Why Google Chrome OS Is Not Such A Good Thing.
November 23, 2009
I have been reading all these positive blogs about the future of the cloud, the cloud is where it is at, the cloud, the cloud, the cloud. Please don’t drink the kool-aid folks. I am going to tell you why the cloud, for all its good, has the potential to be so wrong, especially in the case of Google’s Chrome OS if this becomes mainstream.
So Why Do You Hate The Cloud?
First let me say, I appreciate the benefits of the cloud for many things. It has many pluses, especially with regards to server administration and simple programs with limited functionality. However, the cloud should be something that is kept in the spaces where it is best serving users needs. To make an OS completely based on web apps and cloud based applications should be scary to users, in my opinion, because it takes away your freedom on your OWN computer.
When options are taken away, when your computer is merely a slave to the web (ie corporate America) Is that what you want for your web life? To be permanently fixed to the policies of web application companies such as Microsoft? To never own your apps? To never be able to download to your own computer? To have all your data live on the web with all its security issues?
This post is going to address, why, an all cloud OS is simply bad for users and for individuals in general. I know it is considered blasphemy to question the cloud, but if we do not now, the web as we know it will be forever changed and in my opinion in a very bad way.
Video Credit: Search Engine Land’s YouTube Channel.
So What Are The Issues at Hand?
Own versus Rent.
Currently, most of my applications (except for Adobe), cost me under $100. Once these apps are paid for, they are mine to keep for as long as I want. My Homesite alone paid for itself 5 years ago. Now imagine, you are on an OS that allows for no computer based applications. How do you access your apps? You utilize them online, on the web, only!
So guess what this is called in the offline world? It is called RENTING.
Now you rent your apps from a company such as Google or Microsoft. How long do you think you will be getting these web-based apps for free? In our capitalistic economy it is a fool’s bet to believe that you will be able to rely on the benevolence of software companies to provide you your apps for nominal costs.
But for argument’s sake, let’s say companies are benevolent and charge you only a few dollars per month, how quickly will this add up on your monthly bill? Do you really want to be paying indefinitely for apps that you owned for less than $100? Let’s take my Homesite into account. At a modest iPhone style charge of $4.99 a month, my $69 Homesite would now have cost me $359.28. Who do you think that benefits?
Relying on the Benevolence of Software Companies.
So let’s take it one step further. While we know Google will probably not charge for their apps, what happens when you hit hard times and cannot pay that monthly charge to Microsoft? Do you have access to these apps during that time? My current paid for cloud apps will turn off if I do not pay. Do you want to trust that you will never have financially difficult times, where you have to decide between food and your livelihood? I think this should be a question all people considering an all web-based app OS should be thinking hard about.
Stifling Innovation.
Let’s face it. Most web innovation did not come from corporations, but a few individuals sitting down with their software creating things. Facebook, Twitter, even the first OS all came from very intelligent people with very little money working with code in their garage or dorm rooms. So what happens to this innovation when applications become impossible to download? Do you think Twitter really would have taken off if Tweetdeck and Seesmic did not exist? What about the free software many of these innovators use to create their applications? And what happens to the developers who create them? Will that free application you love so much be available on the cloud? Will the programmer who programs it be able to afford to offer it in the cloud? Will the small developer be locked out of an all cloud OS system and what happens when the future Twitter developer cannot afford to work only in the cloud?
Security. The Only Safe Server is One NOT Connected to the Net.
So let’s say renting your apps for the lifetime that you own them is not a concern to you and innovation you figure will come either way. What about security?
With hackers being able to get into the NSA, the FBI, the World Bank, do you really want to store all your data online? Do you really want everything your write, speak, say to be stored on a company’s cloud with the hopes that they never get hacked? Because getting hacked is usually a matter of when, not if, especially if a hacker knows your entire computer life is stored on a system.
Of course, will it really effect you if your data is hacked (as long as it is not financial), probably not unless you are famous, but I still like the idea of having my personal documents, photos, blogs etc on my OWN computer & not stored on the web unless I put them there.
But I get …
Not much really. For all this forsaking of your own freedom on your own computer, you get a quicker boot time and the perception of increased security. So that is it. Some seconds saved when you boot, which for most is once every week or so (unless you travel with a laptop) and the perception of security (Remember even Google has been hacked). Open source of course, but I mean while that will get you some cool stuff like the iPhone, again, is it worth giving up your computer life to corporate America. These are just shiny object distractions that will be used to get people to forgo their objections.
