[HN Gopher] Chromebook Plus
___________________________________________________________________
Chromebook Plus
Author : mikece
Score : 174 points
Date : 2023-10-02 13:15 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (blog.google)
(TXT) w3m dump (blog.google)
| mattlondon wrote:
| Not a celeron in sight - hurrah!
|
| This will make the Amazon query a lot easier - no more wading
| through loads of 2 or 3 gen old celeron shite.
|
| Perfect
| luke-stanley wrote:
| I'm disappointed that their embed demo video showed at 360p when
| I have a fibre connection and shows Spanish when I have English
| captions selected, but I'm only a little surprised. You might
| think that when they control both frontends and backends end-to-
| end that they could do it right. Why should people trust a
| product from a "web company" that can't play a video properly?
| lazerpants wrote:
| Interesting product but it's a shame that Chromebooks typically
| just turn into e-waste after 2-3 years due to lack of support
| from Google. They're cheap but terrible for the environment.
| nolist_policy wrote:
| Wrong, Chromebooks receive 10 years of updates from the date of
| release. So check out the release date before buying one.
| heresie-dabord wrote:
| Let's also note that Google now offers ChromeOS Flex[1],
| which is a version of ChromsOS comparable to Debian "old
| stable".
|
| I have ChromeOS Flex running on two older (but excellent)
| Chromebooks used by family. The hardware is good; the
| _chipset_ was obsoleted by Intel. ChromeOS Flex is keeping
| these devices useful without my needing to install Debian.
| (Less work for me.)
|
| [1] _ https://support.google.com/chromeosflex/answer/11542901
| ?hl=e...
| ricktdotorg wrote:
| that is correct, but this is a new policy, announced only in
| mid-September 2023[1]
|
| [1] https://blog.google/outreach-
| initiatives/education/automatic...
| [deleted]
| izacus wrote:
| And the previous policy was 7 years for most models. The
| original poster was still blatantly lying.
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| 7 years from initial launch, not from end of sale, so it
| was quite possible to buy a Chromebook and then have it
| promptly lose support
| insanitybit wrote:
| Support for Chromebooks is excellent. I've had my Chromebook
| for 4 years with zero issues getting patches/ updates.
| EvgeniyZh wrote:
| I kind of expected google to roll out their own ARM processors
| drewda wrote:
| Google has had delays trying to design their own processors
| (for smartphones):
| https://www.theinformation.com/articles/inside-googles-effor...
| pawelduda wrote:
| What is the OS on these? Is it Linux based but very limited? Can
| you install a normal Linux distro on it without hacking an entire
| universe?
| jeffbee wrote:
| It's Linux and not limited in any tangible way.
| pjmlp wrote:
| Only selected models support Linux environment, which is
| anyway executed on its own containarized VM.
|
| Plus 128 GB SSD is a severe limitation for modern day storage
| requirements.
| jeffbee wrote:
| Is there an x86 Chromebook you can buy today that won't run
| it?
| pjmlp wrote:
| The few I see on European shopping malls, being
| discounted until someone picks them up.
|
| Always have Linux support disabled on the settings pane,
| as "this device is not supported" kind of message.
| dmazzoni wrote:
| It's Chrome OS. It runs a Linux kernel but by default it's
| designed to be a very simplified, locked-down OS that runs the
| Chrome browser and Android apps.
|
| It also has a built-in Linux development environment that you
| can enable, which runs in a mini VM. It gives you a full Debian
| system, without any risk of messing up the built-in OS.
|
| If you don't want Chrome OS at all, it's definitely possible to
| just install Linux.
| itsoktocry wrote:
| > _All Chromebook Plus laptops come with the the following
| guaranteed hardware specs:_
|
| I feel like these sorts of guarantees _used_ to be useful, but
| now I 'm not sure.
|
| Outside of my work computer, I buy off-lease ThinkPads for use
| around the home (ie family computers). I think the oldest one
| still in use is a 3rd generation i7. And it's totally fine as a
| daily driver.
|
| On the other side, I bought an off-lease desktop that has a 7th
| gen(?) quad-core 8 thread i7 with 32GB of RAM, and it's not going
| to allow me to run Windows 11. Kind of silly.
| inversetelecine wrote:
| e-waste is a sad thing. Hopefully you can use those computers
| with Linux or similar for long after Microsoft says they're
| garbage.
|
| By e-waste here I mean: Perfectly good working hardware that
| gets an arbitrary EoL solely based on software support.
| kotaKat wrote:
| > All Chromebook Plus laptops come with the the following
| guaranteed hardware specs:
|
| > CPU: Intel Core i3 12th Gen or above, or AMD Ryzen 3 7000
| series or above
|
| > RAM: 8GB+
|
| > Storage: 128GB+
|
| > Webcamera: 1080p+ with Temporal Noise Reduction
|
| > Display: Full HD IPS or better display
|
| It feels a little weird and sad that an i3 is the bar to make
| something "plus" in performance.
| willcipriano wrote:
| 12th gen i3 is more than enough for typical chromebook
| workloads. This thing will fly for every day tasks that you'd
| do on a chromebook or cheap computer (browser, learning to
| code, emulators)
| Jyaif wrote:
| "i3" (or for that matter, "i5", "i7"...) means nothing in terms
| of performance. The generation matters a lot.
|
| For example an i3-12100 is faster than a i7-9700F
|
| https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i3-12100...
| https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-9700F...
| happycube wrote:
| Yup. And pre-8th gen most consumer i5/i7 laptops were
| basically dual-core i3's.
| lm28469 wrote:
| > It feels a little weird and sad that an i3 is the bar to make
| something "plus" in performance
|
| It doesn't seem that far from an apple m1 in benchmark I can
| find for the i3 12100 which is the low tier of i3s
| [deleted]
| agloe_dreams wrote:
| In fairness, a 12th Gen i3 is not massively far from an M1. The
| iX branding has become a little silly lately as a user who is
| not hardcore pushing the system could not possibly tell the
| difference between a 1215u and a 1235u.
| LordDragonfang wrote:
| >a 12th Gen i3 is not massively far from an M1
|
| https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/4746vs4754vs4765vs4104/.
| ..
|
| 1215U (accounting for the overwhelming majority of "12th gen
| i3" laptops) is about 75% of the performance of the lowest-
| tier M1, so I suppose that's in the ballpark.
|
| Performance-per-watt is still night and day, though, with
| both i3 laptop chips ranging from 15W base to 55W turbo, and
| M1 ranging from 7W to <30W.
| agloe_dreams wrote:
| 75% of an M1 is pretty damn good as when the M1 first came
| out it was the fastest laptop single core performance in
| the world.
| zozbot234 wrote:
| Plus most Chromebooks are basically fanless and an i3 will
| more easily avoid running into thermal limits. It's just the
| right choice for this kind of usage.
| mnemoni_c wrote:
| i3 is probably still associated with "can barely hold 3+ apps
| open" era but thats not the case for many years now
| bee_rider wrote:
| That seems more like a memory/hard drive issue.
|
| Ever since the Core 2 product line, intel's CPUs have all
| been fine for stuff like office use (browsing, editing
| files, reading email).
|
| Well other than atoms obviously.
| zxexz wrote:
| I still use a core 2 duo some days. For basic web
| browsing (albeit with a pihole on the network) and
| shelling, it works fine. I think it's the longest running
| machine I have.
|
| A Thinkpad X200 - not wiped in 13 years (since installing
| Arch). Truly a frankenstein's monster of a machine now.
| Hardware mods are so easy on this thing - I switched to
| an SSD probably 10 years ago, some RAM upgrades. Upgraded
| Wi-Fi card a few times (mostly based off mainline kernel
| driver support). Touchpad a couple times, keyboard at
| least the same. Keeping Arch running on this machine
| without wiping everything is the only think keeping my
| Linux skills sharp in the era of company-issued macs.
| thomastjeffery wrote:
| The only downside of a core 2 duo is that they run hot.
| bee_rider wrote:
| That is pretty cool.
|
| I installed to an SSD in an enclosure with the hopes that
| it could become an eternal install that I just bring from
| machine to machine (perhaps DD-ing over to a new drive as
| SSDs advance). So far is has gone fine for like 5 or so
| years, but I haven't really found the need to upgrade
| since then, so it is really just living as a single
| desktop.
|
| Actually, this may have inspired me to try plugging it in
| to another machine tonight just to make sure it hadn't
| gotten too dependent on that hardware. What kind of
| Frankenstein would I be if my monster was constrained to
| a single body?
| thomastjeffery wrote:
| This is the itch that NixOS scratches.
|
| One of these days, it will actually have good UX...
| smoldesu wrote:
| _reads in Pee-wee Herman voice_
| (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEGywhma69E)
|
| This... is NixOS. Immutable root. It isn't glamorous, or
| cool, or kid's stuff. It's the most addictive kind of
| package manager, and it can kill your motivation to work
| on actual packages. What's really bad is, nobody knows
| how much you'll need. Every time you use it, you risk
| your sanity. It isn't worth it.
