Paul Buchheit: The Cloud OS

http://paulbuchheit.blogspot.com/2010/12/cloud-os.html

by paul • 16 years ago

100 41 16 years ago

paulbuchheit.blogspot.com

gvb• 16 years ago

Typo? s/now/not/

"(BTW, Apple is lame for now allowing a native Gmail app on the iPhone -- email is the one place where Android really outshines the iPhone for me)"

paul5• 16 years ago

Oops. Fixed. Thanks.

TomOfTTB7• 16 years ago

I still think he’s missing the point here. Android’s ability to run native apps IS its weakness. ChromeOS, believe it or not, employs the Apple method of success. Apple imposes all kinds of restrictions on its developers but the end result is applications that are remarkably uniform. By making ChromeOS web only Google is imposing “use the cloud” on its developers and in doing so creating an environment that fulfills the promise of portability (Android and iOS come close but aren’t anywhere near seamless)

As for the two points that will lead to Chrome’s demise…

ChromeOS will lose because it will lack native apps – That seems short sighted to me. If Android is brought to the point where it supports web apps built for ChromeOS there will be very little reason to develop native Android apps. Assuming ChromeOS is not dead on arrival it makes all the sense in the world to target 2 platforms instead of one (especially when the development tools are the same ones everyone uses on the web). Especially given those apps also have a good chance of running on Palm’s OS, Blackberry and Windows Phone 7 with very little modification (and even the iPhone in a crippled way)

Touch vs Mouse - I wrote a post after working on a touch application so I’ll just direct you there: http://tomstechblog.com/post/A-Quick-Indictment-Of-The-Finge.... The gist was that touch really doesn’t replace the mouse in practical situations (and I wrote that before owning an iPad so you can add “your screen gets dirty much quicker” to the list of reasons).

paul5• 16 years ago

Native apps still "use the cloud". The only substantial difference is the language and APIs used to develop them.

TomOfTTB7• 16 years ago

But they don't have to use the cloud. Meaning native apps can (and in my experience do) leave data on the device which in turn means the user experience isn't seamless from device to device. You're so focused on the technical aspect you're missing the philosophical side of this which is the important part. By forcing app developers to use the cloud you create a guaranteed seamlessness and that's the whole point.

antimatter15• 16 years ago

"Native" really isn't that significant. When Android first came out, it's "native" applications were all apps that were written more or less from scratch using the Android APIs. When Android first came out, there were essentially zero apps. "Native" usually isn't raw ARM binaries either, it's in the form of dalvik vm bytecode, optimized not for speed, but for executable size. The only time native is useful is with truly performance critical applications, and the vast majority of apps aren't performance critical. Javascript runtimes are getting faster with each release and the huge amount of competition between browser vendors. Chrome also has Native Client, which would be the equivalent of Android's NDK.

If by "native" you mean the user interface consistency, acknowledging that web apps will be significant pretty much destroys that anyway. Lots of iOS/Android apps don't even use the native UI widgets anyway, so it's not a really worthy goal.

Android started with a huge disadvantage: not having any apps. Yet only a few years later, the platform hundreds of thousands. Chrome and the web as a platform is much more approachable, and for every existing android or iOS app, in a short time, there will be rough equivalents that can be made.

From the start, Chrome has millions. All of them can be accessed with a consistent interface, where there's a single notion of an application. If android takes over, then you'll be constantly switching contexts from the browser and the "native" applications.

lukeschlather• 16 years ago

Have you spent much time with an Android phone? Android's strength is how seamlessly you can switch contexts. It's easy, it's fun, and it's efficient.

There's definitely a place for ChromeOS, but I'd rather use Android, because the browser just plain sucks at some things.

spinchange• 16 years ago

ChromeOS lack of native apps = Lack of HTML5 websties?

MarkMc• 16 years ago

"If Android is brought to the point where it supports web apps built for ChromeOS there will be very little reason to develop native Android apps."

From what I've seen, the gap between a native Android app and web apps is getting bigger, not smaller. Among other things, the Android API includes: 1. A SIP-based VoIP protocol stack 2. Near Field Communications 3. Gyroscope and other sensors 4. Multiple cameras support 5. Speech recognition engines

Even if these things were available tomorrow to web apps, developers might still choose the native option because a) There would be millions of 'old' devices that only supported the native API; and b) There would be thousands of developers who were familiar with the native API

ratsbane• 16 years ago

There's accelerometer support in Firefox, Chrome, Opera, and Safari (at least mobile Opera and Safari) now. It's only a matter of time until we have useable APIs for NFC, camera, etc. I'm wondering when there's going to be a browser USB API. I can think of some things I'd like to do with that.

orangecat4• 16 years ago

I agree completely. Having all your stuff accessible wherever you are is a worthy goal. Ripping out the ability to use local storage and run native apps when appropriate isn't.