So who really benefits? Well Google for one, but that was obvious, then every major application company as they make millions off your app rentals. So who do you think gets the short end of the proverbial stick? Please people, really think through the cloud before you give your dollars to Google for what is of very little benefit for you.
The cloud for all its benefits could easily turn, what is now fairly open and free, to a dictatorship controlled by corporate America. Do not let the shiny objects and security fears allow you to give up what should never be taken away. Your freedom on your system.
References.
Video is from Search Engine Land’s YouTube Channel >>
Read Danny Sullivan’s Chrome OS Live Blog Post For More Information About Google Chrome OS >>
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Addendum.
NOTE I did not address what happens when you cannot reach the web because I have to believe Google will have some answer to that as NO ONE would buy an OS whose applications do not work when they are not connected. So until I hear otherwise, I will assume this is a non-starter.
Entry Filed under: 2009,Google,chrome,chrome os,internet,search,search engines,seo,technology,website. Tags: applications, Blogroll, chrome os, cloud computing, danny sullivan, Google, Google Chrome, Google Chrome OS, internet, search engine land, technology, thoughts, web development.
9 Comments Add your own
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed
1.
thelostagency | November 24, 2009 at 11:32 am
Great article this is true for any cloud technology no matter if it is Amazon, Azure or Salesforce they all require ongoing payments and leave you dependent on your ISP being reliable…
Also these new cloud systems continue to suck up more and more bandwidth which is a hidden layer of cost you don’t plan or budget for…
2.
Smiffy | November 24, 2009 at 3:35 pm
As a Cloud-Skeptic, I now have a sore neck from nodding my head so vigorously whilst reading this article.
My biggest concern with this is that of business risk.
Whilst with paid Cloud services there is a contractual obligation for the provider to make the service available, I still regard it as a significant business risk until such time as the technology becomes more mature and – above all – robust. As regards using unpaid services, it’s probably best to assume that they won’t be there tomorrow and to plan for such an eventuality.
To replace desktop applications with something from Cloud is a concept with which I am not happy at all, unless redundant offline services exist (like going back to using your traditional office suite.) But then why have the Cloud in there at all? Please note that I am NOT talking about thin-client applications where the server is running in-house, only those where the fragile infrastructure of the Internet and third-party providers are involved.
I will continue to monitor the Cloud Phenomenon; ask me in a couple of years and I may revise my opinion. For now, however, I think that business risk would be minimised by sticking to traditional infrastructures.
3.
Jody | November 29, 2009 at 12:49 am
Greetings – my brother Adam shared your blog post with me, and I thought I’d share a few of my thoughts.
I agree that folks should certainly consider the costs and benefits of different operating systems in meeting their needs, and don’t believe Chrome OS will be a one-size-fits-all solution.
That being said, a few things I’ve been considering:
1. Data storage and applications.
I found a number of articles (i.e. http://www.informationweek.com/news/software/web_services/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=221900550) noting that computers with Chrome OS will allow for local and removable storage. In addition, I’m not convinced that Google will be charging for their most commonly used software at consumer level (i.e. Google Docs) given their ads-based revenue model. Should they (Google, Microsoft, Apple… etc) decide to, there are a large number of web-based alternatives (many FOSS) that would fit the webapps model of Chrome OS quite well.
2. Innovation
It’s difficult to distinguish innovation from individuals vs corporations, especially in instances in which a corporation encourages innovation from its employees, as is the case with Google’s Innovation Time (20 Time) which has been the source of approximately 50% of their product launches (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google#Innovation_Time_Off). Also, I don’t believe that a lack of software downloads will stifle innovations. Deployment models don’t stifle development models. Instead, many companies are generating revenue off of transitions from legacy architectures to web-based architectures, and many open-source and free software projects are web-based or written in easily ported architectures (an example being Java, easily deployed via Java WebStart or Applets) which are perfect for a Web-Based OS.
