News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:$149 Chromebooks by Mikeb85 on Tuesday March 31, 2015 @04:34PM (#9299698)
Chromebook sales are constantly rising.

With the eventual capability that they'll be able to run Android programs, as well as PNaCl and Emscripten borrowing from each other and getting better offering opportunity for tons of apps to be ported to the web, and then of course HTML5 and Js becoming the technology of choice for all sorts of apps, Chromebooks are the eventual future.

Maybe they're not the present, but they ARE the future.

And this is the main thing - for millions (hundreds of millions, maybe billions soon), a smartphone is their first entry to the internet. Probably an Android. When they see the Chrome logo in a laptop they can afford, and they already like the Android/Chrome ecosystem, they'll buy it, versus Windows which is associated with viruses, scams, piracy, etc...

Keep in mind Googles current business is still search. The net they're casting has nothing to do with the present, they're gunning for 7 billion people to associate them with computing, and to create the new future of computing.

Go to the third world. Yes some families have cheap PCs running pirated XP, but every kid has a cheap smartphone that they can connect to the internet with. They all have Facebook, WhatsApp, Twitter, etc...

Re:$149 Chromebooks by ssmoot on Tuesday March 31, 2015 @05:24PM (#9300007)
> "Maybe they're not the present, but they ARE the future."

That reminds me of Sun in the early 90's.

I'm not saying you're wrong. But I don't think it's inevitable you're right either. Especially since browser UI toolkits are still stuck in the stone age compared to native counterparts.

Until that gets fixed, I actually think it's probably just wishful thinking.

Re:$149 Chromebooks by Mikeb85 on Tuesday March 31, 2015 @05:54PM (#9300164)
How ubiquitous is Java? Containers, VMs, etc..., ARE all the rage. Sun was correct as to what technology belongs to the future, they just couldn't position their company properly. Odds are we're all using technology that's part of Sun's legacy...
Re:$149 Chromebooks by ssmoot on Tuesday March 31, 2015 @09:26PM (#9301001)
That wasn't the vision that I recall. Maybe part of some of it, but I'm talking about the Internet Terminal idea.

A lot of cool things came out of Sun. I don't think this was one. Have you tried Web IDEs? They're probably decades behind their desktop counterparts.

Re:$149 Chromebooks by Mikeb85 on Tuesday March 31, 2015 @10:12PM (#9301135)
> Maybe part of some of it, but I'm talking about the Internet Terminal idea.

I'm pretty young, so I was woefully ignorant of this. However the more I read about it, the more it sounds like 'Cloud computing' and 'internet of things'. In fact, Chrome OS isn't too far from their Java Internet Terminal idea.

> Have you tried Web IDEs? They're probably decades behind their desktop counterparts.

I have. My main IDE, and probably my favourite ever, is R Studio which runs in a Webview (or as a webpage) and uses Ace for editing. Two fairly popular upstart IDEs, LightTable and Atom both use web technology. I quite enjoy Caret as well.

Not sure why you think they're decades behind. If anything the fact they're as advanced as they are is impressive, given most have been developed only in the last few years, whereas Visual Studio, Eclipse, etc..., have been around much longer.

Re:$149 Chromebooks by ssmoot on Tuesday March 31, 2015 @11:07PM (#9301275)
> In fact, Chrome OS isn't too far from their Java Internet Terminal idea.

That's what I was getting at. That was 19 years ago.

> Not sure why you think they're decades behind.

I was thinking in person-hours. I don't mean to belittle them. But I feel like these are mostly "JustAnotherTextMate".

Re:$149 Chromebooks by flinty on Wednesday April 01, 2015 @12:42AM (#9301668)
any good sources on sun's history?
Re:$149 Chromebooks by Mikeb85 on Wednesday April 01, 2015 @01:52AM (#9301846)
Not really. Just Googled and found some old pages. Others could probably do better.
Re:$149 Chromebooks by sjtechie on Tuesday March 31, 2015 @09:59PM (#9301101)
You mean like Atom? A lot of the web IDEs are pretty good nowadays. Not decades behind desktop software.
Re:$149 Chromebooks by ssmoot on Tuesday March 31, 2015 @10:48PM (#9301226)
No. Atom is a text-editor with plugins. It's no more a competitor for IntelliJ than UltraEdit was a competitor to Visual Studio.NET. (IMO)

But I was actually talking about in-browser environments like CodeAnywhere.

Re:$149 Chromebooks by rbanffy on Wednesday April 01, 2015 @06:53AM (#9302741)
Depending on the language and stack you choose, a text editor with a terminal and a REPL may be all you need. I spend most of my day switching between emacs, a terminal and a browser.
Re:$149 Chromebooks by Mikeb85 on Wednesday April 01, 2015 @12:18AM (#9301564)
Atom is in-browser. It just so happens to ship with its own browser (Atom-Shell is based on Chromium)...
Re:$149 Chromebooks by akhilcacharya on Wednesday April 01, 2015 @10:45PM (#9308380)
Are there any decent modern ones at all? I'm looking for a few, but don't want to re-invent the wheel.
Re:$149 Chromebooks by kowdermeister on Tuesday March 31, 2015 @05:56PM (#9300173)
There are orders of magnitude more UI kits for HTML/CSS then there are for native.
Re:$149 Chromebooks by cwyers on Tuesday March 31, 2015 @08:49PM (#9300890)
Is that because HTML/CSS UIs are more robust and advanced than native UI frameworks? Or because native UI framekits solved all the problems that the vast cornucopia of HTML/CSS UI frameworks are still struggling to solve? Or because everybody looks at all the HTML/CSS frameworks, decides none of them solve their problem, and decides to write their own?
Re:$149 Chromebooks by kowdermeister on Wednesday April 01, 2015 @08:40AM (#9303103)
It's because it's so easy to create your own. HTML/CSS is very accessible, well tested by lots and lots of small communities.

