[HN Gopher] ChromeOS Flex is now ready to scale to PCs and Macs
___________________________________________________________________
ChromeOS Flex is now ready to scale to PCs and Macs
Author : binkHN
Score : 66 points
Date : 2022-07-14 17:42 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (cloud.google.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (cloud.google.com)
| rvz wrote:
| This is supposedly Desktop Linux's 'finest' example of being the
| 0.1% out of the 99.9% of other free and open-source Linux distros
| that have failed to become useful or mainstream enough at a large
| scale and to be used by everyday users to just get things done.
|
| ChromeOS seems to be _the only_ example close to this, but it
| sadly succeeds more in surveillance of its users with its mostly
| closed system, which goes against the point of choosing Linux in
| the first place. In a couple of years time, ChromeOS will be just
| replaced with Fuchsia underneath and the best part is the users
| won 't care and will not even know it.
|
| Which means Desktop Linux is once again, back to square one.
| jchw wrote:
| Open source isn't a competition or a race. This has no
| practical impact on the traditional Linux desktop stack.
|
| Heck, ChromeOS Flex seems to be shipping Crostini. Similar to
| Windows, ChromeOS Flex is embedding a traditional Linux desktop
| stack inside of it's walled garden.
| ibejoeb wrote:
| If it's shipping crostini, I'll probably give it a shot. I've
| got a stack of old laptops that will probably run it just
| fine. It'll work great for browsing or playing media, and
| then anything special can be run on crostini. Pretty
| convenient to keep old devices updated.
| bedast wrote:
| Despite my opinions on Google, ChromeOS is interesting to me. But
| the most interesting aspect of it is missing in Flex: Access to
| Android apps.
|
| This is not ChromeOS, but a subset of it. ChromeOS Flex is not
| interesting to me.
| gravitate wrote:
| If you want to install this:
| https://chromeenterprise.google/os/chromeosflex/
| fupimeng wrote:
| This used to be a hot topic a few years ago. When will it be
| actually ready?
| haolez wrote:
| It is amazing. It is my main driver right now. If you use VSCode,
| make sure to set Title Bar Style to custom so you get rid of
| ChromeOS's white title bar.
| dangus wrote:
| ChromeOS and all of its derivatives suck. End of story.
|
| Every other general purpose OS, free or proprietary, is more
| capable.
|
| Most other alternatives, I would argue, are better user
| experiences that are easier to use for the average person.
|
| An iPad or tablet is more capable. A phone is more capable.
|
| The sole value of ChromeOS is in the hardware: you get better
| laptop hardware for your money by buying a Chromebook. Why else
| would you choose ChromeOS?
| wmf wrote:
| Many organizations choose Chrome OS because the users can't
| break or degrade it. Of course that's mostly due to Chrome OS
| being less capable.
| real_kaipi wrote:
| they make a big show to say that macs are supported, but in
| reality only x86 macs are supported, M1/M2 are not.
|
| They hide this in the required specs, 2 clicks after the main
| announcement. Pretty misleading given that Apple currently sells
| 2 non M1/M2 macs: an i5 Mac Mini and the Mac Pro (cheese grater).
| invisible wrote:
| The only thing that this reminded me of is that my relatively
| expensive Chromebook (Pixelbook Go) just stopped receiving
| feature updates after a few years. This seems great, but there is
| no mention on how long they'll support the certified devices.
| throwawy6362828 wrote:
| The pixel book go gets updated until 2026, am I missing
| something?
|
| https://support.google.com/pixelbook/answer/9413900?hl=en
| invisible wrote:
| Huh, maybe the date on my laptop was wrong and a notification
| was triggered? I definitely got a notification and was sent
| to https://www.google.com/chromebook/older/
|
| (Looking in settings, it has the 2026 date now.)
| ijidak wrote:
| Poor marketing. Doesn't show screenshots of the OS in use.
|
| Doesn't go into detail about productivity applications.
|
| Doesn't tell us about the apps available from the ecosystem. (Not
| even the main product page.)
|
| Not much to get customers excited.
|
| This is why Apple always wins. (Well... Steve Jobs era Apple)
|
| They've always been better at conveying what their new hotness
| does.
|
| I'll never forget the "app for that" campaign.
|
| Pure genius.
| [deleted]
| Jemm wrote:
| Marketing on value died decades ago. Now we sell emotion and
| shiny.
| jimt1234 wrote:
| Don't sell the steak. Sell the sizzle.
| gravitate wrote:
| Chrome is the main app and I imagine you install apps from
| Chrome itself, so no need to advertise then
| [deleted]
| resoluteteeth wrote:
| > Poor marketing. Doesn't show screenshots of the OS in use.
|
| It's the same as Chrome OS on Chromebooks
|
| > Doesn't go into detail about productivity applications.
|
| Google Docs or anything you can use on the web
|
| > Doesn't tell us about the apps available from the ecosystem.
| (Not even the main product page.)
|
| There are none. Chrome Apps are deprecated so unless you use
| linux via crostini (on normal chrome os devices you can also
| use android apps but I don't think chrome os flex supports that
| currently) there aren't any apps except PWAs.
