Earlier today, Google announced that it will start, or has started, developing an operating system dubbed Chrome OS. The web giant finally confirmed the rumors that have been floating around for a long time.

Last September of 2008, Michael Arrington of TechCrunch stated that Google Chrome, the browser, is going to be the future of the operating system and that it will be a Windows killer. I agreed with his statement, but not entirely, since an operating is more than just software, or in this case, a browser, running on a computer.

But still, it quite made sense, especially when Google introduced Android, the operating system for mobile phones. Android ports for MIDs, netbooks, and other devices started popping up everywhere on the web. I thought to myself that Google has done it without everyone noticing that they released their operating system for computers. One can only imagine how I felt when I read the announcement in Google’s blog of Google Chrome OS.

The announcement indicated that the new operating system will be fast, lightweight, and secure. That, in any case, is the holy trinity of what makes a great operating system.

Google Chrome OS will run on both x86 as well as ARM chips and we are working with multiple OEMs to bring a number of netbooks to market next year. The software architecture is simple — Google Chrome running within a new windowing system on top of a Linux kernel. (SOURCE)

First off, let’s differentiate Android with Google Chrome OS. Android was developed with mobile phones in mind. Chrome OS is going to be developed for computers, netbooks, AND smartbooks. If a netbook, with low processing power and a single core, can boot up a Linux distro in 10 seconds, how would a Core i7 computer fare with the same distro? I. KNOW. RIGHT?

This made me wonder how I would develop Chrome OS if I was given the chance. An operating system, to my understanding, consists of two parts: a kernel, and applications. There is no doubt that a Linux kernel will be used, since it is one of the most readily available kernels going around. First part of the OS: DONE. As for the applications, one that would allow me to run Chrome without any hitches, I would then need a robust, yet lightweight GUI or window manager. There are a number of options here: xfce, fluxbox, blackbox, window maker, etc. GNOME and KDE are out of the question since both window managers are a lot heavier than the previously mentioned WMs. Xubuntu comes to mind, since it is Ubuntu using xfce as the window manager instead of GNOME.

Anyway, another factor that should be considered is how to make Chrome, the browser, work in Linux. Pre-alpha and Alpha releases of the browser are showing a lot of promise with regards to speed and stability. I’ve tested the Pre-alpha of Chrome in Linux and it simply is fast. Making Chrome work in Linux is one thing. Making Chrome work WITH PLUGINS is another. So far, Chrome for Linux still doesn’t have support for Flash, nor Silverlight. And with rich Internet applications relying heavily on one of those two plugins, it’s going to be one heck of an obstacle. And Chrome, the browser, has to be updated for HTML 5 support, to be able to do what Firefox 3.5 is capable of. To make it future-ready, in other words.

A question that bugged me was if the new operating system will support external devices, such as cameras, external drives, and mp3 players, or simply put, “will it be able to detect, support, and give me options to sync my iPod/iPhone?” Maybe not initially, since Google will be focusing first on netbooks and devices that rely more on cloud services. I respectfully think that they should, and I sincerely hope they would. And it maybe sooner than I might think, since Debian, as far as I know, is including support for installing and running Android apps.

All in all, Google’s operating system, Chrome OS, has been a long time coming. And based on the company’s track record for releasing quality products, it’s going to be one heck of a wait that is well worth it.

Other worthwhile reads:
Google Chrome: Redefining The Operating System [TechCrunch: Michael Arrington]
Google Drops A Nuclear Bomb On Microsoft. And It’s Made of Chrome. [TechCrunch: MG Siegler]
Google Releasing Chrome Operating System [Lifehacker: Kevin Purdy]
Google announces Chrome OS, coming to netbooks second half of 2010 [Engadget: Ross Miller]

After reading an interview of one of the winners, Charlie Miller, of this year’s PWN2OWN hackfest, I realized how vulnerable Apple‘s OS X is. Sure it is *NIX-based, and inherently secure, but it doesn’t mean it IS secure out-of-the-box. Firewalls and Antivirus programs are simply not enough to protect one’s OS. If a bug is found and exploited in one of the applications, the whole OS is screwed. An operating system is only as secure as the applications running on it.

