Google Introduces Haswell Chromebooks

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
How have Chromebooks typically sold? I haven't seen anyone use one. Did they need/would they benefit from a haswell processor? The computers don't even run stand-alone programs for the most part, so I can't fathom what sort of processing power they'd need beyond capable video playback/acceleration.
 


The Samsung series 3 Chromebook is currently the #1 selling notebook on Amazon. I picked mine up open item from best buy for $200 and it's the best money I've ever spent. It's thin, lightweight, and fast. I use most of Google's services anyway so the Chromebook comes naturally to me. In fact, aside from Gaming the occasional photo editing it nearly replaces my Lenovo Y400 (a great laptop and I feel bad for letting it go days at a time without use).

Mine has the dual core Samsung ARM SOC with 2GB of RAM and it performs just fine. I can stream Netflix and it can play any web game I've tried so far. It's not unusual for me to have 6-8 browser tabs open at once. Knowing this, a Haswell chip seems way overkill in this purpose. I would think that Bay Trail would be a lot more suited for the tasks a Chromebook would ask of it.

The only performance issue I've noticed is the inability to stream a Netflix browser tab to my Chromecast without some lag. The Chromecast plug-in even tells me my system is holding back performance. That's my only complaint as this thing would be great for that purpose.






 


You can't. Chromebooks are locked down to specifically prevent that. Why would anyone want to though?
 


Windows software maybe? Personally, I would rather use mint or ubuntu to easily interface with my home server, as well as access a plethora of high quality applications. If I could install Windows, it would be great fun to program on this using Visual Studio, then remotely compile them on my Desktop using the server ability.
 
JD88, plenty of people Bootcamp their Macs to get Windows, why would a Chromebook user be any more zealous? If Google starts going down the road of preventing users putting whatever software they want on their hardware then how is that different than all the anti-trust garbage that MS had to go through
 


There are cheap Windows laptops in a similar price range. Additionally, Windows would require more than the 16GB included storage, not to mention what an abomination it would be.

It's not Google's hardware, these are OEM devices. In fact, Google is known for releasing it's hardware with unlocked bootloaders just in the sense of freedom of choice. Just look at the Nexus line.
 

What absolute TOTAL uninformed rubbish. I have Windows 7 Basic installed on a 4 GB SSD on my EEE 901. You're reading that right, FOUR GB - something that just about every EEE 901 user has done if they're not using Linux. Sure the EEE 901 also has a 16 GB (super slow) SSD that you have to install apps on (which would be slower than any current 16GB memory key), but it works just fine. A 16GB Chrome Book with Haswell would be FANTASTIC for Win 7 plus a few apps (e.g. Office).

 
There are better laptops, sure they cost more, but I am less interested in giving money to bottom-feeders. Plus with a Windows machine I get to use the 6.5 million strong software back catalogue. Oh, and all of Googles services too, seeing as they all run on Windows.
 
"The hope is that Haswell will boost battery life without affecting performance. "

Without affecting performance? Because core i series processors, along with the Haswell architecture, are known for their horrible performance especially when compared to the atom, celeron and ARM processors traditionally found in Chromebooks... (Very harsh sarcasm for those of you who don't detect it over the internet)

Somehow the inflection of that statement seems a bit off. If anything, it should read "The hope is that it will give just as good or better battery life with even better performance."
 


Actually, Chromebooks are not locked down to Chrome OS. You can install a custom OS, however you will get a warning screen every boot up. It still wont run Windows because it expects UEFI or BIOS, not u-Boot. But it's not locked down, Windows is just by design incompatible with it.
 
hahaha there are 5 windows rt users for ever 1 chromebook user. why don't they ditch it in favour of a desktop android, makes sense.

http://www.geek.com/news/chromebook-sales-are-terrible-even-compared-to-windows-rt-1552333/
 
I think you misunderstood my comment. Never once did I claim the success or relative advantage of Chrome OS over RT or the surface or whatever.

Having said that, Chrome OS is a minor side project that hasn't really cost Google much of anything VS the $900 million Surface debacle but I digress.

I have a Chromebook and a 2 Win 8 Pro machines so I'm hardly anti-Microsoft. I do think Win RT is a completely unnecessary product given where Intel and AMD are with x86 chips currently.

My entire point was the Chrome OS has some very strong merit through simplicity and I wouldn't want to ruin that by installing bloated Windows. Google isn't trying to make money on Chrome OS, it's trying to encourage the development of web apps for the Chrome browser.

 
"I think you misunderstood my comment. Never once did I claim the success or relative advantage of Chrome OS over RT or the surface or whatever."
However, you said this:-
"The Samsung series 3 Chromebook is currently the #1 selling notebook on Amazon. I picked mine up open item from best buy for $200 and it's the best money I've ever spent."
But then went on to say:-
"That's what Ballmer says every morning when he wakes up surrounded by piles of unsold Surfaces."

Now, i'm no English Professor, but I think I can spot when someone is telling fibs
 
I said that in response to your juvenile comments toward Google. It wasn't a comparison to Chrome OS. Regardless of how the Chromebook is doing, it doesn't change the abyssal failure that was (and looks like is going to be again) the Surface RT. Android is beating the Surface, that's not (and never was) the job of Chrome to begin with.

I don't understand how Microsoft thinks releasing the same product they just lost $900 million on again with a slightly faster processor is going to change anything. If they released the RT form factor with an Intel Bay Trail or AMD Temash chip running full x86 Windows, I think they would have a big hit on their hands. The problem with Microsoft currently is that they have no plan or direction. They, (similar to the post-Jobs apple) are becoming a largely reactive company.
 


Android and Chrome OS are two different things. They both run Linux kernels and are backed by Google, but that's pretty much where similarities end.

Android is designed as a general purpose mobile OS, running apps in a Dalvik Virtual Machine.
Chrome OS is designed to boot and run Google Chrome as fast and secure as possible, without having to consider compatibility with third party software.

While you could install Android on a laptop, there are many GNU/Linux distributions that would be more suitable for the purpose.
 
The chromebook kind of requires a learning curve. I like the IDEA that it's all chrome-based, but it's not as versatile as I'd like. Love Google, but still like Windows. Sorry.
 
I wonder how many people say "Chromebooks are AWESOME! I LOVE them!" while still going bananas with glee pointing out that Windows RT doesn't run x86 apps...
 
I’m one of those people. First off, the Surface does not compete with the Chromebook, it competes in the $500 range with high end Android tablets, the iPad, and mid range laptops. The Chromebook is a sub $300 netbook.

The primary benefit to running Windows is having access to x86 apps. That’s the Windows advantage over Apple and Android. Without that, you’re comparing a tablet with relatively low end specs that was priced outrageously high for what it offered to well established contenders. $450 plus $100 for a flimsy keyboard cover? A much smaller app ecosystem combined with high end price for low end specs meant failure for the first Surface RT and things haven’t changed with the second one.

All of this goes without mentioning similar products that other OEM manufacturers were coming up with running full Windows, proving it could be done. In fact, the new Asus T100 absolutely destroys the Surface in terms of value.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom