"Why Chromebook Pundits Are Out of Touch"

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by pl001

So long as you never upgrade your hardware for any reason, sure, that will work. But you still had to do the initial activation. You can't set the PC up in the first place without this reliance on Microsoft, which was my point. You also can't do major upgrades to it, which makes it more disposable. And are you really going to want to run Windows 7 beyond 2020? I guess if what you do on a PC never changes, that could work out. That won't be the case for most PC users though.
.....

Yep. My point exactly.

[Graham]

Originally Posted by pl001

Instead all my backups are in the cloud now, which has had the side effect of making my life a lot easier. No more hassle syncing and transferring. It's all there and it's all accessible to all my devices. There's no going back for me.

Exactly. Sure, we lose independence of the sort Katsunami is espousing, but we gain a lot too. Look at the hoops Katsunami is willing to jump through.

I've made the choice to give up that freedom along with its tedious hoops. In return I've gained a very welcome and different sort of freedom (seamless operation across all my devices), along with much more of that precious commodity, spare time.

Graham

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by pl001

So long as you never upgrade your hardware for any reason, sure, that will work.

It's a 6 year old computer. It won't be upgraded anymore. Therefore Windows 7 and all programs will run on it as long as the hardware survives; and that's the entire point. I don't have to change anything until something happens on *MY* end.

I've actually dropped Linux (again), because I found out that it's annoying (and often impossible) to get it to NOT upgrade stuff. It's all connected. If you want to upgrade X, you must upgrade library A, which forces you to also upgrade Y (because it uses A), but Y also uses B, which must therefore be upgraded, causing Z to break if you don't upgrade THAT as well.... and so on. Yes, the package manager does it all, but it feels like an all-or-nothing situation.

I've found that even more annoying than having to upgrade 5 or 10 applications by hand on Windows.

A Chromebook, or any platform that runs mostly online is essentially the same: if it changes, it changes, and you can't do anything about it, and I don't like that.

Originally Posted by Graham

Exactly. Sure, we lose independence of the sort Katsunami is espousing, but we gain a lot too. Look at the hoops Katsunami is willing to jump through.

I've made the choice to give up that freedom along with its tedious hoops. In return I've gained a very welcome and different sort of freedom (seamless operation across all my devices), along with much more of that precious commodity, spare time.

Graham

What are you going to do if the one vendor you made yourself depend upon does something that you *REALLY* don't like? If you're invested heavily enough, you might even not be able to leave.

[Graham]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

What are you going to do if the one vendor you made yourself depend upon does something that you *REALLY* don't like? If you're invested heavily enough, you might even not be able to leave.

You're right. I'm taking that gamble. In the meantime though, I'm having what I consider to be a greatly superior experience.

The one vendor we're talking about here, of course, is Google. To date, I really like most of what Google has provided, and even now they seem to going further in the direction that I like. I'd be surprised if they change course so dramatically that I'd want to cut all ties, say, within the next five years (if ever).

So, yes, it's a gamble, but even if I'm looking at just five hassle-free years, it's one I consider well worth taking.

It's also worth pointing out that except for the login process itself you could operate on a Chromebook quite happily using a completely different set of cloud services, say built around Skydrive or Dropbox.

Graham

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by Graham

The one vendor we're talking about here, of course, is Google. To date, I really like most of what Google has provided, and even now they seem to going further in the direction that I like. I'd be surprised if they change course so dramatically that I'd want to cut all ties, say, within the next five years (if ever).

You sure?

Google is always nagging to use your own name on YouTube. They are nagging to get a Google+ account for YouTube, and have made it obligatory for Android if you want to leave app reviews. They're connecting GMail, Google+, YouTube, Docs, and Drive; "all of your data in one place".

That's only one thing I don't like: the integration of all of their services; they're making it almost impossible to sign up for one service, without also signing up for a boatload of others.

Some businesses exist solely to gather data: Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, FourSquare... it works, because they are social networks. Google obviously came to that same conclusion, and they obviously had other services already. They're just using Google+ as an excuse to connect everything together. They're even fiddling with the privacy rules for their services.

If Facebook and the others are large with regard to data collection, then Google is the Mother of all Data Collection Juggernauts.

I'll never ever trust all of my computing needs to one company, let alone a company that mines data on the scale Google is doing; the Chromebook is just one more option to get you to use the Google services.

In short, I don't trust them. The only reason for me to have an Android phone and Google account is Maps, and it's only connected to the internet when I'm using Maps. As soon as there is a cheap alternative on an OS that does not require any accounts with any company, my Android phone will be sold.

[pl001]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

What are you going to do if the one vendor you made yourself depend upon does something that you *REALLY* don't like? If you're invested heavily enough, you might even not be able to leave.

That's true of any vendor you invest in to some extent. I had to have a Microsoft account to make use of their services. For better or worse, you really can't get around that and still make full use of what today's technology has to offer.

Life without online services is like watching over the air TV on an old 19" CRT.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

I've actually dropped Linux (again), because I found out that it's annoying (and often impossible) to get it to NOT upgrade stuff. It's all connected. If you want to upgrade X, you must upgrade library A, which forces you to also upgrade Y (because it uses A), but Y also uses B, which must therefore be upgraded, causing Z to break if you don't upgrade THAT as well.... and so on. Yes, the package manager does it all, but it feels like an all-or-nothing situation.

Can't you just reinstall X from source, using a source-compiled A outside your path that X will use? Even though it's not exactly a bad thing to update Y B and Z.

Wait, now we're on Windows again...

[Graham]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

You sure?

