Google’s Chrome OS: An Old Dog with New Tricks

When I read Google’s Chrome OS announcement via its corporate blog, I couldn’t help but chuckle throughout it.  I think my favorite line is, “The user interface is minimal to stay out of your way, and most of the user experience takes place on the web.”  Wow, I’m all for creative marketing and positive spin, but that takes the cake.  All this time the Windows interface has been in my way and I didn’t even know it!  How dare it let me download and organize pics from my digital camera, copy files to and from network shares and control my computer’s settings! I get what Google is doing, but that’s some pretty blatant straw man logic.

After my laugh, my first thought was that Larry Ellison might've hacked into Google’s Blogger servers.  Google’s vision essentially is the network computer reborn—though reborn at a better time.

When Ellison and Scott McNealy first championed the idea of the always-connected network computer, they were right that the Web would play a growing role in our everyday computing as more and more of the computing experience moved online.  But, the problem with their vision was that it depended on both broadband connectivity, which was not ubiquitous, and Java, which despite the hype, seemed to be an environment better suited for lightweight applets vs. robust desktop applications.

Fast forward to now.  Time certainly has made the Ellison-McNealy vision more viable, but of course, things didn’t turn out exactly as they predicted.  Ellison and McNealy saw their network computer running on Java: Windows was out of the picture.  The duo were outspoken Microsoft competitors and critics, so leaving out Windows was as much for personal reasons as it was for technical ones.  Well, even on netbooks—the network computer incarnate—Windows is still very much in the picture.  Not only is XP easily the most preferred OS for netbooks, Windows 7 has been designed to run well on lower-spec devices.  But they were right in that the underlying operating system would be less relevant as more of our tasks moved to the Web.  The Mac OS certainly owes some of its popularity to that trend.

However, Ellison and McNealy underestimated the role of the browser.  They likely saw the browser as becoming a commodity, which in many ways it has.  So, in their vision, the browser probably would be more of a launch pad for Java-based applications.  Instead, the browser has become the key application, and as the browser and Web protocols have evolved, Java competitors emerged, including everything from Flash and Silverlight to .NET and Ruby.  While each has its own pros and cons and limitations, they are viable platforms for a wide range of applications.  Take a look at Microsoft’s Gazelle project as it really lays out how browser has evolved.  A typical web page contains several dynamic elements and applets.  The browser acts as the helm or shell for it all.

In steps Google.  Google definitely understands the importance of the browser and went as far as taking the bold, but strategic move of developing its own browser so late in the game last year.  But the Chrome browser is really just the foundation for Google’s Chrome OS vision, which the company likely had even before releasing the browser.  Google has the app side covered with Google Apps, Gears, etc.  With the Chrome browser, Google has the run-time environment covered.  And with the Chrome OS, it has the whole user experience covered.  Makes perfect sense.

Of course, whenever Google makes a move, the knee-jerk reaction is to speculate how it spells doom for Microsoft.  Never mind that the Chrome OS is more than a year away, or that Google’s products live in perpetual beta, or that Google Apps have not made significant inroads within the enterprise, or that Android adoption has been lackluster.  Nope!  The clear mainstream message is that Microsoft’s days are numbered.  Please, that story is getting really old.  But not only is it getting old, it’s a distraction from a real, honest-to-goodness assessment.  And to me, that assessment should include how Google’s moves affect Apple. 

Like we already discussed, the Web-based network computer threat is not new to Microsoft.  So when you think about it, Apple’s the one that really could be impacted.  Apple’s cachet comes from its tight coupling of hardware and software in a sleek, elegant form-factor.  But that tight coupling of hardware and software is tied to the desktop computing model, which if we listen to Google, is being replaced by a Web-based experience.  However, think about the average Mac user—not the diehards or those who must use them for work.  How often do you think the average Mac user installs third-party software, barring “essentials” like Adobe Reader, Flash and Mozilla Firefox—and maybe MS Office?  I’d say not often, if ever.  Macs come with everything that an average user would need: Safari, iPhoto, iMovie, iTunes, GarageBand, etc.  Most Mac users probably don’t evolve beyond that functionality. 

So what happens if all that application functionality moves to the Web (as much of it has)?  If we’re all using web apps, what’s the advantage of using a Mac?  Sure, you can be guaranteed to have a solid user experience and an attractive device, but would it really be worth the higher price?  Probably not.  A catch phrase for Google’s computing vision could be open and online: open standards where the underlying platform doesn’t matter and an online experience dictated by Google search, Gmail, Google Apps, etc.  Apple’s legacy is the complete opposite: it’s approach has always been proprietary.  Apple wants to sell you on an experience that you can only get through Apple and its hardware, just like with the iPhone and the App Store.  Apple’s avoided a foray into the netbook arena, but if it does enter that market, I suspect its vision will look a lot different than Google's.  Instead, Apple’s netbook likely would build on its popular, though proprietary, App Store and leverage the affinity that people already have developed for their favorite iPhone apps.

The online-only computer is a familiar old dog with some new tricks.  But when the new tricks involve Google, people pay attention and for good reason.  However, Microsoft already has been putting the pieces in place for a Web-based computing experience with its Live Mesh, Office Live and Azure platforms.  And I can’t help but think the Softies must've smiled to themselves when Google’s announcement inadvertently brought attention to the Gazelle project.  Details of the project certainly had to take some of the air out of Google's announcement.

Follow Me on Twitter