|
| Look: everybody wants to be cool. But doing it with NixOS
| doesn't just take long, it could be _dead_ long.
|
| (Disclaimer: I love Nix and couldn't leave it if I tried)
| thomastjeffery wrote:
| The insane part is that all it needs is good
| documentation.
|
| Where is it written that steam-run will magically execute
| most binaries without patching them? Certainly[1] not in
| the article that tells you how and why to patch binaries!
|
| [1] I see now that it's linked to at the bottom "See
| also" section. Still awful, IMHO.
| smoldesu wrote:
| > Where is it written that steam-run will magically
| execute most binaries without patching them?
|
| Somewhere in here:
| https://github.com/ValveSoftware/steam-runtime
|
| :p
|
| But I do get what you're saying. Once Flakes are default,
| I hope people start a proper push to clear up
| documentation and streamline the development process. The
| end-result is amazing, and the perfect OS/packaging
| system for my needs. The means of getting there... need a
| lot of work. I'm along for the ride either way.
| kilolima wrote:
| I did this for a few years with one SSD in various
| laptops or desktops as logisitics warranted. Desktop at
| home, 12in Thinkpad while traveling, 14in Thinkpad at
| work. It was easy to swap drives with the Thinkpad drive
| bay that they used to have.
|
| Sadly, once most laptops went over to NVME 2280 pcie
| cards, it got a little too tedious to constantly swap out
| drives any more, and I started worrying about
| accidentally breaking them. Also had some weird issues
| with very poor write speed which I thought was
| overheating necessating a heat sink, but it turns out
| nvme speeds are actually just as slow as anything else
| under real workloads.
| philsnow wrote:
| A quality-of-life upgrade you might be interested in:
| https://www.tindie.com/products/mikepdiy/lenovo-charging-
| por...
|
| I had to replace the charging port in my x220, but I did
| not use this usb-c one, because I didn't know at the time
| that it existed. It's a lengthy job (the power port is
| one of the first parts put into the chassis / last parts
| to come out) but satisfying.
| josefresco wrote:
| I concur. Just swapped an HDD for an m.2 SSD on an older i3
| machine and it hauls ass running Windows 11/gaming. Very
| impressed with the i3.
| qingcharles wrote:
| Wow, that's good to hear. I've been so heavily biased
| against touching any i3 stuff from years of struggling
| with them.
| creshal wrote:
| > It feels a little weird and sad that an i3 is the bar to make
| something "plus" in performance.
|
| Compared to the Celerons found on some Chromebooks, it still
| counts.
|
| ...but there were already plenty of i3 (or even i5, or even R7)
| Chromebooks with 8 or 16 GB RAM on the market, even at the
| price point. I don't know what the news is supposed to be here.
| agloe_dreams wrote:
| The news is that those models with an i3+ and 8GB of ram will
| be branded differently to 'help inform the customer of
| enhanced performance and abilities'. They are trying to shed
| the image of all chromebooks being thought of by the $159 one
| that the school gave their kid.
| dmvdoug wrote:
| Indeed, I'm reading the comments on this post because my
| only experience of Chromebooks is with the cart of them
| that my students use at school. And that experience has
| been such a wonderful one that I literally threw one into
| the trashcan in frustration one day trying to get it to
| work.
| matthewaveryusa wrote:
| The price point of the i3 ~100 dollars, and the fact that most
| applications will not be CPU bound by an i3 are the driving
| factors. The clock speed is one thing, but the instruction sets
| really provide everything that's needed that would otherwise
| peg your cpu (notably quick sync, but also aesni, avx2.) It's a
| testament to bad software (minus games) if the thing you're
| running can't be handled by an i3 with ease.
| FirmwareBurner wrote:
| _> The price point of the i3 ~100 dollars_
|
| Where? The article mentions $399.
| mstkllah wrote:
| They mean the CPU itself, not the whole laptop.
| FirmwareBurner wrote:
| Sorry, from the context I understood "the i3 model"
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| tomjen3 wrote:
| Yeah, not to mention that RAM. You are going to be using this
| likely to run multiple heavy-duty webapps, and Chrome will chew
| RAM in that scenario.
| davidw wrote:
| I've been quite pleasantly surprised by the $250 Chromebook I got
| from Costco nearly a year ago when my Linux machine's hardware
| started failing. I originally got it because it was the quickest
| way to have _something_ for writing emails that wasn 't my phone.
| I ended up quite happy with it though.
|
| It does everything I need outside of heavier duty programming,
| and I don't do so much of that in my spare time these days. You
| can code with it; I set up a for-fun Elixir/Phoenix project that
| I coded mostly on the Chromebook.
|
| I do a lot of writing/communicating and I don't need anything
| more than what this computer provides.
| jvanvleet wrote:
| This is fairly close to my revelation as well. I don't run
| "heavier duty programming" as OP says local anyhow. VSCode runs
| wonderfully, battery lasts forever and I run anything beyond
| trivial in some cloud instance. They are so light, the battery
| lasts so long and they are so cheap mine just bounces around in
| my backpack and is always with me.
| hot_gril wrote:
| Would a local nodejs webserver be easily doable for web dev?
| It's sorta ok on the cloud as long as you can SSH tunnel and
| run the browser locally, but you'd have to either sync code
| changes or use Vim over SSH (not always nice due to latency).
| [deleted]
| polshaw wrote:
| i3/8GB/128GB/1080p IPS + webcam
|
| Essentially they have defined "acceptable" performance across the
| board and given that a name. If I was looking for cheap hardware
| it ticks the boxes just about. "AI" is just a transparent
| marketing attempt at throwing a hot buzzword that most people
| don't understand into the mix.
|
| Not awful but it really could do with a more ambitious tier, a
| lot of manufacturers will meet the requirements as set out (all
| laptops shown have 1080p displays, which is disappointing as many
| chromebooks had better before, 3:2 and 4k displays). We had 16GB
| chromebook options nearly a decade ago (mar 2015).
|
| In fact I think would have been preferable if they made this the
| chromebook minimum requirements and called those with less
| "chromebook lite" ("Go" already served as this I think?); because
| celeron/4GB/64GB/<1080p display/webcam is really pushing things
| for a new device in late 2023 onwards, even as a facebook
| machine.
|
| PS anyone responsible for the chromebook site out there, most of
| the device information pages are 404'ing;
| https://www.google.com/chromebook/discover/pdp-asus-chromebo...
| gunapologist99 wrote:
| This, a marketing term defining a set of specifications, is
| also almost exactly what "Ultrabook" does, for the opposite
| (upper) end of the market:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrabook
|
| Also, a Chromebook is a specifically prepared device with a
| highly customized Linux OS that is designed to interface very
| well with Google's services.
|
| Imagine if your iPhone just stored everything in iCloud and
| didn't need or use much local storage; that's similar to what
| the original vision of a Chromebook was, and it was pretty
| successful at that (just ask a good percentage of school-aged
| children in the United States.)
|
| Obviously, it's not for everyone, but it's probably perfect for
| a lot of potential use cases, and I know some serious
| developers exist who actually spend all their time on some of
| the great Chromebooks that are out there, and they're doing it
| _by choice_.
| danpalmer wrote:
| > PS anyone responsible for the chromebook site out there
|
| Thanks, not responsible but I've already reported one other
| 404'ing link to the author and will pass this on too.
| d3w4s9 wrote:
| Have you actually used a Chromebook, like, spent more than 10
| hours working on them? If not, you should try such a laptop out
| and then come back with your opinion. Even Chromebooks with
| Celeron processors are very usable and beat Windows laptops
| with the same specs by miles.
|
| Also want to point out high-end Chromebooks are expensive and
| likely don't sell very well due to its market. So here it is
| striking a balance. Which is why I won't be buying one of
| these. But other people will.
| s3p wrote:
| Chrome OS is fundamentally limited in what it can do, so I
| understand why no one would want to pay for overpowered
| hardware. Will not be buying one either.
| rnk wrote:
| Are you aware of the crostini subsystem? You can run linux
| apps, you have a shell, it's a vm separated from the rest
| of the system, but everything works like native apps. X
| window apps look normal. You can run anything, firefox,
| emacsx, dev tools.
|
| So now you can run android apps safely and directly, you
| have the ubiquitious chrome browser world running, with a
| bunch of chrome-os things that making it a great
| environment for a lot of things. And you can run linux
| where you are root, you can do basically anything. The one
| limitation was recursive vms, I wonder if they enabled that
| yet.
| Almondsetat wrote:
| You are seriously overestimating how much computing power
| people need and underestimating the capabilities of those
| laptops.
| Theodores wrote:
| My three year old Android budget phone has the same specs,
| more or less.
|
| A laptop has to have more.
