Your thoughts on a "Web OS"

[Draconis]

I was reading PCWorld and found a article about using a Web OS. I guess these have been out for a while but I wanted to know if anyone in the community has tried one of these.

PCWorld : Take Your Work Into the Cloud With a Web OS (http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/171269/take_your_work_into_the_cloud_with_a_web_os.html)

If you have experimented with either G.ho.st (http://g.ho.st), Glide OS (http://www.glideos.com), or Icloud (http://icloud.com) I would like to hear your thoughts on it. My main concerns are usabliity, stablity, and (of course) security.

[Hansen]

So, what do you do if you don't have access to the internet but want to use your PC? Seems like with a web OS, you're dead in the water with no paddle if you don't have an internet connection at that moment. Also, what about speed...what if you're in a location wth a really slow connection?

[Ken S]

Ask the people that use sidekicks about totally depending on "the cloud". There are certainly advantages, but without strong offline options it's not something I'd be interested in.

[HIPAR]

Get your feet on the ground and your head out of the clouds. :)

--- CHAS

[Marlin Guy]

I think there is a market for it now, and certainly in the future.
So what if it's no good offline. That's like saying a car is of no use without fuel, isn't it?
If you want something that's offline, then buy the traditional stuff.

I can't help but be amused at how we're headed right back where we came from on computing.
We used to have dumb terminals connected to mainframes which ran the back end and saved all the data.
Now that high speed connectivity is becoming available to anyone anywhere, we're making the swing back in that direction.
I'll turn 50 next month, and I fully expect to see the complete OS and all data stored go to the clouds before I leave this Earth.
It will be the most efficient and least costly way to do things, with cooperative burden sharing of maintenance and overhead, rather than having each entity or individual going their own way.

It's happening now and it will continue to progress in that direction.... until someone invents something that no one has yet to dream.

[Ken S]

I think there is a market for it now, and certainly in the future.
So what if it's no good offline. That's like saying a car is of no use without fuel, isn't it?
If you want something that's offline, then buy the traditional stuff.

I can't help but be amused at how we're headed right back where we came from on computing.
We used to have dumb terminals connected to mainframes which ran the back end and saved all the data.
Now that high speed connectivity is becoming available to anyone anywhere, we're making the swing back in that direction.
I'll turn 50 next month, and I fully expect to see the complete OS and all data stored go to the clouds before I leave this Earth.
It will be the most efficient and least costly way to do things, with cooperative burden sharing of maintenance and overhead, rather than having each entity or individual going their own way.

It's happening now and it will continue to progress in that direction.... until someone invents something that no one has yet to dream.

There's a difference. A terminal didn't do anything but display what the host sent. All of the computing took place on the host.

In the modern scheme much of the computing takes place locally with only the data and code stored on the host. The other difference is that terminals were generally hard-wired to their host...the connection was generally always present. With mobile devices that depend on wireless networks that connection is quite a bit less certain.

The "modern" way isn't all that new though. AOL was doing this type of thing back in the mid 80s with it's Commodore 64 based Q-Link product. The idea was to utilize the computing/graphics/sound power of the 64 and minimize the amount of data that has to be sent back and forth.

[hdtvfan0001]

Like netbooks....for some...there might be a viable desire for this offering....but I suspect that between the security and operational risks that others have mentioned...it will never be mainstream - or at least not in many years (never is a long time :D).

[mystic7]

I think there is a market for it now, and certainly in the future.
So what if it's no good offline. That's like saying a car is of no use without fuel, isn't it?
If you want something that's offline, then buy the traditional stuff.

I can't help but be amused at how we're headed right back where we came from on computing.
We used to have dumb terminals connected to mainframes which ran the back end and saved all the data.
Now that high speed connectivity is becoming available to anyone anywhere, we're making the swing back in that direction.
I'll turn 50 next month, and I fully expect to see the complete OS and all data stored go to the clouds before I leave this Earth.
It will be the most efficient and least costly way to do things, with cooperative burden sharing of maintenance and overhead, rather than having each entity or individual going their own way.

It's happening now and it will continue to progress in that direction.... until someone invents something that no one has yet to dream.

Socialist!!! :eek2:

[Marlin Guy]

There's a difference. A terminal didn't do anything but display what the host sent. All of the computing took place on the host.


I didn't say that the current situation was that way.
I'm saying it will be that way in the future, just as it was in the past.
We OS, web application, etc. and so on.
The highly user-customizable personal computer is going the way of the dinosaurs. Given the way users generally account for most of their of own problems, it's a logical and necessary progression.
Look for computers of the future to be like our current DirecTV receivers. You can tweak a few things, but for the most part, you're stuck with the crap you're given.
Can you imagine DirecTV trying to support their receivers if users were free to crack them open and upgrade video cards, add/remove programs, etc.?
They can't even fix the stuff THEY break now! :lol:

[Ken S]

I didn't say that the current situation was that way.
I'm saying it will be that way in the future, just as it was in the past.
We OS, web application, etc. and so on.
The highly user-customizable personal computer is going the way of the dinosaurs. Given the way users generally account for most of their of own problems, it's a logical and necessary progression.
Look for computers of the future to be like our current DirecTV receivers. You can tweak a few things, but for the most part, you're stuck with the crap you're given.
Can you imagine DirecTV trying to support their receivers if users were free to crack them open and upgrade video cards, add/remove programs, etc.?
They can't even fix the stuff THEY break now! :lol:

They have those today, they're called the Apple Macintosh, Sony Playstation and/or Microsoft XBox 360.

I'll pass on any computer I need to depend on being anything like the current DirecTV receivers.