In the hackfest, contestants try to hack different browsers by finding bugs and exploiting them as proof of the bug’s existence. As the Internet becomes more ubiquitous and applications are moving to the cloud, browsers are becoming a more critical application, and it is only logical for hackers to try and hack into the system by exploiting a browser’s vulnerabilities.

In the interview, Charlie Miller stated that Safari on a Mac is the easiest to exploit, and Firefox on a Windows PC is the second hardest. The hardest application to exploit was Google’s Chrome, partly because of Windows and partly because of the Sandbox framework(?) Google used in developing Chrome. Safari on a Mac was easiest because of Mac OS X. I’m not faulting Apple for releasing an unsecured OS. OS X is secure, don’t get me wrong. However, part of the OS is the browser, in which Apple “forgot” to secure Safari, which makes OS X vulnerable to attacks as well. And with all the money in the world, Apple could have secured the OS a whole lot better. Even if almost all viruses are targeted at Windows-based machines, there’s still the off-chance that one of them will be targeting OS X, or other operating systems for that matter. And as I’ve mentioned before, more and more applications are moving to the cloud. Viruses or other malware don’t have to run on the system itself. There are websites that embed scripts that try to download and execute malicious code without the visitor even knowing about it.

Having a secure operating system, however, is not enough in preventing attacks. No matter how secure the operating system, and the developers can only do so much as to warn everyone of every single virus there is out there, if the user is stupid enough to download and execute a virus, there’s just no way of preventing a virus from infecting a system. It’s time for people to start wisening up and prevent user-initiated errors. This, in my humble opinion, is the most dreaded type of calls, and is abhorred by tech support.

Charlie Miller also mentioned in the interview that Google‘s Chrome and the way they developed the browser was the next evolutionary step in developing future browsers. Although Chrome was based in an open-source software dubbed Chromium, Google made it sure that Chrome is future-ready. I recently tried a pre-alpha version of Chromium, not Chrome, on my Linux install, and although it looked almost the same as Chrome, I doubt it is as secure. Preliminary tests regarding speed (in executing javascripts) were amazing. There were a number of critical things that don’t work, like setting options, navigating opened tabs (tabs were invisible), and saving bookmarks (it was non-existent). And there was no support for Flash, yet. It was like Lynx with a graphical user interface. But it did pique my curiosity, and I am eagerly awaiting Google’s release of Chrome’s Linux version.

As for me buying a Mac in the future, it will only happen when I have extra, and I mean EXTRA, cash laying around. And that would be in about N years. Maybe by that time, a Mac netbook has been released.

My not-so-recent post about Google’s browser, Chrome, touts the browser as an OS competitor instead of just another browser. After having read about Ted Dziuba’s feedback on Michael Arrington’s post on TechCrunch, I decided to take another look from a different perspective on Chrome again, and Ted’s article does make more sense than Michael’s post.

To me, an operating system consists of a kernel and some applications. Chrome is simply just that – an application. If it’s going to compete with Windows, *NIX, or OS X, it’s going to need more than a browser. Maybe Android is Google’s answer to competing with (netbook) operating systems, but only time will tell if that ever happens.

On my home desktop system that I use for work and other stuff, I use Windows XP SP3, dual-booted with Ubuntu 8.04 or Hardy Heron (Hardy). Of course, I use Firefox whenever I’m using Hardy but when I’m booted to XP SP3, I use Chrome and Firefox. So I compared Chrome with my most-beloved Firefox, and I realized how shameful it was to think about permanently replacing Firefox with Chrome. Now, I’m only using Firefox. Here’s why.

Two processes for one webpage?
What I noticed is that when I open an application while Chrome is running, the application’s startup time seems to have tripled, or more, than when I was using Firefox. Notepad takes about a second or two to start. Not when Chrome is running, though. It takes about 20 seconds to open up. Sure, Firefox takes a longer time starting up than Chrome, but I do have a need to use other applications as well, especially when I’m trying to accomplish my other-job’s tasks, and my browser takes a backseat when I’m coding. My system is on the brink of crashing whenever I try to launch any Adobe CS3 application while Chrome is running. I knew I had to find out what was causing this issue that was nonexistent pre-Chrome.

