Since you are being quiet about it, I just want to understand - is Chromoting something like Remote Desktop Connection? Can you spare some more details regarding this component? use cases, platform support?
By the way, you seem to have disabled the VP8 part because it needed to be integrated into Chrome first, but it has already been integrated since then, so I guess you can enable the VP8 part again.
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 20:06, Gary Kačmarčík <gary...@google.com> wrote: > Our "official" statement at the moment is:
> "We're adding new capabilities all the time. With this functionality > (unofficially named "chromoting"), Chrome OS will not only be great platform > for running modern web apps, but will also enable you to access legacy PC > applications right within the browser. We'll have more details to share on > chromoting in the coming months."
> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 2:02 AM, PhistucK <phist...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Since you are being quiet about it, I just want to understand - is >> Chromoting something like Remote Desktop Connection?
> Yes. "something like..."
>> Can you spare some more details regarding this component? use cases, >> platform support?
> Sadly, not right now. We'll have more info later.
> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 20:06, Gary Kačmarčík <gary...@google.com> wrote:
> > (unofficially named "chromoting"), Chrome OS will not only be great platform
> > for running modern web apps, but will also enable you to access legacy PC
> > applications right within the browser.
On Jun 8, 10:10 am, PhistucK <phist...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That certainly makes Chrome OS much more usable for mostly anyone.
I agree! Being able to run legacy PC apps is great!
Granted, for a long while, I thought you were trying to strongly
discourage running legacy apps because of security risks. I was
assuming all standalone apps Chrome OS would be to be compiled/re-
compiled with NaCl?
You will not be able to actually run applications, you will just use a remote desktop connection sort of thing, to connect to your Windows\Linux\Macintosh computer and use it remotely. The data will stay on the remote computer, not on the Chrome OS computer.
Semantics, but still.
Native Client will not allow you to run a regular application, I believe. It will still be sandboxed, so there are a lot of limitations.
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 20:53, krtulmay <krtul...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 20:06, Gary Kačmarčík <gary...@google.com> wrote: > > > (unofficially named "chromoting"), Chrome OS will not only be great > platform > > > for running modern web apps, but will also enable you to access legacy > PC > > > applications right within the browser.
> On Jun 8, 10:10 am, PhistucK <phist...@gmail.com> wrote: > > That certainly makes Chrome OS much more usable for mostly anyone.
> I agree! Being able to run legacy PC apps is great!
> Granted, for a long while, I thought you were trying to strongly > discourage running legacy apps because of security risks. I was > assuming all standalone apps Chrome OS would be to be compiled/re- > compiled with NaCl?
Is this true Gary? When you said "Chrome OS ..... will also enable
you to access legacy PC applications right within the browser"
do you mean "able to access" that Chrome OS will run some sort of
remote desktop to connect to another computer and run the legacy apps
from that other computer?
If that's the case, I would say your original wording is a little
confusing and doesn't make it clear that the legacy apps are not
running from the Chrome OS computer.
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 1:10 PM, PhistucK <phist...@gmail.com> wrote: > Oh. > Now I get it, all of the pieces come together now. ;) > That certainly makes Chrome OS much more usable for mostly anyone. > Cool!
> ☆PhistucK
> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 20:06, Gary Kačmarčík <gary...@google.com> wrote:
>> Our "official" statement at the moment is:
>> "We're adding new capabilities all the time. With this functionality >> (unofficially named "chromoting"), Chrome OS will not only be great platform >> for running modern web apps, but will also enable you to access legacy PC >> applications right within the browser. We'll have more details to share on >> chromoting in the coming months."
>> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 2:02 AM, PhistucK <phist...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Since you are being quiet about it, I just want to understand - is >>> Chromoting something like Remote Desktop Connection?
>> Yes. "something like..."
>>> Can you spare some more details regarding this component? use cases, >>> platform support?
>> Sadly, not right now. We'll have more info later.
I'm struggling to see the usefulness of this, I'm not going to keep my
Windows Laptop running to use programs such as the Adobe suite. My
experience with virtual machines also shows that they run quite slowly
- fine for cross-browser testing, but not the kind of 3D modelling and
video editing software that are the main reasons I don't think I'll be
able to switch to Chrome.
When I first read about Chromoting I was hoping it'd be something more
along the lines of OnLive - i.e, the 'legacy' programs are running on
super-powerful remote machines. Google could set up a pay-per use
license with the software manufactures to allow them to be used
remotely, which'd also cut piracy down. And the thought of rendering
an entire 3D scene or movie on one of Google's supercomputers in
seconds would surely be enough of a reason to get a lot of power users
switching.
On Jun 9, 7:49 pm, Tim Romano <tim.romano...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 1:10 PM, PhistucK <phist...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Oh.
> > Now I get it, all of the pieces come together now. ;)
> > That certainly makes Chrome OS much more usable for mostly anyone.
> > Cool!
> > ☆PhistucK
> > On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 20:06, Gary Kačmarčík <gary...@google.com> wrote:
> >> Our "official" statement at the moment is:
> >> "We're adding new capabilities all the time. With this functionality
> >> (unofficially named "chromoting"), Chrome OS will not only be great platform
> >> for running modern web apps, but will also enable you to access legacy PC
> >> applications right within the browser. We'll have more details to share on
> >> chromoting in the coming months."
> >> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 2:02 AM, PhistucK <phist...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Since you are being quiet about it, I just want to understand - is
> >>> Chromoting something like Remote Desktop Connection?
> >> Yes. "something like..."
> >>> Can you spare some more details regarding this component? use cases,
> >>> platform support?
> >> Sadly, not right now. We'll have more info later.
On Thursday, June 10, 2010 04:57:23 pm MarkLunney wrote:
> I'm struggling to see the usefulness of this, I'm not going to keep my > Windows Laptop running to use programs such as the Adobe suite. My > experience with virtual machines also shows that they run quite slowly > - fine for cross-browser testing, but not the kind of 3D modelling and > video editing software that are the main reasons I don't think I'll be > able to switch to Chrome.
Virtual machines run pretty quickly on my computer, and I just have an AMD Athlon 64 X2 3600+ 2GHz processor, and an old GeForce 7100 graphics card. Even without video acceleration (in the VM) it runs reasonably fast, but with it it's almost as if it's native (if I had more memory, it would probably be the same as native. Only have 1.5GB, atm). Since they're coming out with processors that have more cores now, and since almost all AMD am2 and later processors have hardware virtualization (I hear it's iffy on Intel's side, though... which ones have it, that is), it shouldn't be a problem even if you have a laptop (in the future, at least).
That said, you're still free to choose whether you want to leave your laptop running or not. I probably wouldn't, either.
Wow, I didn't expect several tech sites to quote me on my previous
comment. I regret coming off negatively now!
For the record I think Chromoting is a great addition to Chrome OS.
Benjamin - you may well be right, my experience with VMs is limited
and Chromoting may well run fine if the system is designed for it.
The main point of my post was my suggestion to allow remote access to
software running on Google's servers (which was conveniently not
included in the websites that quoted me). I reckon this could turn
Chromoting from a useful addition to a revolutionary feature, though
it'd likely be while before license agreements could be made.
