×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

The Chromebook Pixel Is Real, and Expensive

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the shifting-value-proposition dept.

Chrome 392

First time accepted submitter Lirodon writes "Just when you thought Google's rumored Chrome OS laptop, the Chromebook Pixel, was an elaborate fake, think again. This high-end Chromebook with a 12.85-inch high resolution touchscreen (available in both Wi-Fi only and Verizon LTE versions) and an Intel Core i5 processor under the hood is super fancy, and also super expensive: starting at $1299. Would you want to pay that much for what is essentially a premium netbook?" Engadget has a hands-on with the device.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

lol @ poor people (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971297)

$1300 isn't expensive.

nope (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971305)

nope

Well.. (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971309)

No

Re:Well.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971367)

Maybe

Re:Well.. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971591)

No

Re:Well.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971619)

Yes!

Re:Well.. (3, Interesting)

rtfa-troll (1340807) | about 2 years ago | (#42971629)

Depends...

On if you can hack it. As long as you can still open up the developer mode and if you can upgrade the local storage, even with some difficulty then this becomes a way of getting a MacBook Pro workalike without giving money to either Apple or Microsoft then I'm for it. Actually I will go for the more "expensive" 64G / LTE version too. It's still cheaper than the $2,199.00 Amazon pops up with for a retina Macbook.

I especially love the idea of having a proper shape of screen. I would sacrifice very much performance for that.

wow, that's a ton more expensive than I expected (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971315)

I was quite enthused about this when they started leaking the specs, but that's at least 2x what I'd be willing to pay.

Re:wow, that's a ton more expensive than I expecte (2, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 2 years ago | (#42971427)

Then you are not going to get a machine of this caliber. The display is expensive, the method of construction is expensive, plus like all luxury goods there will be a good deal of markup.

Re:wow, that's a ton more expensive than I expecte (2, Insightful)

rwa2 (4391) | about 2 years ago | (#42971749)

Hmm, the price would make sense if they actually had a nice video card in there...
But an Intel HD 4000 ?

I'm not expecting that to keep up with the high-res display. Though I guess with all of the touchscreen smudges, it wouldn't matter as much...

needs more ram as well 4gb is small at that price (4, Insightful)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about 2 years ago | (#42971919)

needs more ram as well 4gb is small at that price also flash size is small.

Re:wow, that's a ton more expensive than I expecte (4, Informative)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 2 years ago | (#42971929)

It should not be a problem. I have a very similar built in intel card driving a 1366x768 and a 1920x1080 screen at the same time.

Re:wow, that's a ton more expensive than I expecte (4, Informative)

Bill Hayden (649193) | about 2 years ago | (#42972253)

But an Intel HD 4000 ?

I'm not expecting that to keep up with the high-res display.

It doesn't seem to be a problem for the Retina version of the MacBook Pro 13", which uses the same chip.

x86? REALLY? (2)

ButchDeLoria (2772751) | about 2 years ago | (#42971323)

Oh well, at least this will (hopefully) allow me to install a real version of Linux.

Re:x86? REALLY? (1)

cristiroma (606375) | about 2 years ago | (#42971517)

Also my old Dell allows installing Linux. Too bad the broadcom wireless works only in g mode and the ATI driver renders porn movies using 3d acceleration at 100% , allowing me to bake some eggs in the mean time.

Re:x86? REALLY? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971621)

Does "real" Linux/X11 have good high-dpi support? Honest question, b/c Windows looks like shit on a MacBook Retina.

Re:x86? REALLY? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971773)

b/c Windows looks like shit

FTFY

Re:x86? REALLY? (-1, Troll)

gl4ss (559668) | about 2 years ago | (#42972239)

Does "real" Linux/X11 have good high-dpi support? Honest question, b/c Windows looks like shit on a MacBook Retina.

any real os gui has flexible dpi support.
(that counts out osx - doublepixeling is not it.. at least windows tries, and it's better in every version).

Unask (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971329)

>Would you want to pay that much for what is essentially a premium netbook?

Can I unask this question?

Re:Unask (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971989)

Wouldn't a 'premium' notebook have a real OS?

Looks pretty good. (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 2 years ago | (#42971343)

Assuming I can flop it into dev mode and easily install Chrubuntu it looks interesting. A nice laptop is not going to be cheap and the old chromebooks were cheap pieces of shit. I just wish someone made one of these ultrabooks run a normal linux distro out of the box. Please don't respond with links to the POS dell one. Last I looked the screen resolution was pathetic and the build quality was typical dell.