I then fired up the Task Manager, then quickly looked for Chrome’s process. It wasn’t too hoggy, just about 20+ to 30+ megs of RAM used. But I saw two processes for Chrome, and the other process was about 12+ to 15+ megs. This with just ONE webpage open in Chrome. And whenever I opened up a new tab, another 12+ to 15+ megs of ram gets eaten up by a new Chrome process. Imagine if you have 10+ tabs, that’s 120+ megs of RAM just for Chrome. Firefox maybe using up 130+ megs of RAM with about 12 tabs opened, but it doesn’t make my computer slow down to a crawl. Google still has to develop a way for Chrome to be more efficient when handling system resources.

Pretty, but not pretty enough.
Another thing that I missed sorely from Firefox while I was in my Chrome-induced hallucination is the ability to add extensions or plugins. I no longer care so much about skinning the browser. I’m happy with what Mozilla came up for Firefox 3, and Chrome’s tabs at the top instead of a menu bar is something that I’ll always look for in a new browser. For me, the menu bar (File, Edit, View, etc.) is a waste of screen real estate (especially for netbooks) and if there’s a way to hide or remove it, it should be added in the core. However, there are other Firefox plugins I can never live without, namely, Firebug, FireFTP, Foxmarks, and StumbleUpon. Chrome may have something similar to Firebug built-in, but there’s no integrated FTP client, no bookmark synchronization feature (that I know of), and it has to be “hacked” for a very limited demo of the StumbleUpon toolbar to work. Chrome is pretty, but not pretty enough, IMHO, to forsake Firefox.

With Google’s record of not coming out of beta for a long time (read: GMail), I wonder how long Chrome will stay in beta, if it ever comes out of it at all. For now, I’m cleansing my system (and myself) of Chrome.

So, are you still using Firefox or have you made the permanent switch to Chrome?

So the cat is out of the bag. Google Chrome has been released. For those who haven’t heard of it, Google Chrome is a browser in which Google designed the way they think a browser should be: a desktop application for web applications.

Simply put, Chrome is a web browser. But of course, with Google, it’s not just a simple browser. Chrome uses the Webkit engine, the very same engine that powers Safari. Webkit is a lot like Gecko, the engine that powers Mozilla Firefox, only faster. A lot faster. And as with all things Google touches, Webkit was greatly improved, hence it is really much faster than what Safari is using, and it all boils down to how fast the browser can interpret, or execute, javascript. And since Google relies heavily on javascript for its web applications, such as GMail, Google Calendar, etc. Google designed its own javascript handler for Webkit. Instead of letting Webkit use its own javascript handler, Google redesigned how Webkit handles javascript. Instead of one process handling multiple threads of javascript, they decided it would be better to have multiple processes handling one thread of javascript. This would make the web application respond faster and more stable. At least, that’s how I understood it from their comic.

I’ve been using Chrome since its launch. It doesn’t have any extensions available yet, and I haven’t seen an option to add some, but it is still too early in the beta stage to expect something as robust as Mozilla Firefox 3. And Google promises to release an API for developers, so it would simply be a matter of time before extensions, add-ons, or hacks start popping up.

What I like about Chrome is the way it lets you maximize the virtual real estate you see when viewing web pages. There is no menu bar, just a button to house the browser options and other settings, and another button that houses options for the web page itself. The status bar usually found at the bottom of the window is only there when hovering over a link or when loading a page. It fades out as soon as the page finishes loading. As with tabbed browsing, the tabs are up top, away from the web page’s content. The focus is on the content, not on the browser. There are times that I forget I have other tabs open simply because I was too focused on what I was doing on one tab. The navigation buttons are simple, and there is no stop button. Since you can always press the Esc key to stop loading a web page, you don’t have to bother moving your mouse to click on the stop button. Also, the home button has become optional since they introduced the New Tab page. It displays thumbnail screenshots of the nine (9) most recent web pages you have frequented, and it also displays a list of your most recently closed tabs. It also displays a list of your recent bookmarks. And speaking of bookmarks, it is optional to have it integrated with the browser itself. I wonder when and how they will integrate Chrome with a Google Account. Incognito browsing lets you “plan a surprise party” with confidence that no one will know what you were doing. The “Omnibox” integrates the address bar and the search bar, taking a page from Mozilla Firefox 3′s Awesome bar but a little more “evolved.” And Chrome has its own task manager.

