Live Trend » Hugh Grant gives emotional support to Sandra Bullock

Is downfall of Chrome OS inevitable?

Will Chrome OS be able to sustain the global dominance of Google? Can Chrome OS brave all odds and institute its own credibility? Well, both questions are almost same and revolve around the same subject more or less; this happens to be the talking point in the worldwide tech industry at the moment. What is the reigning view then?

Well, we have to take help of leading analysts and as per a considerable section of them, the failure of Chrome OS is inevitable. It’s sure that this standpoint flies in the face of the ardent admirers of Google. You can surely have own opinion and defy these analysts. But it’s time for us to delve into the analyses directly.

downfall of Chrome OS

The analysts consider that a dearth of flexibility will destine Google's latest ego trip to the dustbin of history. As indicated by them, the first and foremost fatal flaw of Chrome OS is its Linux foundation. At the very outset the aspect that earns attention is the core architecture. As a derivative of Linux, the Chrome OS rests on Linus Torvald's popular open source foundation in order to forge a lightweight, Web-oriented desktop environment. However, it also acquires that platform's several warts, including spotty hardware compatibility.

It is known that Linux, from power management to display support, has long been a tract of buggy code and screwball device driver implementations. Google distinguishes this fact and, in a page out of the Apple Macintosh playbook, has taken the draconian measure of enabling the Chrome OS to be distributed alone on a series of as-yet-undisclosed netbook-like devices.

If you are not content with the above-mentioned standpoint, have a talk with any analyst you like most.

The second fatal flaw is certainly the Web user interface. Since Google prefers to consider the world through the prism of a Web page, there is hardly any surprise that the primary interface to the Chrome OS is in the Google browser. What is more, unlike a conventional OS, there's no desktop and the "applications" running under the Chrome OS are mere interactive Web pages, with the Chrome browser's tabs serving to separate and organize them visually on the screen.

On the other hand, introductory configuration tasks, like defining Wi-Fi settings, are dealt with via Chrome OS-hosted pop-up windows, while a simple status bar-like strip at the top of the display informs you about battery life, connectivity status, and so on. The analysts assert that none of the aforesaid UI constructs is original or compelling.

If there is any view contradictory to these, release them straight away.