Re:Looks pretty good. (5, Insightful)

BanHammor (2587175) | about 2 years ago | (#42971365)

Still, it's like 1 million dollar vodka - it does its job for sure, but it is surely a little expensive for that.

Re:Looks pretty good. (1, Informative)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 2 years ago | (#42971447)

It does not seem to cost more than the only other competitors, macbook pro or air if that comes out with the better display this year.

1 million dollar vodka costs a lot more than even super premium vodka, this laptop is pretty reasonably priced compared to its competitors.

Re:Looks pretty good. (1)

Bigby (659157) | about 2 years ago | (#42971993)

All you need is a few crazy obsessed people and PROFIT!

Re:Looks pretty good. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971479)

The screen resolution got bumped to 1920x1080 with a nice screen, still 13.3".

Re:Looks pretty good. (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 2 years ago | (#42971549)

What about the 11.6?
1920x1080 might be good enough on that one, I was hoping for more on the 13".

Re:Looks pretty good. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971555)

Dell upped the res on the XPS 13 from 720p to 1080p, so it's a step in the right direction. But a peer of mine won one in a draw and it barely made it out of the box before the hard drive failed (second boot according to him). Can't strictly blame Dell for that but still sucks on a new laptop.

Re:Looks pretty good. (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 2 years ago | (#42971609)

Still too low. My laptop from ~2000 had a 1400x1050 display. In 13 years I had hoped for more.

Did they fix the flexing? The one I played with, was before they went on sale, had nasty flexing if you held only one corner.

See proof of ancient high res display below.
http://www.lcds4less.com/SagerLaptop__Sager_NP8560__laptop-screens.html [lcds4less.com]

Re:Looks pretty good. (4, Insightful)

beelsebob (529313) | about 2 years ago | (#42972033)

I don't get why you'd want this – it's only $100 less than a 13" rMBP, while having 4GB less RAM, a much much smaller SSD, and a far inferior OS.

Re:Looks pretty good. (0)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 2 years ago | (#42972261)

For me it would be which ever is easier to install linux on. I don't think the OS is that inferior OSX sucks pretty bad for me.

Seems expensive for a notebook. (2)

rajanala83 (813645) | about 2 years ago | (#42971351)

Is it worth the money?

Re:Seems expensive for a notebook. (1, Insightful)

Tough Love (215404) | about 2 years ago | (#42971649)

Is it worth the money?

Especially considering it comes preinstalled with crippleware.

Re:Seems expensive for a notebook. (2, Funny)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 2 years ago | (#42971699)

Just like a normal laptop and just like a normal laptop you can install linux to your hearts content.

Re:Seems expensive for a notebook. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971959)

Enjoy your 64gigs for 1300 dollars.
 
Lolz!!!

Re:Seems expensive for a notebook. (2)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about 2 years ago | (#42972287)

How so? ChromeOS isn't as flexible as Windows, but it isn't "crippled". You can install any software you like on it, and enable developer mode to get a root shell. You can compile it from source (Chromium OS) if you like.

MICROSOFT TAX! (5, Funny)

CajunArson (465943) | about 2 years ago | (#42971353)

This thing would obviously only be $2.99 + S&H if it weren't for the Microsoft tax! I'm tired of M$ driving up the price of hardware with ... interruption... whispering .... uh... I'm tired of the GOOGLE TAX!

Gee whiz (0)

OzPeter (195038) | about 2 years ago | (#42971361)

Similar form factor and specs to a Mac Book Pro .. and guess what .. similar price. Take that you Apple Apologists .. um .. err .. [Facepalm]

Re:Gee whiz (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42972113)

I was just thinking to myself, "That's a pretty sexy thing, a bit like a mbp. Too bad it's a chromebook."

I feel like I've been punk'd.

Cheap alternative to Retina MacBook (1, Informative)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about 2 years ago | (#42971387)

Hey, it's an x86 PC, even if it runs a crappy OS. I suspect most of these will eventually wind up running Windows, unless there's something about the hardware that prevents this.

For people who liked the Retina hardware on the new MacBooks but couldn't justify the price (and don't care about or don't want OSX), this could be a good alternative. I'll wait a while, though: I don't see this price point lasting very long.