TomOfTTB7• 16 years ago

You can still use local storage in a cached form in ChromeOS. Given that let me ask you this: If technologies like WebGL give Web apps the ability to work and act like native ones would you support ChromeOS then?

trezor• 16 years ago

You're not going to see me using an OS where I have to use a SSH-client written in Javascript where I have to upload my keys to a random site on the internet.

By not supporting local applications, lots of the "cloudy" stuff I do, for instance by hooking up to remote sessions via SSH and RDP, is not viable or is inherently much more complicated and less smooth. The "everything is in the cloud" goes both ways. Prevent me from accessing it and your OS is actually less "cloud-capable". Like ChromeOS is.

Edit: To come off a little bit less rantish, what I think is the key point here is that the proponents of ChromeOS, who wants it to succeed, has their vision somewhat clouded (pun intended).

I don't think anyone here questions the potential of the web as a platform. For certain kinds of applications. We have all seen the amazing stuff happening on the web, while the desktop has been at a relative standstill. We know what this technology can do, and it is finally getting some momentum. Change is happening at a fantastic pace and we're moving forward towards a new web with even more capabilities.

But in all this excitement it's easy to forget that just because a platform can do something doesn't mean it's the best fit for the task. Certain things just works better as local applications. Remember the catch-phrase "use the right tool for the job"?

Why do you want to shoehorn everything into the web, even where it doesn't provide you any benefits? Why should we scrap all out working applications, just because someone out there has written the same application, somewhat limited, in HTML and JS? And why are you so eager about losing control of your data?

Lots of common computer use-cases depends on reasonable IO-capabilities. Until everyone has at least a 100mbps synchronous internet-connection and the internet as a whole has a backbone to support this, these kinds of applications will be severely impaired.

The web is nice. Being forced to go web only when it's not practical is less so.

orangecat4• 16 years ago

Once "web" apps are using local storage and running offline and using the full power of the hardware, it's not clear what distinguishes them from "native" apps. Other than having to be written in the often-less-than-ideal HTML+JS+CSS, and even that isn't necessarily the case with NaCl.

onteria• 16 years ago

The one thing I haven't seen much discussion on with regards to cloud based operating systems is the handling of local peripheral devices. Printers, scanners, video cameras, etc. These devices are used by a wide range of users, from someone who emails pictures to their family, to an amateur who wants to shoot their next film project.

Right now, these devices are not very cloud friendly. In general you plug your printer, scanner, etc. into a USB or Firewire port. From there the operating system needs to work with the printer through some kind of driver. With the sandboxing that I've seen with Chrome OS, it appears to be a rather daunting task to support a wide array of such devices.

Another issue is the bandwidth cost. Let's say I somehow make a video camera "web enabled". Instead of interfacing with the PC through USB, it connects through wifi or wired ethernet. From there you could upload your video to a cloud app that does video editing, or upload it straight to youtube. However, what happens though when it's an hour long video of a family wedding? Depending on the camera's storage format, this could turn out to be a giant gigabyte file, and will take a ridiculously long time to upload given standard broadband connections.

Until this issue has a good solution, I see it extremely difficult to achieve this "live in the cloud" philosophy. This is not to say it's impossible, just that it needs to be well thought out.

skybrian• 16 years ago

For printing, this is a start: http://code.google.com/apis/cloudprint/

TomOfTTB7• 16 years ago

I think the answer to both your questions is that the only way Google will succeed with ChromeOS is if they consider it a long-term play. The goal should be to have the most refined cloud based system 5-10 years from now. When looking at your questions from that perspective I’d give you two answers…

On Peripherals – Google is already addressing that problem with Cloud Print right now. The same concepts could easily be translated to other peripherals. Anyone whose tried to use it will tell you the concept is very rough right now but it has promise and several companies have agreed (in theory) to support it in their hardware with future versions.

On Large Files – I don’t know of anyone who doesn’t think our current bandwidth is just a fraction of what will be available to us 10 years from now. For video editors who need to use raw files I don’t think Chrome is appropriate but Google’s said as much by targeting the OS at the netbook/low-end notebook market to start. Again the point is to refine the OS through iteration (as Google does with all their products) so when editing video in the cloud is a possibility they'll already have the most refined OS for it.

Lewisham2• 16 years ago

re: Large Files... there's no reason the files have to be transmitted to the server anyway, the app could access local storage just fine. This probably indicates that the "save" paradigm is broken, and instead we'll need to start thinking about how to present "local save" to "cloud save" to users.