Google is always nagging to use your own name on YouTube. They are nagging to get a Google+ account for YouTube, and have made it obligatory for Android if you want to leave app reviews. They're connecting GMail, Google+, YouTube, Docs, and Drive; "all of your data in one place".

That's only one thing I don't like: the integration of all of their services; they're making it almost impossible to sign up for one service, without also signing up for a boatload of others.

Well, given that I've stated categorically that the integration is something that I really appreciate this isn't really going to sway me.

You see this as "making it almost impossible to sign up for one service, without also signing up for a boatload of others", I see it as a single sign-on to a service that has a wide range of features.

Originally Posted by Katsunami

Some businesses exist solely to gather data: Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, FourSquare... it works, because they are social networks. Google obviously came to that same conclusion, and they obviously had other services already. They're just using Google+ as an excuse to connect everything together. They're even fiddling with the privacy rules for their services.

If Facebook and the others are large with regard to data collection, then Google is the Mother of all Data Collection Juggernauts.

There is one huge difference. Google's primary business is advertising. Consequently their database is like gold dust to them. The others have reasons to sell on your data, Google far, far less so. Your data is what brings their core business in to them.

Originally Posted by Katsunami

I'll never ever trust all of my computing needs to one company, let alone a company that mines data on the scale Google is doing;

Their primary interest is in selling targeted advertising. I personally would far prefer advertising focussed on my interests than random advertising.

Whether or not I use Google services has no bearing on the measures I might take to block advertising.

Originally Posted by Katsunami

the Chromebook is just one more option to get you to use the Google services.

Or you could see it as the ultimate expression of a clean interface into those services.

Originally Posted by Katsunami

In short, I don't trust them.

The trust I'm placing in them is that they don't misuse or accidentally leak my information. So far, they seem to have a better record at that than many other large companies.

On the other hand, you are presumably placing your trust in a series of offline backup procedures. If you are backing up your data online, then you're at the same sort of risk as I am.

Graham

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by Graham

There is one huge difference. Google's primary business is advertising. Consequently their database is like gold dust to them. The others have reasons to sell on your data, Google far, far less so. Your data is what brings their core business in to them.

Yes. That's exactly the reason why I don't want to use it.

What I want for software, is a business-model like GOG.com uses.

They have games.
I have money.

I give them money, they give me a game. I download it, and I'm done.

Then we're out of each others hair. As long as I have a computer and OS that will run the game, it will run, forever, unchanged, no strings attached. If they update a game, I can download a new copy and install that... *IF* I want to.

Their primary interest is in selling targeted advertising.

I detest advertising. I want something for free without advertising, and if that is not possible, I'll pay for it, so I don't have to look at advertisements.

On the other hand, you are presumably placing your trust in a series of offline backup procedures. If you are backing up your data online, then you're at the same sort of risk as I am.

All of my data is backed up on two separate external hard disks.

I have no data in the cloud, and I never will, except for some trivial stuff such as savegames in DropBox so I can play a game on two computers at once.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

Yes. That's exactly the reason why I don't want to use it.

What I want for software, is a business-model like GOG.com uses.

They have games.
I have money.

I give them money, they give me a game. I download it, and I'm done.

Then we're out of each others hair. As long as I have a computer and OS that will run the game, it will run, forever, unchanged, no strings attached. If they update a game, I can download a new copy and install that... *IF* I want to.



I detest advertising. I want something for free without advertising, and if that is not possible, I'll pay for it, so I don't have to look at advertisements.



All of my data is backed up on two separate external hard disks.

I have no data in the cloud, and I never will, except for some trivial stuff such as savegames in DropBox so I can play a game on two computers at once.

Fine, why are you so upset with those who choose otherwise?

[pl001]

Originally Posted by Graham

On the other hand, you are presumably placing your trust in a series of offline backup procedures.

That used to be me. First floppy disks, then CDs, then DVDs, then external hard drives. Always a pain to keep track of, never completely up to date, and always susceptible to fire, theft, and other various catastrophes.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by pl001

That's true of any vendor you invest in to some extent. I had to have a Microsoft account to make use of their services. For better or worse, you really can't get around that and still make full use of what today's technology has to offer.

Life without online services is like watching over the air TV on an old 19" CRT.

Nah, more like watching 16mm films with a projector.

[Graham]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

All of my data is backed up on two separate external hard disks.

I hope one of those is always off site and you swap them round regularly.

Graham

[pl001]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Nah, more like watching 16mm films with a projector.

You know, after giving it some thought, I think you are absolutely correct.

Over the air TV had(has) commercials targeted to the expected audience demographics. And it relies on the station to broadcast the signal.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by Graham

I hope one of those is always off site and you swap them round regularly.

Of course. That is exactly what I do.

Originally Posted by kennyc

Fine, why are you so upset with those who choose otherwise?

Because I've heard of quite some people who place all of their trust in one single company or type of technology lose a lot of stuff. Haven't you heard of something.... oh... I don't know... DropBox banning users that use Calibre2odps, and/or store their ebooks in the cloud, because they can't determine if the books are legitimate or not? Do a search and see.

Sometimes, also Google closes accounts.

In reality, I discovered, Google assumes no responsibility over user data nor is it required by law to do so. In the same notice informing me that it had disabled my account, Google told me for the first time that it reserves the right to “terminate your account at any time, for any reason, with or without notice.”

If a company puts that into their TOS, then I definitely DON'T want to store my data there, not even as a backup measure, let alone as primary storage.

Just stuffing everything into the cloud without having a backup plan is very dangerous, but I see more and more people doing it. They just trust Google/DropBox or whatever to not lose their stuff or revoke access.