Re:Cheap alternative to Retina MacBook (4, Informative)

alen (225700) | about 2 years ago | (#42971459)

Apple just dropped the price on all their retina laptops

Re:Cheap alternative to Retina MacBook (1)

EvanED (569694) | about 2 years ago | (#42971653)

...and with the macbook pros starting at $1500, they're still more expensive.

Re:Cheap alternative to Retina MacBook (0)

OzPeter (195038) | about 2 years ago | (#42971733)

...and with the macbook pros starting at $1500, they're still more expensive.

The low end MacBook Pro ($1499) has better specs that the low end Chromebook ($1299) - 128GB vs 32GB. The high end Chromebook ($1450) comes with 64GB .. and is only $50 cheaper that the low end MacBook

Re:Cheap alternative to Retina MacBook (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42972153)

And comes with a data connection.

Re:Cheap alternative to Retina MacBook (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971839)

Yeah but the 13" MBP comes with a stand alone OS, a faster processor and a real hard drive. Somehow that more than justifies the additional 200 dollars.
 
And don't get me wrong, I'm not a Mac fanboy. I do own a 15 inch MBP Retina with most of the bells and whistles and when people ask if it's worth the price I tell them not really unless they have to run OSX for some reason. I wanted to step into something different to kill off the compugeek blahs that I had been getting recently. I don't regret buying it but I don't really recommend it to others if money is a question.

Re:Cheap alternative to Retina MacBook (1)

Subratik (1747672) | about 2 years ago | (#42971675)

I'm 90 % sure they only dropped the price for the 13 in model. The other model's specs were bumped up by a little for the same price.

Re:Cheap alternative to Retina MacBook (4, Informative)

tlhIngan (30335) | about 2 years ago | (#42971973)

Hey, it's an x86 PC, even if it runs a crappy OS. I suspect most of these will eventually wind up running Windows, unless there's something about the hardware that prevents this.

For people who liked the Retina hardware on the new MacBooks but couldn't justify the price (and don't care about or don't want OSX), this could be a good alternative. I'll wait a while, though: I don't see this price point lasting very long.

You can't run Windows on a Chromebook. The BIOS doesn't exist - just a small loader that can boot Linux and that's it. You can flip a hidden switch into "developer mode" where it'll let you have a command prompt, but that's really all there is. You can modify ChromeOS at that point to have a Linux system (there are instructions for installing Ubuntu, but it involves a bit of work with DD).

In regular non-developer mode, ChromeOS is quite locked down.

Re:Cheap alternative to Retina MacBook (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42972065)

https://play.google.com/store/devices/details?id=chromebook_pixel_wifi

This has a 32 GB SSD. I think that right there prevents Windows.

It has similar specs to a base model Macbook Pro Retina, except half the RAM and 1/4th the disk space. The increase in disk space alone would usually justify a $200 price difference. MBP has faster processor, better battery life, but is slightly thicker and heavier. It could pass for comparable to the rest of the line of MBPs, but I think that the 32 GB would cripple it in comparison, for anyone looking for MPB alternative.

The 32 GB SSD makes this a netbook with an ultrabook body.

Netbook??? (5, Insightful)

nomel (244635) | about 2 years ago | (#42971417)

Since when is Core i5, Intel HD 4000, and 4GB of ram, and a screen with an absurdly high resolution, considered a netbook?

Sure, it has a netbook os installed...but that doesn't mean anything. I could also install windows 3.1...big deal.

Re:Netbook??? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971483)

Since when is Core i5, Intel HD 4000, and 4GB of ram, and a screen with an absurdly high resolution, considered a netbook?

When all it can do is web browsing?

Besides, 4GB is pretty lame for a new system. I'd have that much in my netbook if the Atom chipset supported more than 2GB.

Re:Netbook??? (3, Interesting)

jythie (914043) | about 2 years ago | (#42971513)

As specs evolve and advances slow down, what software something runs will probably increasingly become the differentiating factor.

Re:Netbook??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971561)

Indeed, this seems more of an uberbook, the screen aspect ratio is very interesting.

Re:Netbook??? (1)

IndustrialComplex (975015) | about 2 years ago | (#42971565)

The only standard definition I've seen for netbook is:

Clamshell and no optical drive.

Re:Netbook??? (2, Insightful)

hedwards (940851) | about 2 years ago | (#42971847)

If you filter out the MS astroturfers, a netbook is a low cost, minimalist computer with low specs that's mostly useful for the net.