I’m loving Chrome so far, but I have seen some quirks and eccentrities in its ingenuity. One is the overflowing text when typing in a text field in Plurk. It may be a CSS issue, or a Plurk issue, since I haven’t seen this appear in other sites. That, or I’m not websurfing enough. Another is the smoothness of rounded corners. Although it supports CSS-enabled rounded corners due to Webkit’s standards compliance, Mozilla Firefox renders the rounded corners more smoothly. Ajax is sometimes quirky, but most of the time, it works, and it’s the same with Flash – videos or sites itself. I can’t say much about Gears as I don’t encounter much implementations as I should. Chrome is also resource hungry, as my desktop PC slowed to a crawl when my antivirus started its scheduled scan. I also checked the task manager, the Windows Task Manager, and it indicated that Chrome used about half of my physical memory. Also, a bug I found in Chrome is when I tried accessing my router. I didn’t bother setting up a password for it, so I just leave the username field blank, and typed in the default password. Chrome would not let me proceed without filling in the username field. So I went back to Firefox to setup a router password and then tried Chrome to try accessing my router again. With the admin username and the password I set, it allowed me to access the router admin page. Chrome may have forced me to add a router password, but it should let me in and do exactly that using Chrome itself. I wonder how Google will address this in Mac and Linux. I would so love it if Chrome’s Linux version had an Ubuntu-flavored color/theme.

Features I would like to see added to Chrome in the future would be the ability to change the color of the window, or theming capabilities. Also, the ability to add extensions that are much like FireFTP, Stumbleupon, Delicious, and Foxmarks. I would have asked for Firebug, but when I tried the Inspect Element in the context menu, it showed me something that was achingly, very similar to Firebug.

After searching for Chrome tips and tricks, hacks, and such, I stumbled upon an article from TechCrunch that may have proven what Google is actually aiming for, and it made sense. Google, with Chrome, is not really aiming for, or joining, a browser war. Right now, I’m about 70% sure I’ll switch to Chrome and leave Firefox forever. But it’s not just that. Google is joining the OS wars. With everything being put in the cloud these days, one would only need a browser to do whatever they need to do. And computers are being developed to simply use a browser without an operating system. The birth of the cloud computer is near.

To Google and the Chrome developers, a tip of the hat or a pat on the back may not be enough and a big thank you is all I can manage to give you. This is a job well done. You may be evil, but you are so good at being evil. I simply can’t wait for the next iteration of this great application.

The next release of WordPress has come early, about a month earlier than the projected timeline. It is a welcome upgrade, though, since it boasts a lot of new features, but not as heavy as 2.5 was. Current release is WordPress 2.6 beta 1.

One of the notable features of 2.6 is the Google Gears implementation. Users will now have the ability to work offline when there is no Internet connection and will automatically synchronize the files that were changed once they are connected again. Geniosity.co.za has a better write-up of 2.6′s new feature.

There’s also the Post Revisioning feature which allows you to go back to a previous revision of your entry if in case you digress too far away from the subject of your post and need to go back and review what you were actually trying to convey. This was something that made me think about the bandwidth and database space, that it may consume a lot of. But the developers commented that it won’t really make a significant impact on the database and that it will only extend the auto-save feature.

You can also preview themes before you actually use it. There were a lot of updates to make your install more secure, and tons more to enhance the user experience. I wasn’t really expecting to be all this giddy waiting for 2.6 but after test-driving beta1, I just can’t help it.

Tentative date of release is July 14. Emphasis on tentative.

These past few days, I’ve been experimenting with Google Talk (GTalk) by integrating my buddies I have on Yahoo! Messenger (YM) and AOL Instant Messenger (AIM). This all started when GMail let their users chat with their AIM buddies within GMail. This way, all chats are saved in the Chats folder of GMail. AND saving or having archives of conversations can now be more searchable.