| eptcyka wrote:
| It doesn't _have_ to. In fact, your android phone could do
| all the things it does on a daily basis with far less. I 'd
| love to get stats on how many people are not using their
| ultra high resolution displays at the maximum resolution
| and dont even know it, since it's a toggle in the settings
| to enable it.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| Very few people "need" more than a Pentium 4, but there are a
| lot of technically sufficient, practically unusable laptops
| out there. Modern Celerons dance that line of "usable on the
| web now, but who knows what next year brings" quite
| delicately.
|
| My benchmark is "can this play an HD Youtube video full
| screen". Many cheap Windows laptops will struggle at this
| task, but with remote education in the state that it's at,
| that would make life very hard for its users.
|
| I've also seen laptops go from usable to unusable because
| everyone switched codecs and suddenly the hardware
| acceleration didn't work anymore.
|
| I think an i3 with a modest amount of RAM is a good decision
| for a baseline. You can get away with less, but you'll have
| to constantly maintain your laptop to do so, tweaking
| settings as the computer ages and acceleration support dies
| out. For most people, the device will just slow down to a
| crawl.
|
| An i3 and 8GB of RAM are technically overspecced today, but
| in five years time you'll be happy you didn't buy the
| Celeron.
| babypuncher wrote:
| A pentium 4 would leave people without any reasonable means
| to even play modern video codecs
| Almondsetat wrote:
| 11th gen intel processors or higher have AV1 decoding on
| top of all the other hardware accelerated codecs. This
| means that watching multimedia for the foreseeable future
| will be a lag free experience.
| hot_gril wrote:
| Will Google Meet actually utilize that?
| asdajksah2123 wrote:
| A pentium 4 would burn through your battery within minutes
| (not to mention your skin).
|
| Most people absolutely NEED better than a pentium 4.
| 15457345234 wrote:
| > Many cheap Windows laptops will struggle at this task
|
| There's not a single cheap Windows laptop that will even
| vaguely 'struggle' at this task given that the video decode
| is hardware accelerated. Even a RPI can manage that task. I
| have set-top box PCs with dual core Celeron 1037U
| processors which are more than ten years old which don't
| 'struggle' at this task even if you throw them a x265 video
| which their hardware decode ASIC doesn't support.
| thefz wrote:
| 8GB of volatile memory will be a swapfest every time a
| "modern" browser opens.
|
| Try it out in a VM, open 10+ pages from your bookmarks.
| _Algernon_ wrote:
| With 17 tabs open I managed to just about reach 4 gigs in
| use. This is the entire system, not just the browser. In
| fact, if I open Witcher 3 in the background with 10 tabs
| open I just barely get to 8.5 gigs in use.
|
| I don't think your experience is generalizable.
| qingcharles wrote:
| You absolutely have to install a form of ad blocking.
|
| So many web sites now have multiple hundreds of MBs in
| payload when you visit. I agree that 8GB is the bare
| minimum.
|
| It's sad :(
| seized wrote:
| Eh, I have an 8GB Chromebook and I start to notice issues
| at around 100 open tabs, with the Linux VM running,
| Obsidian, and VS Code.
|
| So you're a bit off.
| hot_gril wrote:
| Browser RAM usage is bad but exaggerated. You won't reach
| 8GB doing this. Maybe like 4.
| deadmutex wrote:
| Isn't that what the base M1 Air ships with?
| patrec wrote:
| Apple's computers appear to have working memory
| management, whilst Linux doesn't. Anecdotally, an old
| 8GiB intel mac feels fine, an enormously more powerful 16
| GiB linux laptop with Gnome is basically unusable (but
| runs great once you seriously bump up the RAM).
| viraptor wrote:
| As a dev of multiple languages, distro maintainer,
| general experimenter-with-things and basic ML user -
| Linux with 8GB works perfectly fine here. Sounds like
| something else is happening with your system.
| _Algernon_ wrote:
| Linux doesn't deal well with OOM situations but those
| don't really apply here. 10 tabs in FF brings me to 3.5
| gigs total system use, which is plenty of buffer to avoid
| swapping and OOM freezes.
| jsight wrote:
| I haven't had that issue with Chromebooks in general.
| Memory management seems to be decent.
| mamcx wrote:
| The problem is not what people need but what Js app needs :)
| hedora wrote:
| They don't come with reasonable displays.
|
| My previous experience with low-end intel hardware has been
| universally negative, so I assumed the i3's are terrible.
| Passmark says they are far better than I would have guessed:
|
| M1 performance at 4x the wattage.
|
| https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i3-12100
|
| So, either these get hot and are power-outlet-dependent, or
| they throttle badly.
|
| I wonder if suspend / resume works reliably. It did not for
| the last 4 intel laptops I owned, regardless of OS. That
| included Windows, MacOS and Linux.
|
| Maybe the AMD ones are decent. It's a shame about the screen
| (and bizarre bios) though.
| kcb wrote:
| That's a desktop processor. These will all likely contain u
| series processors.
| jsight wrote:
| My guess is that they throttle a bit. ChromeOS machines
| tend to sleep and resume really well and sacrifice
| performance for battery.
|
| In a world full of low end garbage windows machines, it
| actually makes them a pretty nice little niche. Lots of
| consumers would likely find them much better than a lot of
| the $1-200 more expensive Windows laptops.
| troupo wrote:
| People need Google Meet. Google Meet will melt your CPU on
| most laptops.
|
| Most of Google's apps will, come to think of it.
| hot_gril wrote:
| Meet has the sorta unique problem of using video encoding
| that most modern hardware doesn't accelerate, meaning the
| CPU ends up taking it. Zoom just uses the typical H.264.
| insanitybit wrote:
| The "more performance" is that the new line has newer hardware.
| It's not like the OS is doing something interesting or new - this
| is what you would expect when buying a new laptop versus an old
| laptop.
|
| The OS features seem like fairly basic QOL wins, at best. I don't
| really care about a generative AI background for my video calls
| or whatever.
|
| I guess if I were in the market for a new chromebook I'd say "oh,
| there are some new ones, I'll check those out" but that's kinda
| it.
| creshal wrote:
| Yeah. The hardware is solid, but there's already been
| Chromebooks announced for this (or last) year's lineup with
| equal or better specs.
|
| And the AI features smell a lot like "we literally have no idea
| what AI is good for, we'll just throw it at everything and see
| what sticks".
| jeffbee wrote:
| The AI features seem to just be those that can achieve
| adequate performance on this amount of hardware.
| agloe_dreams wrote:
| This is a marketing/branding thing Google is starting this
| year. It isn't that the hardware is newer, it is that Google is
| trying to draw a line in the sand between the $159 machines and
| the $400 machines. Machines with a less than Core i3/Ryzen 7000
| won't be branded as such, even if they come out next year. They
| want a buyer to walk into a store and see A $159 Chromebook and
| a $400 Chromebook Plus and have and idea that the money goes
| somewhere and gives you 'more'.
| toast0 wrote:
| Seems like it makes it easier to send your low-needs user
| shopping on their own. Hey, get a chromebook+, rather than
| having to go with them or find out where they're shopping and
| give them a list of ok models to buy.
|
| There have always been chromebooks with better or worse
| choices of hardware. This selection is certainly good.
| Personally, I don't shy away from Intel's mainstream core
| Pentium/Celeron either especially in generations where the
| core count is the same as i3. But Intel also sells
| Pentium/Celeron branded atom-series chips that I avoid
| because of past experience with sluggish systems and reports
| that they're harder to get 3rd party firmware for (once
| ChromeOS updates stop happening, I want to be able to put
| something else on these, if the thing still works)
| agloe_dreams wrote:
| The good thing is that Intel will probably help here. The
| 15th gen CPUS are branded as Intel Processor, Intel Core
| Processor, and Intel Core Ultra Processor. In this: Intel
| Processor -> Atom, Pentium, Celeron Core -> i3, i5 Core
| Ultra -> i7, i9
|
| You can just say 'buy the Core CPU, no numbers, no other
| words'
| pjmlp wrote:
| For $400, I get a regular laptop.
| mcoliver wrote:
| I know the tensor power pixelbook was shutdown and I never heard
| the actual reason just a bunch of speculation about
| costs/profitability which is probably true.
|
| It's a shame that there isn't more competition and development in
| the neural asic world to harness the power of llms/generative AI
| on a low power, cheap hardware platform like the pixelbook line.
| For someone that invented the TPU they have done a not so great
| job of ensuring it's commercialization and support. Both on the
| hardware and software side.
|
| The coral edge tpu seemed to be the right high level idea but
| without proper execution.
|
| https://github.com/google-coral/edgetpu/issues/668
| makeitdouble wrote:
| Those look interesting, definitely a step in the right direction.
| It's kinda surprising that Samsung is not part of this lineup
| when they were the spearhead of decently powerful Chromebooks.
| Did Google come with contractual obligations that made it a hard
| sell ? At least Lenovo is in it.
|
| A weirder aspect of this: why North America only ? In particular,
| Lenovo or Acer have no such geographical bias, does it mean we'll
| have a west/east split, with more advanced models only available
| in Asian markets again ?
|
| Edit: FHD was probably the reasons Samsung is not part of this.