MS had a cow when Asus had success with the Eee PC line and started to apply pressure to release Windows netbooks. At which point, the whole definition was pretty much broken as the specs had to be just about doubled to make that work with XP and the cost went above what normal people would pay.

As for your definition, that would include UMPCs as well, which is sort of a problem.

Re:Netbook??? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971947)

Gotta love how slashdot blames everything on a vast Microsoft conspiracy.

What really happened was Intel pushed real laptops down into the $400 range, and that killed the demand for crippled 11" Atoms with shitty keyboards.

Re:Netbook??? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42972229)

Uh, no. The original netbooks were Linux with small SSDs and limited RAM, because that's all they needed. It was only when Microsoft demanded everything run Windows that they became expensive, bloated pigs with big hard drives.

And many of us buying netbooks did so precisely because they're half the size of a 'real' laptop. I can just chuck my Eee PC into my bag when I go traveling and hardly notice it, rather than carry a separate bag for a laptop that I have to recharge every three hours.

Re:Netbook??? (1)

jkflying (2190798) | about 2 years ago | (#42971867)

10.1" screen? Any bigger than that and I wouldn't call it a netbook any more.

Re:Netbook??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971923)

I thought size counted too, with a netbook generally having a screen size between 7" and 9". Otherwise, that would mean the Macbook Air counts as a netbook. And while I've heard the Macbook Air called a lot of things, "netbook" has never been one of those things.

Re:Netbook??? (1)

lightknight (213164) | about 2 years ago | (#42972027)

Laptop -> portable computer, been around for years.
Netbook -> mini-sized laptop, unlikely to have an optical drive.
Ultrabook -> laptop without an optical drive.

Re:Netbook??? (1)

lightknight (213164) | about 2 years ago | (#42971941)

I'm not really sure what it is, to be honest.

On one hand, the resolution is impressive, and always on the 'I want' list. On the other hand, the lack of dedicated video card, small storage space, USB 2.0 ports...ouch. I writing this comment on a laptop from HP, that I bought several months ago, whose specs, with the exception of that resolution, somewhat trounce this thing, for the same price. I've upgraded mine, so it has 16GB of RAM, and a 240 GB SSD, but still, it came with 8 GB of RAM, which is 4 more than this thing from Google...and it's not like the i5 is a 32-bit processor or that RAM is expensive.

Unless I am missing something, it looks very expensive, and underpowered. It looks like a laptop, with the hardware of a netbook, save the disk space you expect from a tablet. And they're charging prices like it's mid-level laptop. *shudders*

Now, it makes sense in that Google is an internet company, not a hardware company, and their strategy is to tether you as closely as possible to their existing services to make as much money as possible. Still, from a freedom perspective, as well as a bang for your buck perspective, this thing is a little weak if you have even one IT guy in house. On the other hand, perhaps this is part of the glorious revolution, where the masses pay for 32KB upgrades to their POP3 accounts, because they really, really are that kind of a terrible people, while the techs who are screaming about this are silenced with checks suddenly appearing in the mail for undisclosed, but potentially eye-popping, amounts, as well as gainful employment at these companies. A serious ethical dilemma, on par with being a defense contractor. But if the universe truly has gone mad, and is desperate to pay good money for little in return...yeah, I'd still probably have a problem with it.

Re:Netbook??? (1)

ohcrapitssteve (1185821) | about 2 years ago | (#42972199)

Since when is such a machine considered "premium?" :) Even if I wasn't a Mac fan, to buy this over a Macbook Air, which is also an x86 box at heart wouldn't make a ton of sense to me, as it could run the same x86 OSes but also run OSX natively without hackery and dodging updates that might break your Hackintosh, etc.

Re:Netbook??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42972277)

If you're not a Mac fan, you generally don't give a fuck about OSX and don't roll a Hackintosh, so that's not really a selling point.

"Hey guys, even if I didn't care about Mac OS, this other computer runs Mac OS, so how about that, huh?!"

Re:Netbook??? (2)

gl4ss (559668) | about 2 years ago | (#42972279)

premium means just premium "quality" and more importantly premium pricing.

you can buy a premium car with a shitty engine and be still paying premium for the badge.

Wow, reminds me of ... (1)

cristiroma (606375) | about 2 years ago | (#42971443)

WOW! Stevie would twist in his grave when he sees this cheap clone of a MacBook Pro!