DanielRibeiro• 16 years ago

So true: This global super-computer enables us to do things that would have been impossible not long ago, such as instantly search billions of documents, .... leak embarrassing diplomatic cables, etc.

roadnottaken• 16 years ago

Does Chrome OS have a solution to The Airplane Problem?

(Can't really use it as a mobile computer if you can't use it on an airplane.)

paul5• 16 years ago

I think WiFi on airplanes is the solution to The Airplane Problem :)

jallmann3• 16 years ago

ChromeOS needs to expose the hardware capabilities of its host machine. That is really the only reason for native apps these days -- access to camera, accelerometers, various coprocessors, etc. Perhaps that will become viable if NaCl takes off, I don't know.

But speaking as a developer, the ChromeOS development model is much saner than those of its mobile counterparts. iPhone/Android development is antiquated and miserable in comparison. We are stifling ourselves by perpetuating a development model that worked in the 1990's.

Wherefore art thou, WebOS? You need a champion.

orangecat4• 16 years ago

That is really the only reason for native apps these days -- access to camera, accelerometers, various coprocessors, etc

Or the CPU running at its full potential rather than interpreting Javascript, or storage that doesn't have 100+ millisecond network latency, or UI frameworks that were designed for applications rather than text documents...

The web is great for lots of things. The insistence that it should be the One True Way for applications strikes me as a case of man-with-a-hammer syndrome.

jallmann3• 16 years ago

But poll any dev and ask which is more pleasant to write UI-heavy apps in: web tools, or Java? The forced decoupling of the presentation (HTML) from the styling (CSS) and application logic (JavaScript) is really a nice way of doing things.

I don't think this is man-with-a-hammer syndrome, merely that the approach to building web apps translates well for 90% of native apps. For everything else, there's a FFI or NDK.

The major failing of ChromeOS, in my opinion, is that it needs an internet connection to work. (WebOS, for example, does not). The closest analog to "local" apps are browser extensions, and that is still a reasonable approach; the capabilities of such just need to be expanded a little. HTML5-style offline functionality is another option.

FWIW, most of my work is done in C these days. Different tools for different tasks.

nextparadigms• 16 years ago

Wouldn't it have been great if Google bought/made WebOS in the first place? It's the perfect combination between Chrome OS and Android.

bl4k• 16 years ago

That is really the only reason for native apps these days -- access to camera, accelerometers, various coprocessors, etc.

All of these are steadily being added as HTML5 (formerly Web Applications 1.0) API's. Even OpenGL and direct graphics optimizations.

For eg. the geolocation API already exists:

http://dev.w3.org/geo/api/spec-source.html

loup-vaillant• 16 years ago

(duplicate from the post's comment thread)

Good post, but there are two important things you overlooked here.

First, dumb terminals are about control. Not speed. Not behind the scenes smart shenanigans. Control at the user level. By that definition, web browsers and IPhones are Dumb. Jailbroken IPhones, Android phones (not locked), and PCs, are Smart. That's what cloud OS detractors talk about when they say "dumb terminal".

Second, viewing the internet as a secure vault that you can summon at will can be dangerous. Like, get-your-identity-stolen dangerous. (You know this, but many people don't.) There's also systemic risks associated with the centralization encouraged by the (re-)rise of dumb terminals. And you wouldn't want anyone to look at your private data (say your e-mail). Or doing automatic semantic analysis on it so it can directly extract the good stuff… and use it to his advantage.

Now, I agree the couple "cloud + dumb terminals" is extremely convenient, and has an unmatched potential for ease of use. Now if only it didn't require the user to relinquish his right for privacy (an even other freedoms in some cases), that would be great. Personally, I'm looking forward to see Eben Moglen's FreedomBox.

GeneralMaximus• 16 years ago

> For example, interacting with my FriendFeed page involves the coordination of thousands of individual processors and disks owned by a dozen different entities, including you, Facebook, Amazon, Google, your ISP, and many intermediate ISPs.

Put that way, the entire idea of "the cloud" sounds scary. I have a sudden urge to replace all the webapps I use with native apps.

wazoox• 16 years ago

Did you miss RMS' point of view about the cloud by any chance?

dave1619• 16 years ago

I have to agree with the author. There's nothing super unique and powerful about Chrome OS that can't be replicated and done better on top of Android. Further, iOS and Android have incredible momentum right now, and it's hard seeing Chrome OS picking up much traction, especially once Android 3.0 tablets start coming out.

Paul Buchheit: The Cloud OS

Related Stories