which mentions that: 

"The software architecture is simple — Google Chrome running within a
new windowing system on top of a Linux kernel."

I'm sure their OS also contains all the GNU utilities and they should
probably give credit to those guys too. 

I agree with Jamon, though. I'd be very worried about privacy.. in
particular, I'd worry that the whole OS is a mechanism to collect more
private data from unaware users. I've managed to avoid gmail all this
time for these reasons. I wouldn't touch Chrome OS with a ten-foot
pole. Let's just say I wouldn't be surprised if the OS uploaded process
usage data to Big Brother. 



Theory is when you know something, but it doesn't work. Practice
is when something works, but you don't know why. Programmers combine
theory and practice: Nothing works and they don't know why.
  -- Anonymous
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings:
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns

More information about the Legacy mailing list