|
| > Not much to get customers excited.
|
| It's for companies that want an easy to manage OS that just
| provides a web browser, basically. They're not trying to market
| chrome os flex to consumers. If you wanted a chrome os device
| as a consumer you would buy a chromebook.
|
| > This is why Apple always wins. (Well... Steve Jobs era Apple)
|
| Chromebooks have been incredibly successful with elementary
| schools in the US. iPads and macbooks have obviously been
| successful too but they basically inhabit completely different
| niches so it's not necessarily possible to say that apple is
| "winning" against chrome os (apple would have to change their
| approach somewhat to try to make a cheap ipad laptop at the
| risk of cannibalizing the market for macbooks to try to compete
| with chrome os). Chrome OS flex has a good chance at being
| successful with companies that already have their own desktops
| and don't need any offline applications.
| stonogo wrote:
| Chromebooks have been incredibly present in elementary
| schools in the US. I haven't seen any metrics for
| "successful" that go beyond "make sure every kid has a Google
| account."
| wmf wrote:
| Does "schools didn't switch back to iPads" count as
| success?
| epakai wrote:
| I put it on a 2012 Macbook Air about a month ago. Things went
| pretty well. Having a reasonable amount of drive space for the
| Linux environment was nice for once. The keyboard backlight was
| non-functional, but otherwise hardware seemed to work.
| turtlebits wrote:
| ChromeOS has gotten progressively worse over the years.
|
| I have a Pixelbook and it used to be great, but now I get
| constant freezes and crashes with android apps, unresponsive
| windowing UI and launcher, etc. It's also constantly updating
| itself, which isn't inherently bad, but it's asking for restarts
| what feels like twice a week.
|
| Linux containers is half-baked (takes >30 sec to launch), the
| stability of Android apps is questionable.
| resoluteteeth wrote:
| I have a cheap chromebook with much worse specs than a
| pixelbook and it has been extremely reliable.
|
| The linux containers are slow to start but that only applies to
| the first time you run a linux app after restarting the
| computer or logging out/in. Otherwise they work great.
|
| Android apps are more of a mixed bag.
|
| The bigger problem is that PWAs don't quite seem ready and
| Chrome apps are deprecated so there's no good way to make apps
| that specifically target chrome os right now.
| invisible wrote:
| I know it's not a requirement, but running docker containers
| is a nontrivial headache. Additionally, running VSCode
| resulted in a number of frustrating bugs:
|
| - copy+paste not working, or only working on small strings
|
| - font size issues and anti-aliasing issues
|
| - delays on keystrokes
|
| Any type of advanced networking in Linux was also a huge
| headache (e.g. a wireguard interface) and didn't interop with
| the browser. So as needed, I was at one point running both
| the Chrome on ChromeOS and another Chrome in Linux.
| jeffbee wrote:
| Are you sure you didn't switch it to dev channel? The last five
| production ChromeOS releases were on June 23, May 26, April 28,
| March 31, and March 3, 4 weeks apart as usual.
| turtlebits wrote:
| Pretty sure im on stable - I guess I'll try a powerwash.
|
| The biggest frustration is that all I use it as a glorifed
| PDF reader for sheet music- I use an Android PDF reader and
| the Scribd app and it's hit or miss it those work after
| waking sleep.
| edmcnulty101 wrote:
| Whatever happened to Fuschia?
| mhoad wrote:
| Under active development but still at an early stage, last I
| looked they were solving problems like standardising various
| configuration APIs file formats etc so a long way it seems from
| a daily driver let's say.
|
| However, maybe a year or so ago they started a strategy with
| Nest where they started rolling out updates which swapped the
| underlying OS with an early release of Fuchsia on some models
| and they seem to be expanding that into other models at the
| moment.
|
| But still very much a thing with meaningful but not
| particularly public process.
| mulderc wrote:
| I'm still confused on what problem Fuchsia is solving.
| cosmojg wrote:
| Can't wait to run an operating system on my operating system on
| my operating system! Maybe I'll even run an operating system on
| it! Can it run Emacs?
| antonvs wrote:
| Chrome OS Flex is intended to run directly on the host device,
| not on top of some other OS.
|
| Chrome OS is basically a Chrome UI running on a customized
| Linux distribution, and most apps the target users would run
| are going to run directly in that environment - no "OS on your
| OS on your OS."
|
| The exception is native Linux apps, which on Chrome OS run in
| an LXC container inside a Chrome OS VM, mainly for security
| reasons. However, any GUI for such apps is proxied to the host
| display, so the virtualization is purely a back end detail -
| similar to how most web back ends run in containers and VMs on
| the internet somewhere.
| fmakunbound wrote:
| Unfortunately my first thought is to wonder if they'll scrap it
| after I've invested some time into it.
| lifeplusplus wrote:
| giant privacy concerns
| yomkippur wrote:
| was my immediate thought thinking this is an OS that is running
| inside google's servers?
| AdmiralAsshat wrote:
| I glanced at the list of certified devices. You know what's _not_
| on the list? Google 's own Chromebook Pixel.[0] Which
| coincidentally stopped getting OS updates from Google around
| 2018. [1]
|
| The specs are a little long in the tooth now (especially that
| battery life which was _always_ crap), but I still love the form
| factor of it. I removed the write-protect screw from it a couple
| years back and threw Linux Mint onto it, but it would be real
| nice to have it as an up-to-date Chromebook again.
