2015 Chromebook Pixel - <AUTHOR> http://www.google.com/chromebook/pixel/ <comment><USER2> Owner of a last-gen Pixel here. I don't see myself upgrading any time soon, but as far as refreshes go, this one seems to address most of my complaints, namely:

\- More RAM

\- Better battery life / charge time

\- USB-C ports

Here's what I'm not sure if it will fix: \- Overheating (original Pixel gets HOT on the top-left corner where I'm guessing the CPU resides)

\- OpenVPN support (ChromeOS does not support simply loading a .ovpn profile-- I have to do some hacking from the command-line to get it to work)

\- Longer warranty (1-year limited is all that is provided with the previous model--and since these are directly from Google, you can't get an extended warranty through the retailer)

\- Weight (Love the metal slate look, could be lighter, however; based on the specs it seems like not so much)

And finally, the things that Google will never fix, and you should simply be aware of ChromeOS's limitations:

\- Lack of apps

I will say, however, that in the past year, Crouton, which allows you to sideload a linux partition onto the device, has come a _long_ way, to the point that you can actually have an Ubuntu chroot running in a tab inside ChromeOS as though it were just another window/app. It has proved incredibly useful for running things like Sublime or Eclipse without having to do the complete environment-shift that was required some time ago.

Price is still a little high, however. I feel like those looking for a high- quality Linux laptop could probably get an Acer Aspire for cheaper.

<comment><USER3> Why do you say Google will "never fix" the "lack of apps"? What do you call adding support for running Android apps? Clearly they are working on addressing this, even if they're not there yet.

<comment><USER4> That's what you want to run on your laptop? Android apps?

<comment><USER5> You sound surprised. Are web apps better than Android apps?

<comment><USER6> I think on a computer with a Core i5 and 8gb of RAM, choosing between web apps and Android apps is kind of a false choice. Windows or Linux both offer you far more applications that are built to take advantage of that form factor.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Jesus, designing a usable ultrabook must be very difficult.

We have one contender from California, but their ideology has them offer just a _single_ USB-C port. Now we get the competitor from Mountain View, who have rightly recognized the need for more than one fucking port when that's how you charge the damn thing, and what do they decide?

Oh yeah, we'll top out storage at 64GiB.

<comment><USER8> What most people have missed is that USB allows charging and data over the same port. So you can easily get a power adapter that has a charging tip which has on the same cord another USB-C port (socket) which you can plug into your display chain, or port replicator or what not.

In Apple's case I fully expect they will make it so that when you plug your Apple display into your laptop it also charges it since the charger is permanently connected to (or built into) the Apple monitor/display.

<comment><USER9> At this point, I find this whole thing funny. Again.

How many times has Apple done this in modern times? Remember the outrage when Apple removed floppy disk drives? Optical drives? Ethernet ports? Remember how mad everyone got when Apple replaced their old, thick connector on the iPhone 5? Nobody complains about how thin their phone is now that the old 30pin connector is no longer the limiting factor on size. Nobody is bemoaning the fact that they can't watch a DVD on their laptop - we've moved on from optical media.

Nobody will even bother examining the bellyaching about this in a couple of years because we'll all be so happy with the _obvious_ (in hindsight) decision to switch to USB-C.

<comment><USER10> > we'll all be so happy with the obvious (in hindsight) decision to switch to > USB-C.

I don't think the issue is the inclusion of USB-C -- in fact, USB-C offers a _lot_.

I think the issue is only having _one_ connector on the entire laptop. What happens if that port fails or beaks? Your laptop stops working...

<comment><USER11> _What happens if that port fails or beaks? Your laptop stops working..._

I'm not a fan of their single-port decision either, but in fairness: Every laptop stops working when the charging port breaks. No matter how many other ports it may have.

<comment><USER12> And Apple is replacing the nigh-indestructible magsafe with a traditional plug...

<comment> semi-extrinsic Of course this is purely anecdotal, but amongst my friends and coworkers I've seen magsafe connectors fail at about the same rate as normal power adapters. Usually at the end where the wire goes into the wall plug brick part.