There are many HTML/CSS frameworks that are doing really great job and not struggling at all. It all depends of course on what you want to do, but finding a good kit that solves your problem is definitely not the bottleneck of creating a modern HTML UI based application.

Re:$149 Chromebooks by aikah on Wednesday April 01, 2015 @02:38AM (#9301965)
> There are orders of magnitude more UI kits for HTML/CSS then there are for native.

of course you need them because working directly with hTML/CSS is total crap.

Re:$149 Chromebooks by ssmoot on Tuesday March 31, 2015 @09:17PM (#9300980)
I don't think you can compare Angular with Cocoa.
Re:$149 Chromebooks by ntakasaki on Tuesday March 31, 2015 @04:51PM (#9299800)
>Chromebook sales are constantly rising

Where are the real shipping numbers from Google then? Surely they must know the numbers? Why won't they release it then? The only reason I can think of could be that they aren't all that great.

Re:$149 Chromebooks by Mikeb85 on Tuesday March 31, 2015 @05:03PM (#9299869)
You do realise that Asus, Lenovo, HP, etc... sell Chromebooks, right? Google sells very few branded as a 'Google' product.

The numbers are out there, but Google isn't releasing numbers because they're a tiny vendor.

Re:$149 Chromebooks by ntakasaki on Tuesday March 31, 2015 @05:08PM (#9299898)
You mean Google does not know exactly how many Chromebooks are being sold by Asus, Lenovo, HP, etc?
Re:$149 Chromebooks by Mikeb85 on Tuesday March 31, 2015 @05:52PM (#9300145)
They probably do, but all those are public companies. They all report sales a certain way. Google isn't going to mess with reporting sales that other companies are making. That's irresponsible.
Re:$149 Chromebooks by jhall1468 on Tuesday March 31, 2015 @05:51PM (#9300143)
No. Why would they? You think Asus, Lenovo and HP are giving sales data to Google?
Re:$149 Chromebooks by jeromegv on Tuesday March 31, 2015 @06:53PM (#9300444)
They do know about Android activations, it's not so far fetched.
Re:$149 Chromebooks by robotresearcher on Wednesday April 01, 2015 @02:46AM (#9302000)
All the Chromebooks phone home regularly checking for updates, etc. Google knows exactly how many have been used and are in use now.
Re:$149 Chromebooks by acchow on Tuesday March 31, 2015 @05:17PM (#9299962)
I don't have a Chromebook, but I think you have to sign into a Google account to use a Chromebook, so surely they have the numbers?
Re:$149 Chromebooks by kaared on Wednesday April 01, 2015 @07:37AM (#9302878)
You can use it in guest mode without a Google account or other authentication. I don't remember if you need to explicitly set it up to do that, though.

I'm sure Google has the numbers since the Chromebooks/Chromeboxes auto-update (part of the whole point, really) so given that they likely have unique device IDs (or ethernet MAC addresses), the 'live devices count' would be rather easy to figure out.

Re:$149 Chromebooks by scholia on Tuesday March 31, 2015 @06:07PM (#9300234)
"Chromebooks in Q3 2013 had at best a 1.2 percent share of the PC market and a 0.76 percent share of the combined PC-tablet market."

Latest IDC figures show Chromebooks continue to struggle http://www.zdnet.com/article/latest-idc-figures-show-chromeb...

Re:$149 Chromebooks by mkozlows on Tuesday March 31, 2015 @07:19PM (#9300544)
Q3 2013 is a long time ago. According to NPD, Chromebooks had 14% market share in 2014, counting retail and commercial (read: education) channels. Growth was up 85% year over year, too, which is amazing in the context of a stagnant/declining laptop market.

http://betanews.com/2015/02/24/2015-is-year-of-the-chromeboo...

Re:$149 Chromebooks by scholia on Wednesday April 01, 2015 @10:30AM (#9303831)
NPD is a less reliable source covering a much smaller market (not that any of them are reliable).
Re:$149 Chromebooks by scholia on Thursday April 02, 2015 @11:50AM (#9311437)
Chromebook sales are about 1% of all PC sales, says ABI Research http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/oct/22/chromebook...

Different source, different paper, different journalist, same conclusion.

The idea that Chromebooks sell in volume is delusional, at this point, and downvotes won't make it any less delusional.

Re:$149 Chromebooks by Mikeb85 on Tuesday March 31, 2015 @07:27PM (#9300572)
You can spin it all sorts of ways. Keep in mind the 'PC' market includes all those legacy Windows XP computers which are languishing in peoples homes, businesses, corporations, etc...

Chromebook sales are a much bigger part of current PC sales. And vendors do keep expanding their Chromebook lines. If it was a failure they wouldn't.

Re:$149 Chromebooks by millstone on Wednesday April 01, 2015 @12:58AM (#9301714)
The "PC market" refers to current sales. "Installed base" is the term for the metric that includes the languishing WinXP machines.
Re:$149 Chromebooks by Mikeb85 on Wednesday April 01, 2015 @09:41AM (#9303413)
Ah yeah you're right. The 1% came from some guy extrapolating Samsung's sales of Chromebooks to mean the whole Chromebook market...
Re:$149 Chromebooks by scholia on Wednesday April 01, 2015 @10:33AM (#9303857)
Some guy being a professional journalist who actually made some effort to analyze the numbers.

I appreciate from the downvotes above that some people prefer to believe what they want to believe ;-)