| That's an awfully low resolution compared to what they've been
| pushing up until now.
| surfingdino wrote:
| > In Canada and Europe, new Chromebook Plus laptops will be
| available starting on October 9, 2023.
|
| It's not North America only.
| vachina wrote:
| Why can't companies be honest with themselves. Nobody wants
| underpowered x86 laptops running a glorified thin client OS.
| wishfish wrote:
| It's not a thin client. Hasn't been for a long while. Has
| Android and Linux layers which runs apps / programs locally and
| offline. There's also several web apps that can be run offline,
| including Google's own. Certain models have Steam support.
| Chrome OS devices are closer to being general purpose computing
| devices than iPads.
|
| You could run one as a thin client and have a great time with
| it. But it's no longer limited to being thin.
| stetrain wrote:
| My mom actually really likes her Chromebook Pixel and I'm not
| sure what to replace it with now that it isn't supported.
|
| For a lot of users the browser is the whole computer anyway.
| Windows is now full of ads and User Engagement popups.
|
| It's tough to find an Apple-hardware-level device in the
| Chromebook space though. There are a few, but this new
| Chromebook Plus spec seems more like a bare minimum than a
| premium segment.
| ghaff wrote:
| I'm using an old 11" Asus on my current trip but it's out of
| support and I probably won't use it again. With no more
| Google hardware which a liquid spill killed, not sure what
| I'll do for travel going forward. <aybe my 13 yo MacBook Pro
| going forward for a while while I keep a newer MacBook mostly
| at home. Maybe an Air at some point. Probably not worth
| another Chromebook at this point even if it's cheap.
| dylan604 wrote:
| Does your 13 yo MBP have the horrid GPU in it? Can't
| remember the year they started, but my 2011 MBP had one. My
| cheap ass would probably still be using it if it didn't
| freeze every time a GPU request was made, which is
| everything now. Once the browsers wanted GPU acceleration,
| the thing was unusuable
| ghaff wrote:
| I think my old MBP is a 2015. In any case, it works fine
| tor mostly browser-stuff which is all I really use it for
| on my dining room rable day to day. So more like 8 years
| old. My 2010's battery swelled and it wasn't worth fixing
| at that point after I personally did a couple other
| upgrades to it.
| jorvi wrote:
| They could do something like:
|
| Chromebook
|
| Chromebook Plus
|
| Chromebook Ultra
|
| Although I can't really see why you'd need a tricked out
| Chromebook. Maybe when WebGPU / WebAssembly gains widespread
| adoption?
| stetrain wrote:
| I don't really care about having better specs other than a
| decent processor and SSD. iPad-level performance is fine.
| ARM is probably the better choice here.
|
| But having a nice keyboard, trackpad, and high res display
| are good. A lot of Chromebooks really cheap out on the
| display, even the Chromebook Plus spec only calls for
| 1080p.
|
| A nice premium-feeling durable computing product covers a
| lot more than just the raw cpu/gpu speed.
|
| That's really what the original Chromebook Pixel was. Great
| build quality, high res display, good keyboard/trackpad,
| and just enough horsepower to run ChromeOS.
| sofixa wrote:
| The fact that Chromebooks sell seems to indicate that you are
| mistaken.
| creshal wrote:
| ChromeOS is surprisingly solid, between the Android and Linux
| support you can run basically anything short of heavy desktop
| games on it.
|
| For all the Chrome memes, ChromeOS's desktop environment is
| really snappy (even on a passively cooled dualcore throttling
| down to 500MHz) and uses up basically no RAM (once you dig into
| the terminal and top, and realize the task manager reports
| cache as used... sigh).
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| Google is the king of killing unprofitable businesses yet
| Chromebooks live.
| insanitybit wrote:
| Are Chromebooks not profitable? They seem to have done a
| great job with the education sector.
| BanazirGalbasi wrote:
| I think that's their point - if Chromebooks were
| unprofitable, they would have been killed off years ago.
| Instead, they're thriving and being expanded upon.
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| That's my point, they live because they're most likely
| profitable.
| insanitybit wrote:
| Got it - I misunderstood.
| sangeeth96 wrote:
| It could be that I'm the wrong audience for this but I can't help
| but feel this is massively disappointing even for budget options.
| The minimum criteria is no way acceptable for 2023, especially
| given there's a lot of development happening around LLMs that can
| be run on-device. Given the current state of AI, I feel like the
| baseline specs is all the more important for general consumers
| also to play with these and to interface with them.
|
| Then again, Google's (and Microsoft's) vision is all about
| locking access behind their cloud empires.
| nashashmi wrote:
| Anyone remember when Chromebooks were these really fast
| lightweight cheap systems? I used to be a huge fan of Chromebooks
| back then. Not anymore.
|
| Chromebooks went off the deep end when they told you and promised
| you that you would get these computers which could run linux apps
| and android apps. The idea was great: "Run web apps, mobile apps,
| and desktop apps, all on a secure throwaway system." The
| performance of doing that was abysmal on weak laptops. It used
| lots of memory. It started off very slowly when the Linux VM and
| Android VMs booted. And slowed down the browser too. Chromebook
| Co should have followed the Windows/Apple way: release those VMs
| only on certified premium/plus notebooks.
| nolist_policy wrote:
| I don't understand your problem, the Linux VM isn't even
| enabled by default and Android can be disabled with 2 clicks in
| the settings.
| dotBen wrote:
| The key thing here is specifying 8Gb RAM as minimum spec and
| branding it accordingly.
|
| What's hurt Chromebook's reputation is people buying
| discounted/value priced 4Gb ones, struggling with performance and
| concluding it's a terrible platform.
|
| I'm intellectually curious what the experience of web-based video
| editing and Photoshop are like for anyone that actually needs to
| use these tools as part of their repeat workflow.
| skinkestek wrote:
| > What's hurt Chromebook's reputation is people buying
| discounted/value priced 4Gb ones, struggling with performance
| and concluding it's a terrible platform.
|
| Doesn't help that they are made by a company that is now more
| icky than Microsoft and deservedly so IMO.
| notatoad wrote:
| i agree, but i think they should have gone the other way.
| "chromebook plus" makes it sound like a premium product that
| you probably don't need. minimum 8GB of ram should be the
| standard configuration that most people go for. The people
| buying Chromebooks with 4GB of ram aren't going to be put off
| because it doesn't have the "chromebook plus" branding on it.
|
| if they want to help the chromebook's reputation, they should
| be calling this the minimum spec for a chromebook, and putting
| "chromebook lite" or similar branding on the ones that don't
| meet it.
| dotBen wrote:
| They do this with Android... follow certain specs (and other
| requirements) and you can have the Google suite of apps +
| Play Store access. If you don't, you're own your own.
|
| It would be great if they could do that with Chromebooks -
| follow a minimum spec or otherwise <insert punishment>.
| Problem is, there isn't anything to hold back or punish with.
| Which leaves them in a situation where, other than a "made
| for Chromebook" endorsement that can be withheld, there's
| nothing to stop anyone making any laptop of any spec and
| calling it "Chromebook".
| dvh wrote:
| Announced or cancelled? It's 50:50 if you don't put it in title.
| renewiltord wrote:
| Bought a Chromebook to use as a webcam machine for meetings.
| Thing was fucking useless. We just used an old Macbook instead.
| Same price point.
| holografix wrote:
| FHD resolution in 2023 is dead in the water for anything but
| children or gamers on low end devices.
| r00fus wrote:
| Does anyone know how long the support model is for Chromebooks?
| danans wrote:
| 10 years of full OS updates.
|
| https://blog.google/outreach-initiatives/education/automatic...
| clnq wrote:
| If the Chromebook project itself survives so long.
| danans wrote:
| It has been around for 12 years so far. Also, the OS is
| mostly open source, and modulo some security features, can
| be run on non-Chromebook hardware.
|
| So even if Google stops developing it, it can be carried
| forward.
| reacharavindh wrote:
| I'd buy a Chromebook if I can kick Google out of the picture, use
| the hardware to run Linux in full control and still get
| outstanding battery life. Like a poor man's(or smart man's? ) M*
| Macs.
|
| Why dont I just buy regular Windows laptop then? because they pay
| Windows tax and often come with weird power hungry choices
| because windows....
| hot_gril wrote:
| I don't see why it needs to be a Chromebook. You can install
| Linux on a regular Windows laptop, and you're probably not
| really paying extra for Windows preinstalled.
| jeffbee wrote:
| > run Linux in full control and still get outstanding battery
| life.
|
| Why do you believe this would be the outcome? Good battery life
| is an attribute of software, not hardware. The likely outcome
| of slapping Fedora on a Chromebook will be exceedingly poor
| battery life and prolonged frustration as you attempt to figure
| out why it doesn't have energy efficiency parity with ChromeOS.
| hedora wrote:
| This hasn't been my experience with other devices that have
| upstreamed kernel device drivers. Worst case, you run
| powertop (or whatever), and change a few entries in /proc and
| /sys.