-- Good artists copy, great artists steal

OMG, the display! (4, Insightful)

dabadab (126782) | about 2 years ago | (#42971461)

The only interesting thing in the whole machine is the display.
It has sane proportions (3:2) and it has a very decent resolution (2560x1700). Basically these were the worst problems of the notebooks of the last few years: the 16:9 display that made no sense whatsoever* and the laughably low resolution. Now it seems that these may go away.

*: please note that I'm talking about the really portable size range where basically the keyboard determines the width of the notebook - in this category the displays did not get wide; they got short, with huge unused spaces above and below them.

Re:OMG, the display! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971837)

Yeah, lets hope that the display idea catches the attention of other laptop builders. This 16x9 crap has to end...it's a movie ratio when almost no one uses a laptop to primarily watch movies. Maybe the occasional college student uses a laptop as the primary TV in their dorm room, but even then I'd say activities such as doing school work are predominant. But whatever.

Re:OMG, the display! (0)

hedwards (940851) | about 2 years ago | (#42971897)

The only problem with most 16:9 and 16:10 monitors is that typical OSes don't handle them very well. This is less of a problem with laptops than with large monitors. I have a 24" and a 22" monitor and because of the way the OS handles things, it means that I have to work around the fact that the browser and all the rest of the software assumes that I want to use the full width of the monitor. Which, I don't, the range within which vision is sharp is about half the width of the monitors.

This is one advantage of *NIX, it's relatively straight forward to solve the problem through the xorg.conf.

Re:OMG, the display! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42972063)

The only problem with most 16:9 and 16:10 monitors is that typical OSes don't handle them very well.

Garbage. There is a simple test. Take an A4 document with dense text. Fit the height to the screen. If you cannot comfortably read the text, take the monitor and shove it down the throat of the idiot who bought it for you. This leaves a minimum of 1000 vertical pixels for your own survival. No operating system magic can fix that.

resolution and monitor size (1)

ThorGod (456163) | about 2 years ago | (#42971491)

I like the idea, but the monitor size (13", about) is small! But it's got a high resolution and a touch screen...

Still, it's interesting if I can treat it like a unix laptop...

I'll call it an interesting direction. You certainly can't touch the screen on any MacBook(s) at the moment.

Re:resolution and monitor size (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 2 years ago | (#42971525)

I just touched the screen on my MacBook air. I seem to still be alive. I think you can touch it all you like. It does not treat it as input, but that does not prevent you from smudging up the display if you like.

Touch on a laptop seems like a terrible idea. It already has better methods of input. It works for phones and tablets because there really is no other option.

Competetive? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971529)

At the price, they're hardly beating the macbook or microsoft surface.

I still balk at the price, and that it's only a 12 inch chromebook for such a high res, but, it's good to have options. Hopefully samsung will come out with their own luxury model with good features.

Yay (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971533)

In order to better fit web content, which often flows vertically down a page, the screen is nearly as tall as it is wide.

So my 1920x800 laptop 'wide' screen isn't actually appropriate for most web content? You don't say...

Why did it take ten+ years to figure that out?

Taking a queue from Apple (-1, Flamebait)

ZeroSerenity (923363) | about 2 years ago | (#42971585)

Absurdly overpriced with a nice looking screen but incapable of running much? Yup. Sounds like it's trying to be Apple without being better than Apple.

This is why people still buy Windows laptops at less than $500.

Re:Taking a queue from Apple (2)

Tough Love (215404) | about 2 years ago | (#42971673)

The only good thing about Google beating on this dead horse till the end of time is, it's a great source of decent Ubuntu laptops.

No. (4, Interesting)

Richy_T (111409) | about 2 years ago | (#42971643)

In the last few days, I have switched over to the "Google is evil" camp and will be moving away from them as much as possible.

If anyone cares what pushed me over the edge, it was when I found they now require you have Google Plus to write a review in the play store. A move worthy of Microsoft at its vilest. This is not the only issue by any means though.

Re:No. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971927)

Same here, I just didn't comment nor gave what I believe is useful advice to other users and the developers. People freak out over national id's and stopping identity thefts but no complaints about corporations forcing us to give up privacy and the right to decide who knows who we are while doing something legal.

Re:No. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42972053)

Constantly pestering me to login to Youtube is what did it for me.

Storage! (1)

onyxruby (118189) | about 2 years ago | (#42971657)

Google should know better than to gimp the storage! Nice netbook, looks like it could be useful right up until you get to the point about storage. 32 GB for the base model or 64 GB for the upgrade model. It has a nice screen, I like that, but in the real world most people don't live in the cloud, they live off their hard drive!!!!

