Small Fish, Big Pond

Big news in the arena of computer technology, and with all the buzz I feel compelled to comment.
Google is pushing on developing a full OS, not just their smartphone OS Android. It will be centered around the Chrome Browser which is already built to greatly integrate a lot of the features on the desktop.

Some bloggers predicted Chrome was the first step into the foray of desktop OS and are patting themselves on the back. Many others are now claiming that this will be the game changer that will destroy Microsoft and destabilize the OS playing field forever! In a word, the people who say that are wrong.

There are a few buzz words that cause all tech pundits and bloggers to claim the beginning of a revolution in the tech world and this news has the three of biggest: “Open-source” “Linux” and “Google”) Every time these buzz words come up the tech world creams themselves shouting about how it will kill the Microsoft giant and leave Apple shaking in it’s boots; regardless of the fact that this has never happened in the many times people predicted it will (Android, Chrome, etc).

Before you continue please read the Ars Technica article about this. They write good levelheaded articles and give some good perspective on the situation as it stands. Many blogs on the other hand flip out in an orgy of Linux/Open-source delusion that comes from being too plugged into tech and not knowing how real people react to these developments.

Let me expand on that. Many tech people believe that the buzz-word “cloud computing” will lead to a revolution in computers where all PCs become dumb terminals that simply plug us into the net and all computing, apps, and storage will be done offsite and piped to us via the browser and it’s many plugins. Google is a big proponent in this, thus the development of all Google apps and now the ultimate OS to plug you in. The problem is that this fully online scenario will never happen (or at least not for a long time). Here’s why:

Some programs don’t run in a browser or are too big to run across a WAN connection. Basic word processing is a piece of cake as are most MS Office style apps, but what about photo editing? Photoshop is a beast and will be a PITA to run over the net, as well as any video editing software. A lot of my computational power goes to fingerprinting audio files; finding a way to do these high demand processes over the net is going to be hard and network intensive, or the cloud will have to load a lot of programs onto my computer remotely so I can process that data locally. In that case you’re just duplicating the traditional computer architecture with the extra step that my computer has to constantly download remote apps to run.

Also, people are loath to store all their data online (simple backups are one thing), first of all there is the issue of size; I have multiple terabytes of data stored on my network, multiply this by the millions of computer users and even Google’s massive storage can’t keep up. Then there’s the privacy issue. There is some data I want to keep local even if it means it may be lost in a computer crash (although I keep good backups), I’d rather lose it than read in the paper that my storage company had a massive internal breach of security and now anybody could have my personal files.

Next the WAN (internet) infrastructure isn’t as robust enough to handle everybody doing all their computing in the cloud. A good broadband connection is 1/1000 the size of a good LAN connection; and most people don’t have that and are still on dial up which is about 1/1500 the size of a 100Mbps LAN connection. Simply put we can’t handle everybody doing cloud computing right now because instead of a distributed system where 1 million computers do 1 million tasks we’d have a centralized system where one computer would have to do 1 million tasks on behalf of those 1 million users.

How about the reliability of one site/company being responsible for providing all your computing? If Google’s apps go down your hands are tied. But they don’t even need to go down, you just need to be in an area with a bad network connection.
Ever been cut off from the net due to a downed communication trunk? It drives me up the wall not being able to surf the net but I can always fall back to doing local work with installed apps and local files till the net is back. With an online app dependant OS your computer becomes useless if you have a bad connection. Many argue that Google will provide resources so that you can work offline (they better!) but in that case you’re back to the traditional OS infrastructure and Google isn’t really breaking any new ground.

Lastly, most of us personal users don’t realize it but it’s the Businesses that drive the market on computer OS’s. Why do you think MS has weathered all the bad press and hardships it has had and maintained over 3/4 of the OS market? So the simple question is do you think a fortune 500 business is willing to change to an online format where they are dependant on another company for computer usage and uptime, paying for an internet pipe big enough run all their computers across the WAN? Plus will they keep all their company secrets stored in remote sites by other companies, and train all employees to learn google apps for all processes all so they can have their computer startup a little faster?

Admittedly the Google OS won’t be this extreme and will likely be a hybrid of online and offline content and apps. Google will make money with this, and they will gain more market share; especially where they are starting out in the netbook market. But don’t be fooled that this is a new groundbreaking option for computers that will change the way computers work. Asus already has its “Express Gate” system that quick boots Firefox and Skype, and the number of Linux flavored quick-boot versions is too numerous to count. And Apple and Windows OS’s are already lowering boot times and creating hybrid boots that can do a quick boot to basic programs then a long boot to the full OS. Google is taking a good idea and improving on it but it will take a year before we see an actual product that may or may not live upto the hype. By then the competitors may have closed or eliminated the gap Google OS will try to fill.

Bottom line. Don’t drink the kool-aid, the Google OS may be a nice new entry to give us more choices in what OS to use, but its not going to kill the computing status quo. And far from “shaking in their boots” I’m sure MS and Apple are simply making a few course corrections to adapt their already proven browsers to make use of many of the benefits Google OS may provide.

Sorry that evolved into more of an anti Cloud Computing gripe, but the Cloud and the Google OS are being so intertwined in the new I think both need to be addressed.