It's a new OS (or at least a new packaging of an existing one). The website promises more information at 9 am.
http://www.thinkgos.com/
ID:36279
 Nov 1 2007, 2:30 am
|
|
|
Nov 1 2007, 3:05 am
|
|
SuperSaiyanGokuX
 |
Hmmm, 9:05 by my clocks, and nothing...
|
So is this the 'offical' google OS, or just some knockoff?
I assume it's running Linux. :/ | |
It would be insteresting to see a 3rd parties idea of a GoogleOS. Especially if the 3rd party could get Google's help in setting up a good interface for everything google. Things like a desktop that interfaces with Google Reader, iGoogle, GMail, and other Google services, without actually going to Google(like desktop widgets).
Aside from playing games, Google covers 90% of my computing needs. They have a basic word processor, an RSS feed reader, email, great map system, and a lot more. Hell, give me a gMusic player that can sync with my iPod and I'd be in gHeaven. | |
It's not produced by Google. At the bottom of the page it says it is not connected to Google in any way.
| |
How did they score a gig with Walmart?
| |
After checking google news(news.google.com) I found a little bit more about them. They have been making very cheap desktops and laptops for a while. They are releasing this OS on a PC called the gPC. The g stands for both Google and green. Google, for the reasons listed on the GOS site, and green because it is an extremely low power system(rather slow to todays standards, but using a slimmed down Linux based OS it would run as fast as XP on a modern dual core system).
| |
Wow. That interface looks like it has been lifted directly from <insert OS vendor> and tinted green. You can tell they tried really hard to get it as close as possible, rather than actually putting in the effort to make their own. They even lifted and slightly altered an old (and stupid) ad slogan from said OS vendor (Think gOS). And even the website design -- fonts, reflections, everything. Pathetic.
Nobody ever accused the open source weenies of being original, that's for sure. | |
Yeah, the interface is clearly modeled after <insert OS vendor>, but how is that different from other Linux distros modeling their interface after <insert other OS vendor>. But when "its all been done before", it's hard not to step on some toes.
How would they not "copy" one or the other? Put half the title on one side of the interface, the other half on the other side, and the _[]X buttons in the middle? The round buttons are about the same as those on <insert OS vendor>, and the background resembles the stock one for them as well. But when you break it down, <insert OS vendor> has round buttons, and line based backgrounds, <insert other OS vendor> has square and rounded square buttons and organic backgrounds. Where does that leave room for another OS? Triangle buttons with a fractal generated background? Of course, I'm over stating that. I'm sure there are art directions they can go, but you start having problems with people not understanding the interface. The icons along the bottom are actually not much like the Mac. They are closer to desktop icons than a dock(at least last time I used E17, the desktop manager they are using). | |
Pretty amazing the lengths they've gone to to make it appear to be a Google project.
But this has worked before...think "JavaScript". | |
Somebody needs to break the mould and make some sort of operating system like the one prominently featured in Jurassic Park.
"It's a UNIX system!" | |
Jtgibson wrote:
Somebody needs to break the mould and make some sort of operating system like the one prominently featured in Jurassic Park. It's been done. That company is dying a slow death. http://web.archive.org/web/20070102120114/http:// www.sgi.com/fun/freeware/3d_navigator.html | |
Silicon Graphics is going bust? Did no one tell me? Where have I been the last five years?! Have I been living under a rock?!
(The first sentence was my own. The rest were to pre-empt the expected responses.) | |