|
| This is even true for phones. For instance, stock GrapheneOS
| gets 3-4x the battery life of stock Android on my Pixel 6
| Pro.
|
| (Graphene can't run many things from the android store until
| you install Google Play Services. That then reduces the
| battery life back to stock Android levels, except stuff is
| buggy. I gave up on using it.)
| seanw444 wrote:
| Gave up on using sandboxed Play Services, or GrapheneOS? I
| had Play Services on my last Pixel until I broke it. Got
| another of the same phone and installed GrapheneOS again,
| but didn't install Play nor Services, and honestly F-Droid
| has almost everything I need. The few apps I have from Play
| Store, I get through Aurora Store, and they work without
| Play Services with no complaints.
| Rebelgecko wrote:
| You can buy the Framework Chromebook, although the battery life
| with Fedora is significantly worse than Windows
| incanus77 wrote:
| You absolutely can run full Linux on a Chromebook. I've done it
| with four.
|
| There are great resources here:
|
| https://mrchromebox.tech
|
| I recently used 3x Dell 5190 and 1x Dell 3100 as touch-capable
| displays built into wooden cabinets running a Pygame app to
| communicate with a microcontroller and assorted electronics as
| part of a science festival booth.
|
| https://justinmiller.io/posts/2023/09/18/wave-caught/
|
| The machines are rugged, have great battery life & durable
| screens, enough USB ports, space to run plenty of stuff, and I
| got them for $60 a piece refurbished and guaranteed good screen
| quality.
| pphysch wrote:
| While you need a (burner) gmail to login, you aren't obligated
| to use Google services on a Chromebook. The built-in Linux VM
| scratches the Linux development itch for me.
| [deleted]
| danans wrote:
| A lot of the Chromebook's battery saving features are the
| result of features of ChromeOS, not the Linux kernel, i.e.
| ChromeOS uses ML to predict how fast to charge the battery [1].
| Tight integration between hardware and software has its
| advantages, just like with Apple products.
|
| If you want the same battery life without ChromeOS, you need to
| talk to your preferred Linux distribution vendor and ask them
| to implement similar features.
|
| https://www.theverge.com/2023/9/27/23892651/chromeos-117-sta...
| circuit10 wrote:
| Can you not already do that? You can do enable developer mode
| and from there (in theory) it's possible to use them as regular
| PCs and boot any Linux distro or even Windows. I don't know
| about things like battery life though
| zozbot234 wrote:
| You need to remove a write-protection screw from the logic
| board and replace the firmware, or the Chromebook will prompt
| you to factory-reset it at each boot. Very annoying, makes it
| feel like a useless toy.
| sam1r wrote:
| ^^ very good to know. Thanks for that.
| circuit10 wrote:
| I think that's not the case any more. I didn't have to do
| this
|
| Edit: "In newer devices, we've moved away from the WP
| signal being controlled by a physical screw and to a
| separate chip controlling the WP signal."
| seabrookmx wrote:
| If you run vanilla Linux you don't get the outstanding battery
| life. ChromeOS runs a Google kernel and has all sorts of power
| management special sauce. I tried a few distros on an older
| Chromebook running SeaBIOS and I got maybe 60% of the runtime,
| not unlike Linux vs. Windows on my Framework 13.
| pjmlp wrote:
| Intel Core i3, designed for performance?!?
| turblety wrote:
| Such a shame this isn't ARM, and they stuck with Intel. The
| battery life vs performance is just too good.
| seabrookmx wrote:
| Yeah ChromeOS ARM support is already there, they just need the
| hardware. I dabbled with the Linux container support on my
| Lenovo Duet and on a larger more powerful device it would be
| totally usable. But it seems all the ARM devices are 4GB RAM
| configs with weak SoC's.
| ics wrote:
| Roughly 7-8 years ago I was going to be traveling and didn't have
| a suitable machine to take with me so I went online and found an
| Acer CB3 for $100 new- I think the retail then was double that,
| maybe a little more. I bought two, one for myself and one for my
| mom who was struggling with her aging MacBook both in operation
| and physical heft. I immediately dropped crouton onto mine and
| made it my Linux daily driver for the next year.
|
| It ran xfce, emacs, and firefox like butter, silently, and never
| got warmer than a good lap friend. Battery life for (literally)
| days. It looked good too, with a very simple white case and
| sturdy black keycaps. The trackpad even was _fine_. When my work
| started to involve heavy graphics and multimedia again my daily
| use dropped, mostly replaced by a newer Mac, and was eventually
| relegated to closet storage not to be charged or even turned on
| for at least two years.
|
| Now it's 2023, my mom stopped using hers maybe two years ago in
| favor of a new and even more portable iPad. I have a daughter who
| is 3 approaching 4. She's interested in computers, tries to touch
| type on my desk computer, and is no longer a walking hazard to
| all non-stationary objects. I dug the old Chromebook out of the
| closet, plugged it in, and _the damn thing works_. Once the OS
| connected to the internet it was kind enough to inform me that
| its version of ChromeOS was EOL _and_ and that there were no
| newer supported versions for my hardware. _But it works._ Even
| browsing the web normally has no issues beyond the occasional
| spruce goose 'd site which could probably bring down the heftiest
| workstation anyway. It hasn't been locked out of any usage that I
| can tell but hopefully soon I'll be able to sit down and see to
| removing ChromeOS entirely for a fresh linux install.
|
| There isn't much of a point to all that I've typed out besides
| some personal nostalgia. I tend to agree with all the comments
| which come up about Google's worsening business practices in
| general, surveillance-enabling behaviour, lack of product
| support, etc. While they seem to still be investing in it, I hope
| this product space doesn't eventually die in Google's hands. It's
| disappointing to me that there are not multiple vendors trying to
| offer something similar: a streamlined linux desktop experience
| on decent hardware that isn't fussy and is _cheap_.
| qingcharles wrote:
| That's good to hear it still worked OK.
|
| I recommend Chromebooks to lots of people who have trouble
| using Windows and end up calling me when their storage is
| entirely filled with malware. The issue I had was the really
| short support/EOL for these things. They finally just switched
| it up -- I think they now receive 10 years of support, which is
| even better than Apple's great 7 years. Another reason to use
| them.
| vorpalhex wrote:
| Recently I had to setup a Windows computer and a Macbook.
|
| Both sucked. It was miserable. Lots of dialog after dialog
| after dialog. Disabling crap just to get like functional local
| file storage. Turning off news and stocks and notifications
| galore.
|
| Linux is fine in this regard as a poweruser but has it's own
| rough edges. I think for the moment it is actually ahead
| despite occasionally having to pop into terminal for the odd
| task.
|
| I just can't believe how horrible using a computer is for a
| non-poweruser. It is abusive. No wonder so many people hate
| computers when this is the experience they have.
| ghaff wrote:
| >I just can't believe how horrible using a computer is for a
| non-poweruser.
|
| I think it's more that computers have filesystems and a ton
| of other stuff--unrelated to crapware in many cases--that a
| lot of people don't understand, don't want to understand, and
| that a lot of people reading this are probably somewhat
| contemptuous of them not understanding. So they use phones
| that don't require them to understand any of that stuff and
| ask family/friends to help them when they get out of their
| very narrow comfort zone for some reason.
| viraptor wrote:
| > don't understand, don't want to understand
|
| They're a threshold for when things are complicated and not
| wanting to understand something is fair. But as an adult,
| you very likely have a home with an address, which contains
| a room with a common name, which contains a folder, which
| contains your documents (birth certificate or something
| similar). That means you already understand filesystems. As
| a non-poweruser that's all there is to it - beyond that is
| just being uncomfortable with something you haven't
| encountered.
| freedomben wrote:
| I've had a similar experience. Also that buying replacement
| power cables is easy and pretty cheap.
|
| On Black Friday a few years ago there was an HP Chromebook with
| touch screen and 8 GB of RAM on sale for a really good price,
| enough so that I temporarily lifted my absolute ban on HP
| products to buy. It was my wife's beloved computer for many
| years until a kid threw it in anger and shattered the screen
| D-:
| [deleted]
| rakoo wrote:
| > There isn't much of a point to all that I've typed out
| besides some personal nostalgia.
|
| There is a very real point: as a society, we don't really need
| new computers. Some people want new ones, because games, video
| editing, the usual suspects, but for a large majority of us,
| including developers, we don't actually _need_ more. Computers
| from ~5 years ago are enough. Computers with processing power
| of ~5 years ago are enough.
|
| If that aspect could be more widely spread, maybe we wouldn't
| have such a frenzy over always new stuff and be content with
| the old, and have an actual, real impact on climate change, on
| exploited countries and minors, on pollution. We need to be
| developing software towards _old_ computers, not _new_
| computers. The older the better.
| bcrosby95 wrote:
| No no, _consume!_ Think of the shareholders!
| prpl wrote:
| there's a name for that: consumer durable goods. Computers
| (and even phones) are just transitioning into that category.