So I found this site by searching “google talk aim” on Google and it clearly outlined what needs to be done in order to integrate GTalk with other Instant Messengers (IMs).

Read the rest of this entry »

It’s still a snorefest as the limelight is shifted to other news, but Microsoft’s bid is still up in the air as News Corp., the owners of MySpace, is joining Microsoft in its bid for Yahoo!.

However, Yahoo! thinks it can avoid the acquisition bullet by merging with AOL. AOL, meanwhile, has its problems of its own as Time Warner is thinking of selling it off. Anyway, Yahoo! also thinks that making itself a company not worth being acquired (i.e. a company losing money) is a good thing and hopefully make Microsoft retract their offer. Basically, Yahoo! wants more money from Microsoft, and if Microsoft can’t or won’t increase the bid, Yahoo! won’t sell.

To further prove to Microsoft that they should not pursue the bid, Yahoo! “partners” with Google in which Google will handle the ads shown on 3% of Yahoo!’s search results page. And this is something that made Microsoft cry foul. Yahoo! is basically telling the world that they can no longer compete with Google and is throwing the towel. Google, therefore gets the monopoly on the search advertising wars. Of course, this is unacceptable.

Here’s my theory on what will happen.

Microsoft teams up with News Corp. to give Yahoo! what they want: more money. This is AFTER Yahoo! merges with AOL. Google will be left alone to their own devices. So it’s going to be Microsoft/MySpace/Yahoo!/AOL against Google. Microsoft will get Yahoo!, with or without News Corp. but before Yahoo! merges with AOL. If Yahoo! merges with AOL, Microsoft will have no choice but to give Yahoo! more money. And they can definitely do that by getting News Corp.’s money to up the offer. Michael Arrington of TechCrunch mentions something about the health of the Internet. I believe him.

Whatever happens, expect layoffs in the thousands. That is, if the acquisition pushes through. If Microsoft decides to back out of the offer, Yahoo! will then continue to do what it is doing. And that would be losing money. And at this rate, Yahoo! will be in the deadpool by next year. Personally, I hope Yahoo! finds an angel before it’s too late.

In my previous posts, I was talking about installing gOS. gOS is an operating system that was bundled with the gPC, a $200 Linux PC that aims to provide a very affordable way of getting online. Everex is the company that makes these computers. The Everex TC2502 Green gPC comes equipped with a basic 1.5 GHz VIA C7 CPU, 512mb DDR2 memory and an 80GB hard drive. The package, however, doesn’t include a monitor. TechCrunch believes people like a Google-focused PC, but let me make it clear: the gPC or gOS is NOT manufactured or developed by Google. The “G” in gOS or gPC stands for Green. Google, however, let Everex and gOS developers use Google-related icons and trademarks.

As for gOS’s performance, all I can say is gOS made the right decision of basing it on Ubuntu. The latest version of gOS Rocket Beta is based on Ubuntu 7.10 (Gutsy Gibbon) and, consequently, has integrated NTFS read-write capabilities. gOS makes thin-client computing possible by focusing on web-based apps. It also has offline desktop apps, like OpenOffice et al, to make sure that when there is no way to go online, you can still be productive.

Inevitably, the only way to tell if the operating system is good, or good enough, is to compare it to other operating systems.

Read the rest of this entry »

I previously posted an aside that Microsoft is trying to acquire Yahoo! but I felt I need to put in my two cents worth. I know a lot of blogs and websites have dicussed this matter in a very thorough and informative manner, but I just want to express what I feel about the merger, IF it happens, from a user point-of-view.

Microsoft has had its share of legal hurdles and stumbling blocks that makes every single Windows user think twice whenever the Redmond giants release new software. Although their practices are least admired by the Valley, the world still embraces, although reluctantly, almost each and every single software that hails from Microsoft. Their operating system practically runs almost every single computer on the planet. That is, if we think about numbers. However, some systems providing critical services run some other operating system, either *NIX or BSD. But that’s not where the money is, and Microsoft knows this. A rich and wealthy company, indeed.

Read the rest of this entry »

If Microsoft succeeds in acquiring Yahoo!, the battle for supremacy in the search and online advertising industry is going to be very interesting.