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromebook_Pixel
|
| [1] https://chromeunboxed.com/news/original-chromebook-pixel-
| upd...
| ocdtrekkie wrote:
| Ironically, the best way to have a supported Chrome browser has
| always been to buy a Windows PC. Google will continue to
| support every single Windows 7 PC until January 15th, 2023, an
| operating system released 13 years ago, in 2009. Most Windows 7
| PCs can also run Windows 10 for free, which punts that out
| probably at least another decade, but with no end of life
| officially yet set.
|
| Meanwhile, Chromebooks have a three year lifecycle, and LOL if
| you spent real money on one.
| wmf wrote:
| Chromebooks are supported for six years (just be sure to get
| the latest model).
| abraham wrote:
| Chromebooks are starting to get eight years.
|
| https://www.androidpolice.com/2020/02/07/chromebooks-will-
| no...
| johnvaluk wrote:
| I just want to download the image and dd it to a flash drive.
| Nobody uses ChromeOS without a Google account, so why add extra
| hoops to jump through?
| bityard wrote:
| Well this link is to a fluffy marketing piece that tells you
| exactly zero about what the product is, why I should care, or how
| it's different from ChromeOS. Must be nice to get paid to write
| lots of words without actually saying anything.
|
| Some links that may be more helpful for the HN audience:
|
| How to install it without handing over your personal info to a
| salescritter:
| https://support.google.com/chromeosflex/answer/11552529
|
| Supported devices:
| https://support.google.com/chromeosflex/answer/11513094 (No
| information on whether it will refuse to install on other devices
| or whether it's more of a "it could work, but you'll be on your
| own" situation. Interestingly, there are Apple products listed.)
|
| Differences between ChromeOS and ChromeOS Flex:
| https://support.google.com/chromeosflex/answer/11542901
|
| Edit: One important difference that pretty much wipes out what a
| lot of us would be interested in: "Google Play and Android apps:
| Chrome OS Flex does not support Android apps or Google Play."
| kayodelycaon wrote:
| I'm pretty sure all the Apple devices listed support Bootcamp.
| So it wouldn't be all that difficult to load another OS on it.
| Macacity wrote:
| From the page about the differences:
|
| > While many non-certified devices might work, Google
| guarantees only those on the list.
| chaostheory wrote:
| > One important difference that pretty much wipes out what a
| lot of us would be interested in: "Google Play and Android
| apps: Chrome OS Flex does not support Android apps or Google
| Play."
|
| If they added that, it would kill Chrome OS's main benefit:
| security.
| solardev wrote:
| Why would it kill security? Chrome OS already supports Play
| and Android apps:
| https://support.google.com/chromebook/answer/7021273?hl=en
| londons_explore wrote:
| Many of ChromeOS's security guarantees evaporate as soon as
| you install or enable the android subsystem.
| mato wrote:
| I beg to differ on this. Went to a presentation by the
| ChromeOS engineers who developed the Android support, at
| LinuxCon 2016(?) in Berlin. Everything shown there
| pointed to an explicit distrust of Android, their
| security posture was essentially 'sandbox the hell out of
| it'.
| binkHN wrote:
| I wonder if this is related to Flex's "supported" devices not
| having verified boot, which is via a chip provided by Google.
| Some detail at https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/p
| latform/ec/+/c....
| adamredwoods wrote:
| I read it as a point-of-sale / service OS for business-level
| security. I don't think its audience is home consumer.
|
| (edit: as others have stated)
| ospray wrote:
| >One important difference that pretty much wipes out what a lot
| of us would be interested in: "Google Play and Android apps:
| Chrome OS Flex does not support Android apps or Google Play."
|
| Looking at the OS I think Flex isn't targeted at consumers but
| at enterprise who want an idiot proof Google docs/chrome
| workspace for employees.
| gravitate wrote:
| How is this different than Cloudready by Neverware?
| hoppyhoppy2 wrote:
| Chrome OS Flex is the new name for Cloudready now that Google
| owns it. The Cloudready download page now directs to the
| installation instructions for Chrome OS Flex. More info about
| the acquisition is at
| https://cloudreadykb.neverware.com/s/article/Neverware-is-no...
| Commodore63 wrote:
| Google bought Neverware.
| nehalem wrote:
| Chrome OS's easy administration is great, but Google Accounts are
| just not an option in many environments. Are there any approaches
| with self-hosted auth/admin/control servers?
| FpUser wrote:
| >"cloud-first"
|
| Sorry, I do not want my personal OS install to be cloud first. I
| want it to be cloud last.
| happyopossum wrote:
| This is really not targeted at personal use
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-07-14 23:01 UTC)