| freeAgent wrote:
| Unfortunately, part of the problem people run into is
| software/security updates. Microsoft cut off a bunch of PCs
| from circa 2017 with Windows 11 (though Win10 is still
| getting updates for now). Google has cut off security patches
| for machines that were still sold new just a few years ago
| (and through some vendors...still sold "new" today!). Apple
| also cuts off updates for sufficiently old PCs. Basically,
| unless the average person figures out how to install Linux,
| and it suits their needs, their computers still have a finite
| shelf life due to software support.
| tamiral wrote:
| older family members use Chromebooks and it's amazing. All they
| need it for is social media, bank stuff, browsing news sites.
| I've bought one 6 years ago and mom has never looked back. We
| even set it up via hdmi to a tv and watch youtube videos with
| zero issues.
| bookofjoe wrote:
| My seven year old grandson was given a new Chromebook on his
| first day of second grade in Upper St. Clair, Pa., along with
| each of his classmates. It stopped working after two weeks
| and he came home the next day with a new one.
| fragmede wrote:
| The quality of life feature that's missing is a finger print
| sensor.
| losvedir wrote:
| Eight new laptops from Acer, ASUS, HP and Lenovo.
|
| I feel like pulled off right, this "shared ecosystem" approach
| across manufacturers can be very strong, and from a competition
| perspective is probably pretty healthy. That said, the
| "everything under one roof" pull of the Apple world is pretty
| strong.
|
| I've been pretty happy with my Google hardware so far (Nexus and
| then Pixel phones, Nest minis, pixel buds), but now that I'm
| interested in a smart watch, I'm running into a bit of a wall. I
| _want_ to want a Pixel watch, but it sounds like the integration
| with the Pixel phone is not all that great, and for a lot of
| fitness tracking you also need a separate FitBit account, and
| have to use a separate FitBit app (!) and it doesn 't integrate
| super well with all my existing data in Google's own Google Fit
| app that I've got.
|
| I know it's not fair to compare these ~$400 laptops with Apple's
| laptops, but it just seems like Apple is better positioned to
| pull off seamless integration between laptops, phones, watches,
| earbuds, etc, when they're not working at cross purposes with a
| dozen other manufacturers.
|
| Then again, some people probably actively don't _want_ all this
| integration? Maybe just a simple, standalone, cheap laptop is
| ideal for them, and that 's who this is targeting.
| talkingtab wrote:
| "I've been pretty happy with my Google hardware so far".
|
| I have a pixel phone. The hardware is impressive. The software
| is total junk. Everything is designed for to make you into an
| obsessive-compulsive phone junky. How many stupid alerts and
| notifications do I need per second. How many ads must I watch?
| I went back to an iphone despite feeling like the pixel was
| actually a really good piece of hardware. And an iPhone is not
| that much better any more.
| [deleted]
| technothrasher wrote:
| I switched to an iPhone about a year ago, and got annoyed at
| the pushy things iOS was doing that Android wasn't. So I
| switched back to Android recently, only to find that many of
| the annoying iOS things had now been adopted by Google.
| Great, thanks. I'll stick with Android for the near future
| though, as with a custom rooted ROM I can at least remove a
| lot of 'unremovable' stuff, even if I now have to play
| annoying cat and mouse games with apps trying to detect my
| rooted device and disable themselves.
| JohnBooty wrote:
| Everything is designed for to make you into an
| obsessive-compulsive phone junky. [...] And an
| iPhone is not that much better any more.
|
| Regardless of OS, this seems like it's almost entirely down
| to the apps you use and the notification settings you pick.
| No? I rarely use Android so I may just be unfamiliar.
| hot_gril wrote:
| The defaults are different. I was surprised to find that
| Android apps didn't have to ask to send notifications,
| rather you had to turn them off, but this was changed in
| Android 13 near the end of 2022.
| criddell wrote:
| Do you know of all Chromebooks have cellular modems? It seems
| like it would be a basic requirement but the article doesn't
| mention anything.
| jsnell wrote:
| Why would it be a basic requirement? Cellular modems in
| laptop are an incredibly niche feature. They're only included
| in a handful of top-end business laptops and (in my
| experience) nobody even uses them when present.
| asdajksah2123 wrote:
| Further to actually use cellular modems you likely need to
| pay an additional fee every month to a cellphone carrier.
|
| That requirement probably makes the already tiny subset of
| people who could use a cellular modem even smaller.
| criddell wrote:
| There is a fee, but typically it's a data-only plan and
| isn't super expensive. I'm on T-Mobile and it's $20 for
| unlimited data. You can pay even less for limited data.
| lozenge wrote:
| $20/month is absolutely expensive if your laptop is
| hardly ever going to leave your home wi-fi (like most
| laptops)
| umeshunni wrote:
| wouldn't it be easier / cheaper to just tether?
| criddell wrote:
| Cheaper, probably. Not easier though.
|
| After thinking about it a bit more, Chromebooks biggest
| users seem to be schools and they don't want 5G modems
| for everybody. I would guess they would want some for
| kids who don't have decent home internet. It makes sense
| for the default to be Wi-Fi only.
| makeitdouble wrote:
| I wonder how many laptops have cellular options right now.
| From a cursory look they're awfully niche (mostly business
| BTO models).
|
| My best guess would be that the including the cellular chip
| and paying whoever (Qualcomm ?) holds the licensing fees,
| doing the qualification etc. is just that prohibitive.
|
| PS:Qualcomm's fees based on the total product price sure
| won't help: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-qualcomm-
| licensing-idUSKB...
| [deleted]
| hot_gril wrote:
| The generic solutions are cheaper and more flexible, while the
| special all-included one is more user-friendly and can be
| better-optimized. It's similar with other products.
| MatthiasPortzel wrote:
| > Laptop shopping is harder than it should be. You can easily
| get lost in a sea of numbers and technical specs,
|
| > We're launching eight new laptops
|
| This reads like satire.
| danans wrote:
| > when they're not working at cross purposes with a dozen other
| manufacturers.
|
| Manufacturers of Chromebooks mostly only deal with the outer
| shell and branding of the device.
|
| The computing hardware is controlled by Google, who set strict
| guidelines for compatibility. The ChromeOS software is of
| course completely controlled by Google. This announcement
| sounds like it's basically creating a new brand around an even
| more restrictive set of higher-performance hardware
| requirements.
| freedomben wrote:
| I have the pixel watch and I don't use the Fitbit stuff. Google
| fit is now first class on it, and it is a super well thought
| out and polished implementation. I'm really pleased with it
| thomastjeffery wrote:
| You can get a 16" 2.5K 120hz 12th-gen i3 Chromebook from 2022
| for $430[1].
|
| Are any of these "Chromebook Plus" models better? I don't think
| so.
|
| [1] https://www.walmart.com/ip/Lenovo-Ideapad-5i-Gaming-
| Chromebo...
| nolist_policy wrote:
| That's because this one _is_ a Chromebook Plus.
|
| > In addition to new Chromebook Plus devices, some existing
| Chromebooks will qualify for an OS update to include the
| enhanced features found on Chromebook Plus devices in the
| coming weeks.
|
| > See here for details on eligible devices.[1]
|
| [1] https://support.google.com/chromebook/answer/14128000?vis
| it_...
| rnk wrote:
| thanks. I'm glad the framework chromebook is listed.
| thomastjeffery wrote:
| Fair enough. Still a bit sneaky with the marketing, but
| that's par for the course.
|
| I'm just over here wishing the "enhanced features" included
| coreboot support...
| nolist_policy wrote:
| It does. This is a Alder Lake device so it's either a
| Brya or Nissa mainboard. Sourcecode is here[1].
|
| [1] https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/third_pa
| rty/cor...
| thomastjeffery wrote:
| I stand corrected!
|
| Is there a more discoverable way to find this info?
| haunter wrote:
| >pulled off right, this "shared ecosystem" approach across
| manufacturers can be very strong, and from a competition
| perspective is probably pretty healthy.
|
| I wish the Steam Machines didn't fail, they were pretty much
| this
| https://web.archive.org/web/20160303080731/https://store.ste...
|
| One can say the Steam Deck is a better successor but I think
| mostly because of Proton itself became mature through the years
| (compared to 2016)
| dgunay wrote:
| My bold prediction is that as consoles become more and more
| architecturally similar to home computers and MS & Sony
| continue to port more titles to PC, we will eventually see a
| unification of sorts where games are by default available on
| PC, with consoles serving as essentially a consistent and
| well-tested PC configuration for people who don't want to
| futz around with PC building. That's the role Steam Machines
| were supposed to play. They were a little too early IMO but
| the concept seems solid.
| hot_gril wrote:
| Game companies don't just want consistent and well-tested,
| they often want to also prevent user tampering. Consoles +
| iPhone security have long put extra effort into that, and
| streaming is looking like a viable replacement. Not a good
| solution for people extremely into video games, but they've
| got gaming PCs anyway.
| OJFord wrote:
| And they want walled garden, subscription fee for network
| access, etc.
| nolist_policy wrote:
| There is Steam for ChromeOS in the Beta channel right now.
