zlacker

Now the only thing missing is a winning strategy for desktops/laptops. :-)

Seems like Chrome OS should be folded into Android and many people would be comfortable using it at home. Same apps could run and sync on all devices.

>>mellin+(OP)
Unfortunately the two systems are very different and largely incompatible.

Merging them would not be impossible, but it's not easy.

>>mellin+(OP)
Google seems to be trying to position itself as the Microsoft of the post-PC world. I doubt ChromeOS, as an operating system designed for the now-defunct netbook, plays much of a role in that strategy.

>>redthr+V1
> I doubt ChromeOS, as an operating system designed for the now-defunct netbook

Actually, ChromeOS isn't just for netbooks. It's for a world where everything you want to do on your computer is available via a web service. Netbooks happen to be suitable for ChromeOS now because the web services available today generally don't require much heavy lifting client-side. Especially if NaCl/PNaCl takes off (who knows?) that very well may change soon.

That's why ChromeOS as designed is, in my opinion, actually unlikely to become defunct anytime soon: I personally suspect the percentage of consumers for which ChromeOS's capabilities are sufficient will continue to rise over the next few years.

>>chimer+S
I don't know about that. Certainly there are large differences under the hood, but isn't Chrome OS just supposed to run browser apps really well? I don't think that's a very hard compatibility measure for Android to match.

>>Maakut+ym
The entire point of Chrome OS is that it's only the browser. Saying you want Chrome OS merged with Android is the same as saying you just want a Chrome APK. Chrome OS's key tenets of security and simplicity are simply not compatible with traditional operating systems.