Google, quite being cheap and give people a hard drive that isn't the same spec I would have gotten from a model 5 years ago, okay? Just because you live in the cloud, just because your users utilize the cloud, doesn't mean that your users live in the cloud. Why is this so hard to understand?

Re:Storage! (2)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about 2 years ago | (#42971943)

Google should know better than to gimp the storage!

Google does this on purpose with all their devices, because they want you to live your entire life "in the cloud" (i.e. no data security and no privacy). This is why most newer Nexus devices don't have SD card slots. At least the Chromebook Pixel has one so you can add external storage for your stuff.

The real question is whether the Chromebook Pixel has its SSD in standard mSATA format, or if it uses some proprietary crap like the Macbooks do. If it's a standard mSATA drive, it wouldn't be hard to upgrade – you can get a decent 256GB mSATA drive for less than $200, and you're still paying less than you would for a comparable 15" Retina MacBook Pro.

That said, you can fit Windows 7 on the default amount of space – I've run it for a while on a 30GB SSD boot drive on one of my systems. The install comes to 10-15GB before adding any extra software. Of course, you need to keep all your actual data on a different drive.

Re:Storage! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42972041)

If Chrome OS takes less than 9GB it's still more space than the Surface Pro Base Model.... Just saying.

Re:Storage! (1)

farble1670 (803356) | about 2 years ago | (#42972173)

Just because you live in the cloud, just because your users utilize the cloud, doesn't mean that your users live in the cloud. Why is this so hard to understand?

google doesn't have a lot of interest in giving you a nice system to run linux. it only pays off for them if you use their cloud services. they aren't going to jack up the price / lower their profit margin to add hardware that doesn't support that end.

Google Docs and the Cloud Problem (2)

ideonexus (1257332) | about 2 years ago | (#42971659)

What keeps me from buying into the Chrome OS is the idea of having everything in the "cloud." A few months back I switched to Google Docs for all my writing, and the experience hasn't been the best. On my laptop, I've got local versions of all my docs, so it isn't too big a problem, but on my tablet, the local versions won't work unless there's an internet connection. I live just outside of DC, but Verizon's DSL is still unreliable. Many times I'm writing and docs looses the internet connection and freezes up, making me sit there waiting until it can sync my last edit with its servers.

What's worse is that Office 2013 is starting to go the Cloud-drive route too, so Word freezes up when I'm not connected to the Internet. You know what else freezes up when I'm not connected to the cloud? Mass Effect 3, right in the middle of my game play. Even though all the content is on my hard drive.

I am all for the cloud, but developers need to make sure their products work when I'm not connected to it. I have no intention of shelling out a $1000-plus dollars for a device that turns into a brick when I'm riding in a car just because my hot-spot can't get a cellphone signal.

No (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971677)

No.

Glossy display (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971689)

Do not want.

But who will have the last laugh when ... (0)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | about 2 years ago | (#42971715)

When Google unveils the other super secret project it has been keeping under the wraps, the Google WiMax Nationwide (tm) project that gives Wi-Fi access to all Chromebook Pixel users for free, who will be laughing? Pixel users get 50GB data per month, Nexus users 10 GB/month, all other Android users get 2GB/month free, Wi-Fi calling using VoIP is included too. If you need more data than that the planned rate is something like 1$/GB or something. Non Android gmail users pay 5$ a month for 2GB/ month. Non-Android Non-gmail users pay some 20$ a month for 2GB/month.

How accurate are the numbers? Where did I get this info? Well, I am just day dreaming, hoping this comes to pass, and everyone thinks I have a super high level mole inside Google organization. That should be worth some 15 minutes of fame, should it come to pass, that is.

Re:But who will have the last laugh when ... (1)

punkrockguy318 (808639) | about 2 years ago | (#42971817)

When Google unveils the other super secret project it has been keeping under the wraps, the Google WiMax Nationwide (tm) project that gives Wi-Fi access to all Chromebook Pixel users for free, who will be laughing? Pixel users get 50GB data per month, Nexus users 10 GB/month, all other Android users get 2GB/month free, Wi-Fi calling using VoIP is included too. If you need more data than that the planned rate is something like 1$/GB or something. Non Android gmail users pay 5$ a month for 2GB/ month. Non-Android Non-gmail users pay some 20$ a month for 2GB/month.