| It's working surprisingly well, running inside a VM with
| virgl acceleration.
|
| I could imagine a gaming Chromebox or Chromebook with
| dedicated graphics in the future.
| glenstein wrote:
| What could be a wonderful asset would be a streaming
| service for games. Google would just have to make a
| credible, consistent commitment to such a service, commit
| to it through its initial wilderness period and not shut it
| down on a reflex, so customers would have the confidence
| that their time learning the platform wouldn't be wasted.
|
| Then, with something like this launch event for 2x faster
| Chromebooks, it could emerge as a mature offering whose
| moment as come. All it would take is discipline not to
| instantly give up and a willingness to have a vision
| extending beyond quarter-at-a-time release cycles.
| jollyjerry wrote:
| I also love Apple's OS and first-party apps' seamless
| integration. However, Google has a better story with cloud apps
| in gsuite. My Mac is overkill hardware for running a browser,
| but I like the build quality.
| happymellon wrote:
| > However, Google has a better story with cloud apps in
| gsuite.
|
| Except that they just set a death date for my go to
| whiteboarding app.
|
| It was great to be able to have a dead simple paintbrush
| level drawing app that was shared in the browser, and I could
| sketch out on my tablet without dealing with drawing "boxes"
| and text labels to get an idea across.
| mrbonner wrote:
| I bought a Lenovo Flex (I think that's what it is called) from
| the onset of the pandemic for my kid. It is a convertible tablet.
| It works perfectly except now it is slow. Is there any suggestion
| for a replacement with similar tablet but a bit beefy?
| fulafel wrote:
| Interesting that there aren't any ARM based systems that made the
| performance cut.
| dz0ny wrote:
| The classic arm for ChromeOS is terrible, mostly because they
| cheaped out on CPU extensions and storage, and memory
| bandwidth. They mostly repurposed those cheap Android tablet
| designs that die after a year.
| riku_iki wrote:
| its tradeoff for performance (acceptable for web browsing) vs
| battery life.
| cowmix wrote:
| I use the Lenovo IdeaPad Duet 5 Chromebook (picked it up for
| $279 from Best Buy) and it is pretty amazing. OLED screen,
| ARM performance that's pretty good, a tablet that comes with
| a keyboard.
|
| It's a great Chromebook for on the go stuff.
| bee_rider wrote:
| It is especially funny because the pitch seems pretty similar
| to the Ultrabook pitch (thin and lights, but the branding
| guarantees some performance hurdle was passed--started more or
| less at the same time as the original Chromebook).
|
| ChromeOS was of course notable as a laptop OS on both ARM and
| x86.
|
| I suspect the whole Ultrabook thing kinda fizzled out as it
| became apparent that ARM was not getting much traction in
| laptops (other than Apple, but then, they are always an
| outlier).
| chaostheory wrote:
| The existence of ChromeOS Flex dulls the excitement here for me,
| but this is good for people who can't install ChromeOS on their
| (old) laptops.
| josefresco wrote:
| What constitutes a "Plus" Chromebooks is very easily defined now,
| but what about in 6-12 months? Will the Plus moniker evolve
| continuously or is this a one-time promotion to sell this
| hardware generation?
| aborsy wrote:
| It's worth mentioning that ChromeOS is one of the most secure
| operating systems.
| Atotalnoob wrote:
| Because it's used less...
| mark_l_watson wrote:
| Chromebooks are good products for people who need to be on a
| budget. With Linux container support, a Chromebook can do
| anything, but not the best for software development.
| nolist_policy wrote:
| Chromebooks can absolutely be used for serious coding, see my
| comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37396727
| pphysch wrote:
| Yeah, it took me five minutes to set up a dev environment
| with Postgres and other containerized services. No
| performance issues. Full stack web development is a big chunk
| of the market...
|
| Sure, maybe AAA gamedev isn't gonna work on a Chromebook.
| pkaye wrote:
| How does this work? Is there a bash shell and containers
| available within a Chromebook or did you install it
| yourself?
| danans wrote:
| https://chromeos.dev/en/linux
| mattzito wrote:
| I got my wife a chromebook a few years ago to replace her mbp
| that died unexpectedly right when she needed a laptop. I
| figured she would use it for a while and then we would get her
| a new Mac and hand-down the chromebook to one of the kids.
|
| Almost five years later, though, she's still using it and loves
| it. She uses it for everything, doesn't play games or need to
| run heavy compute locally, and now that Docs and Sheets can
| open Office documents natively (as opposed to conversion, which
| it used to do), there's really nothing she needs beyond that.
|
| Recently I mentioned that the new Macs that had come out had a
| great battery life/performance profile and did she want to
| switch back - and she had little interest in it. They're pretty
| capable machines for general purpose use.
|
| That's anecdata, of course, but if I think back to setting my
| grandmother up with a mac mini many years ago, if I were doing
| that today I would absolutely get her a chromebook for the
| security and data reliability alone.
| hotnfresh wrote:
| Careful with giving Chromebooks to the elderly. As someone
| used to macs, I found my dad's Chromebook (given to him by
| one of my siblings) to have astonishingly limited and poorly-
| functioning accessibility settings.
|
| IDK maybe they've gotten better, but at least 2-3 years ago
| they were unimpressive on that front, certainly.
| paxys wrote:
| A $300 Chromebook is more than enough for 90%+ of the
| population, but it's really the marketing that gets them to
| spend 5-10x as much on fancier hardware. No one needs an M2
| Max chip to browse Facebook/Reddit and write Google docs.
| mattzito wrote:
| Self-replying because I did think of something that is an
| annoyance, which is the lack of iMessage/Messages support on
| the chromebook. We have iphones, so we can still communicate
| with each other, but I get my messages on my mac laptop,
| which helps me see high priority stuff while working, and she
| doesn't. Annoyance, not a deal-breaker.
| seabrookmx wrote:
| Chromebooks do have that integration with the Google
| Messages app on Android though, unsurprisingly.
|
| +1 on it being a really nice quality of life feature.
| olddustytrail wrote:
| And for people who just want to use email and web. My father-
| in-law is not computer literate at all and had continual issues
| with his Windows laptop, so I ended up being his regular IT
| support. For his birthday we got him a Chromebook and I haven't
| had a single support call from him since.
| eli wrote:
| They make great corporate devices, depending on the needs of
| your users. Great security with very minimal configuration,
| which is really not the case for most of the competition.
| Affric wrote:
| Introduction failed at one of my workplaces for a three big
| reasons (in the order they arose during the small scale
| trial):
|
| 1. Incompatibility with our stack for our front line staff.
|
| 2. No Excel which was preferred internally and externally
|
| 3. No Word which to this day is used by many customers and
| external vendors
|
| Now the first one may well not be an issue if one were
| setting up a new company today but the third is not an issue
| now with Google Docs being able to parse docx well but at the
| time it caused shenanigans. We ended up migrating all staff
| to google docs while on windows and giving Microsoft office
| licences to particular users who could justify it from a
| technical perspective (rather than an "i don't want to learn
| new tech" perspective).
|
| Excel, though, is still untouchable at a certain level.
| Demonstrations of macros that took moments in excel taking
| eternities in sheets. Poor data wrangling capabilities.
| Obviously some features simply not existing at all.
|
| I guess the company saved millions over some period by
| switching to mostly being a google shop but native Excel
| would be worth its weight in gold to Microsoft.
| hospitalJail wrote:
| Hows the stability/userability?
|
| After running Fedora, I've noticed ~100% of my bugs come from
| using Nividia. I imagine going directly to CPU makes running
| linux easy?
|
| My Raspi4 had basically no problems once I installed it on the
| final TV I'd be using main.
| creshal wrote:
| Stability is solid, but so is Linux's usually. Even the
| unholy trinity of AMD iGPU + Nvidia Optimus dGPU + X11 hasn't
| caused any driver issues yet for me.
|
| Usability, YMMV. Out of the box it's okay-ish, but it's hard
| to improve it. Screenshotting/desktop recording, e.g.: The
| included tool only does the bare minimum (can't even draw
| arrows on screenshots), and there's almost no ChromeOS native
| third-party software to pick up the slack. In many other
| cases, Android apps or Linux desktop applications can be
| substituted, but screen sharing is just too borked for
| screenshotting/recording to work reliably. Meanwhile, Chrome
| browser addons are limited to Chrome tabs.
| creshal wrote:
| It runs git, vim (or emacs, if you're feeling frisky) and
| docker, that covers a lot of software dev use cases.
| sowbug wrote:
| VSCode, too.
| anoncow wrote:
| Is the Photoshop via chrome or is this a native application?
| dagmx wrote:
| Via Chrome. They demoed it a while ago, and I can't find any
| changes to that since. Basically streaming from a cloud
| instance.
| EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK wrote:
| If I need a thin client computer, i.e. a good 4k screen, ~1kg
| weight and ability to run Remote Desktop, performance and storage
| don't matter, what would be the best option?