3. Security
In addition to servers, The Only Safe Computer is One Not Connected to the Net. And even at that, many public terminals on local networks face security risks via any other input to the machine such as USB or CD/DVD drives. With recent news of Chrome OS allowing local (internal and external) storage which would supports backups, with recommendations by DHS for employees to minimize locally stored data, with a linux-based OS where professionals are tasked with maintaining up-to-date security patches rather than varied and inconsistent update levels across customer machines, and with substantial server security architectures including backups, physical and virtual data segregation as well as encryption, there is a lot to be said for the Chrome OS security model in how it addresses current risks for PC machines.
While I think Google makes compelling products, Chrome OS won’t be blowing Mac or Microsoft’s OS’s out of the water anytime soon. What Chrome OS will do is support competition in the marketplace, and consumer responsibility being what it is, I hope that users will make the right personal and professional decisions in choosing what OS is right for their needs.
4.
Michael Persson | December 1, 2009 at 8:19 am
Dear Kristine, i read your article here and i can gree with most point of being scared for most of the people using computers and Internet. Its already a scary thing for many people and some of my friends dont have any experience of computer usage at all.
I could not have my work or client information on a cloud solution but im afraid we have to say stop to the companies investing billions or trillions in this NEW IDEA, probably for their own purposes only.
Im very sceptic on the Cloud solution purely for the lack of security today, how would it get better??
5.
zohaib hisam | December 3, 2009 at 8:13 am
Hi Kristine.
Couldn’t help look into your profile once I read your reply at my Chrome OS thread at LI. Though a bit ‘conspiratory’ and skeptical (no offense), your points about security , privacy, and ‘BUY’ vs ‘RENT’ are valid, no doubt.
Thanks for the feedback. Would like to keep in touch with you at future discussions as well, your experience with internet marketing/SEO seems similar to mine in many ways. I’m sure future interactions would prove mutually beneficial.
Take care, n have a good day.
z
6.
Robert Bravery | December 21, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Great article Kristine.
You tackle many questions that cannot be answered. I do see advantages for cloud computing. But cannot use it as a main stream form of computing.
Why? Two main reasons. Bandwidth is expensive. Can you imagine paying for uploading and downloading documents continually.
Second, Bandwidth is unreliable. What in the world happens when you cannot get to your documents. Too many potential connection and reliability problems to fully trust your precious documents into the hands of another.
Like everything Cloud computing has it’s advantages and disadvantages. Just don’t think that it is the answer to all our problems or the Holy Grail of the modern computing world.
7.
Shane Wilson | January 6, 2010 at 10:37 am
Hi I am the Devils Advocate on this one. Let’s talk expensive software like Adobe. There are several programs that are very pricey and I am positive people have resorted to theft and or other means to use them or own them. Before I continue let me say that I am in favor of a hybrid system where you have your desktop OS and a copy Cloud OS running congruent. The one protects the other and so on. In the case of Adobe or other companies selling software that is unaffordable for most of the planet they now have a larger market share. Now you can offer programs on a rental basis where people only pay to use them when they need them. If you are a web designer in Haiti and you want to use the latest version of photoshop for 30min it may only cost you $5 but that’s alright because you have a paying job and you can budget that expense into the deposit. You also never have to come up with one large initial investment. On another note..maybe you are the guy making the software application making millions of dollars from people so exited about what you made that they are WILLING to pay to use it. In the end we still have the choice and that will drive the innovation not to mention the competition which over time does drive costs down. Remember its not the gun (aka. cloud) that kills people, It’s the person who decides to use it the wrong way. We just need laws and enforcement (just like Monopoly laws) that protect us.
8.
Hieroweb Interactive | January 12, 2010 at 9:41 am
Read your post. We spike on Twitter about this and I agree with your analysis in whole for the most part.
I do believe that this is going to be a niche market that is not going to catch on to the masses for the reasons that you mention in your post. Most people that have used computers for any length of time will not want to deal with the issues involved with having their information reside on some ghost machine out there somewhere.
Having said that I can see corporations and medium size businesses using Cloud to some degree to try and keep monthly costs down. Like you said the overall picture is it costs you more, but it’s a fixed cost monthly. Since you are also paying for storage and app usage in that fixed monthly cost it will have users.
All in all I still do believe it is a niche market. As we discussed it’s the new dumb terminal concept except instead of the apps and storage residing on your own company server it’s on someone else’s. Dumb terminals never took off either but they do serve a niche market.
9.
Rob | January 14, 2010 at 11:44 am
And what happens when they turn the internet off like during martial law/war etc.