How accurate are the numbers? Where did I get this info? Well, I am just day dreaming, hoping this comes to pass, and everyone thinks I have a super high level mole inside Google organization. That should be worth some 15 minutes of fame, should it come to pass, that is.

When? Don't you mean if? Do you have any links whatsoever to back this up? And anyway I don't think I would be bummed out if Google rolls out WiMax and i wasn't an early adopter on their netbook...

For that price, they need a better ecosystem... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971743)

The hardware is nice and all, but Google needs a better software ecosystem for Chrome OS before something like this will fly. I have a Chromebook and I love it, but there just isn't that much good software available. Here's my advice: lose the Core i5, replace it with an Arm CPU like the Samsung Chromebook (I REALLY like the 6.5 hr battery life!) and integrate the Google Play Android appstore with Chrome OS. With the Arm CPU and a touchscreen, I would think that this would be do-able. I think that this is basically what Google is planning. Otherwise, why even bother with a touchscreen?

Of course, I realize that we probably won't see 6.5 hrs. of battery with THAT resolution display! Maybe that's what the added bulk is REALLY for: more battery!

great screen / form factor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971767)

the blurb labels this "super expensive" ???. it's got a higher resolution screen than anything in the ultrabook category, including 1700 vertical pixels compared to the next best in class 1080 (that only a handful of ultrabooks have). aspect ration is 3:2 instead of the 16:9 that's ubiquitous today, so it's 7" vertical (equivalent to a 14.1" screen at 16:9)

this looks like a great developer machine if you can throw linux on it (i don't have any experience with chromeOS but assume i'd want my normal environment)

People already do. (0)

Lumpy (12016) | about 2 years ago | (#42971791)

They are called ultrabooks and Dell sells a LOT of them.

FTFY (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42971931)

They are called ultrabooks and Dell sells a LOT of them to corporations with lots of money and little oversight.

Super expensive? (0)

damn_registrars (1103043) | about 2 years ago | (#42971917)

What would you call Apple's offerings? The chromebook is a steal by comparison.

missed pun (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42972117)

mod parent down.

The chromebook is a steel by comparison!

Re:Super expensive? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42972247)

I seriously hope this is some kind of joke or you haven't taken the time to look at the pricepoint and the specs of the low end MBP Retina 13 versus your Google offering. It's actually... pathetic, to be honest.

Chromebook = cheap? (1)

WhackAttack (2672021) | about 2 years ago | (#42971965)

I thought the whole point of a Chromebook was a laptop that was affordable and practical...not very affordable anymore...

Will fail like Nexus Q (1)

rsborg (111459) | about 2 years ago | (#42971995)

A chromebook for $250-$500 sounds like a pretty good deal ($250 for those unsure about a laptop that only runs a web browser, $500 for those who like the chromebook concept and want better hardware). Why would I pay 4x more than the entry-level model - what kind of product marketing group signed off on this?

A 13" retina-class Chromebook for the same price as a MB Air (which has better specs aside from the screen and runs a real OS) just sounds crazy.

I would be considering it, if... (1)

aklinux (1318095) | about 2 years ago | (#42971997)

... I hadn't just gotten a Samsung Series 5 550 about a week and a half ago. I don't regret my purchase, so far anyway. My life was already in the cloud, I just went with it ;)

Cheaper than 3 years of 1TB Google Drive Storage (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42972103)

At current prices, 3 Years of 1TB Google Drive Storage (that they throw in for free with every Pixel purchase) goes for 12x3x49.99=1799.64.

Basically you get a laptop for free and some discount if you prepay for it.

Seems like a good deal (if you *need* that kind of storage)

A laptop with a touch screen? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42972115)

Retarded.

Good for google. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42972143)

They'll likely sell hundreds of these.

Yes, but... (1)

bored (40072) | about 2 years ago | (#42972185)

Only if the HD and RAM are upgradable with standard parts, and the can be replaced. And no, using a soldering iron or a heat gun doesn't count, especially if there is a large likely hood of damage.

Until then, I consider $1300 to much for a disposable laptop. That was my problem with the macbook. Although, I probably would have dropped $1300 for the retina mac even with its failings.

I would be ecstatic if they put that display (with a matte coating) on an actual netbook. My netbook has standard RAM, harddrive and a replaceable battery. Its only real weakness is the crap display. I can put up with the CPU being a little slow, but the display is the killer.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?