| denysonique wrote:
| "~1kg weight" - LG Gram comes to mind
| BoorishBears wrote:
| M1 Mackbook Air
| freedomben wrote:
| I'm a big fan of Chromebooks, but I do find myself wondering at
| the direction they are heading. I hope they stand by traditional
| Googley values of open and interactive, rather than a more Apple
| approach of locking things down.
|
| I'm really, amazingly happy that they added Linux support. Are
| the kernel contributions and other things that make the
| Chromebook battery life so good being upstreamed? Are they super
| specific to Chromebook hardware or is that something that
| benefits all Linux users?
|
| With all the AI stuff being added "directly to ChromeOS", is the
| OS getting more locked down and less owner-hackable? If one
| enables dev mode, do you lose access to features?
| ecmascript wrote:
| I think the idea of Chromebooks are great, unfortunately it is
| made by the dystopian surveillance company Google and therefore
| cannot be trusted. I don't really want AI capabilities that sends
| my data back to the mothership embedded in my operating system
| either.
|
| Otherwise it would be a great laptop experience but I would never
| buy one for me or my family and I strongly advice people not to
| buy one either.
|
| The sad part is that people do not realize what data companies
| like Google holds on them and many would be freaked out if they
| knew.
| hospitalJail wrote:
| >I don't really want AI capabilities that sends my data back to
| the mothership embedded in my operating system either.
|
| Okay but does this actually happen ever?
|
| If you are using Google or Google maps and they mention there
| is a 711, yeah your location is known.
|
| However, I've been avoiding google search since chatgpt, and
| outside of a few programming searches, google has no idea what
| I'm doing. Or at least their ads aren't particularly targeted
| outside the few programming searches. Haven't really been
| enticed by the 'learn python' ads in the screen I never visit.
|
| Can't we also look at the source code? I have been happy with
| my degoogled products that are open source. That can be
| trusted. Black boxes cannot be trusted.
| ocdtrekkie wrote:
| Chrome and Chromebook are proprietary, closed source
| products, built on _top_ of open source code. They are black
| boxes. Black boxes Google just added literal spyware to this
| past month.
|
| The whole "Google platforms are open source" myth is one of
| the most ridiculous lies they've managed to sell people on.
| nolist_policy wrote:
| If you're okay with Windows 11 you gotta be okay with ChromeOS
| too.
|
| And you don't have to use any of the Google services, you can
| install Libreoffice, Thunderbird, etc. just fine in the
| Crostini Linux environment.
| freeAgent wrote:
| There are options beyond Chrome OS and Windows, and I'd say
| that almost all of them offer better privacy protections.
| tapoxi wrote:
| I think most people know but don't care. Their search history,
| photos, and email are knowingly stored by Google, but it
| doesn't impact them.
|
| You would need a rogue employee or a massive breach to make
| people care, I think.
| scarmig wrote:
| Fedora Silverblue is in some ways comparable. Unfortunately it
| uses Flatpaks.
|
| In the end, the architecture and security (against non-Google
| adversaries) of ChromeOS trumps everything else for my personal
| use. And when maintaining things for nontechnical family,
| ChromeOS eliminates large classes of problems that everything
| else has.
| a1o wrote:
| What is the alternative to flatpaks for something like
| silverblue?
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| I mean, you could probably put together something that used
| snaps instead.
| scarmig wrote:
| I don't know of anything. I think you could create
| something pretty solid using Nix, but no one (afaik) has
| put the effort into making a simple, user friendly OS built
| on it.
| weatherlight wrote:
| ..or go a step further and just use nixOS :)
| xd1936 wrote:
| What don't you like about Flatpaks?
| devinprater wrote:
| Meh, still the same software. Still the same screen reader that's
| not gotten a substantial update in like 3 or so years, and even
| on my Acer Spin 713 with 16 GB RAM, even Emacs, Emacspeak, and
| IBM TTS under Crostini is more responsive than local Google TTS
| models. So nah I'm just not the target audience. At least Orca
| can run properly on Crostini, unlike WSL, and Linux windows don't
| just... vanish when plugging in my dock connected to a monitor
| and Ethernet. But not even Crostini makes me want to pull out the
| Chromebook, ever. I update the thing, look in ChromeVox options
| and what's new page to see if anything has improved, and then put
| it away. It's a great piece of hardware, a high end model, just
| with very lackluster accessibility.
| [deleted]
| YmFzZTY0 wrote:
| Does anyone here have one of these framework chromebooks
| https://frame.work/products/laptop-chromebook-12-gen-intel?
| Haven't seen many impressions on it so I've been hesitant to buy
| one. But it looks pretty good spec wise.
| beretguy wrote:
| Framework and chromeos feel like a very strange combination to
| me.
| eloisant wrote:
| You can upgrade and repair your laptop!
|
| But after a few years you can no longer update your web
| browser.
| freedomben wrote:
| Hard disagree from me. I've had a lot of Chromebooks and 3
| frameworks, and it's a terrific match IMHO. I do wish you
| could switch back and forth between Linux and Chromebook
| without replacing the main board, but even that is a great
| fit. As needs change, you have options. Chromebook is great
| for many users especially now that it runs Linux apps, and
| can even be a very capable dev machine.
| cbsmith wrote:
| You need to swap out the mainboard to install Linux?
| danans wrote:
| It's the other way around. If you want ChromeOS (in
| particular with its Verified Boot system for the OS image
| [1]), you need special hardware that comes with
| Chromebooks, including the Framework Chromebook. That has
| nothing to do with the ability to run Linux, though.
|
| If you don't care about Verified Boot, you can install
| ChromeOS-Flex on a Framework Linux device (https://www.re
| ddit.com/r/framework/comments/um0mk6/chromeos_...)
|
| On the other hand, installing Linux on Chromebook
| hardware is straightforward.
|
| The options are:
|
| 1. Use the Debian Linux VM (Crostini) that is already
| present on Chromebooks:
|
| https://chromeos.dev/en/linux
|
| All you do is click on a few buttons in the settings.
| This approach preserves Verified Boot.
|
| If you want to replace ChromeOS on a Chromebook with a
| Linux distro, you can use Crouton:
| https://github.com/dnschneid/crouton
|
| This approach removes verified boot.
|
| 1. https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/chromiumos-
| design-docs/...
| cbsmith wrote:
| Okay, that's what i thought.
| seanw444 wrote:
| > I do wish you could switch back and forth between Linux
| and Chromebook without replacing the main board
|
| Crouton? It won't have full capabilities being in a chroot,
| but I remember it being more than adequate for almost
| everything I needed it for. 5 years ago.
| tapoxi wrote:
| Imagine all the schools with Chromebooks deployed, suddenly
| there's an option for their own IT staff to easily replace
| broken parts instead of buying new Chromebooks or sending
| them elsewhere to repair. Decent market for that.
| danans wrote:
| This has existed for a while:
|
| https://edu.google.com/chromebooks/chromebook-repairability
|
| Some school districts have summer internship programs for
| students interested in learning how to do the repairs.
|
| https://www.pcmag.com/news/google-encourages-kids-to-
| repair-...
| moondev wrote:
| I have one. 64GB of memory and 2TB NVME. Pretty cool to be able
| to run android apps, crostini (lxd) and KVM machines (with
| nested virt) all at the same time.
| YmFzZTY0 wrote:
| Yeah thats why it's so appealing. Neat, what kind of battery
| life do you get? And how are temps/thermals?
| hedora wrote:
| Can you get it with a standard bios (or flash one)?
|
| I have no interest in Chrome OS, but I'd like a framework
| laptop that reliably runs Linux out of the box without
| setting the kernel taint bit.
| greggsy wrote:
| None of those capabilities are specific to the framework
| laptop though? Or are you referring to the high ram enabling
| multiple VMs?
| rsync wrote:
| Can you elaborate ?
|
| Can I run _any android app_ as if it were running on a phone
| ?
|
| I am specifically thinking of running the 'lyft' app and
| booking a car ... is that possible ?
| HALtheWise wrote:
| Minor side note, but you might be interested to know that
| https://ride.lyft.com/ exists. I was surprised and happy
| when I learned that.
| ewoodrich wrote:
| You can run most Android apps, but the developer can opt
| out of it showing as compatible for Chromebooks on the Play
| Store I believe. You can also sideload APKs.
|
| Some apps can be resized well, others are stuck in their
| default size and orientation. Compatibility is pretty
| mature and solid at this point. They can also be pinned and
| float which is kinda cool.
|
| I am able to download and sign in to Lyft app on my
| Chromebook but didn't try to book a ride with it.
| sirjaz wrote:
| This is google trying to get people more interested in
| Chromebooks and ChromeOS. ChromeOS device sales have dropped
| faster and farther than any other compute device in the past
| year.
| prepend wrote:
| [flagged]
| squarefoot wrote:
| Does anyone know if the plus models are restricted to ChromeOS
| only like the older models and, if that's the case, if they can
| be unlocked like most of the older ones?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-10-02 23:01 UTC)