<comment><USER13> Yes the cheap to replace wire end breaks easily. But the expensive-to-repair computer side port is solid. You're going to see a lot more expensive computer repairs with the USB-C charging port.

<comment> semi-extrinsic True. Although I think it would be much better for durability if Apple used the same wire/power brick layout as everyone else: have the power brick in the middle of the wire, accepting 120/240 V from a standard "figure-eight" cord. Then that cord would be the one that breaks, and they cost $1 to replace. Of course this conflicts with Apple's business model...

<comment><USER13> All the Apple laptop and iPad adapters I've gotten accept a standard figure-8 cord if you just slide off the national plug. For my it's the slim cord between the charger and the machine that wears out.

<comment> semi-extrinsic Interesting. I've never seen anyone using it with the figure-8 cord. My intuition was that having the adapter stuck to the wall tends to often bend the thin cord on the DC side. As you say, that's what usually fails.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I don't really understand the appeal personally. At this price level you could get a dell xps.

ChromeOS seems brilliant at a few hundred bucks, especially for kids & elders who get the browser/video/text experience, without the complexity, bloatware, viruses etc of a windows environment.

But at $600 or $1000, there just seem to be better windows alternatives, to me at least. And above that you get into OS X range. ChromeOS just doesn't seem to provide the environment where you really need beefy specs (e.g. compiling large code or editing large videos), so if it's just consumer-type stuff, I'd rather have a 2014 Macbook Air 13' at $800-900 at Best Buy, or a Dell XPS, than this.

Would love to hear from peoples usecases and experiences. I think there's a genuine usecase for people to put linux on it, or SSH into something else, but for your average straight up consumer, why the pixel and not something else? I understand the low-price Chromebooks, the higher price is hard to grasp for me.

<comment><USER15> Writing this from my 2011 MBA. Looking at a replacement, and the CBP is a strong contender. If I swap out the storage for a 256 or 512 GB drive and throw linux or windows on it, then it's better hardware than a macbook air, for cheaper. In fact, it's impossible to build a MBA that stands up to CBP's hardware.

the chromebook represents essentially what i wanted out of a macbook air refresh, instead the ipad-with-a-keyboard Macbook showed up.

<comment><USER16> But why wouldn't you get the Dell XPS 13 instead? (Linux edition coming out soon.) The Pixel is heavier than the MBA, while the XPS is lighter/slimmer and has a real harddrive. There are minor trade-offs here and there but it's the limitation of ChromeOS that really makes this a strange option.

I myself am debating both options, but I've ordered a Pixel specifically because I'm hoping the keyboard is a bit better than the XPS, and to see how well it will run Debian natively.

If only the US had ultraportable options like they have in Japan.

<comment><USER17> As someone who runs Linux and ChromeOS on my personal laptops, was looking at the XPS, and just ordered a Pixel, I can answer that:

1\. Chromebook is zero-hassle. It's great that Dell is putting native Ubuntu on their laptops, but fundamentally those are still machines that were designed for Windows first and awkwardly adapted to Linux. They'll always have a few niggling issues that a designed-for-ChromeOS machine won't have.

2\. I prefer ChromeOS to Linux. The ultra-minimalist ChromeOS UI is just amazingly clean and elegant, in a way that none of the Linux desktops are (and I say that as a huge fan of GNOME 3).

3\. The high-DPI version of the XPS 13 is more expensive than the Pixel (and might not be the one that gets released with Linux, they haven't announced it); high-DPI is a mandatory thing on an expensive laptop now for me.

4\. 3:2 screen is the perfect aspect ratio, and the XPS isn't that.

5\. USB-C charger is sweet.

But the XPS 13 looks like it'll be a nice laptop when the Linux version comes out. Still, I wish Dell would design Linux-first laptops rather than trying to awkwardly retrofit Linux onto designed-for-Windows machines.

<comment><USER18> What is the difference between a laptop designed for Windows and one designed for Linux? Apart from device drivers (graphics, Wi-Fi, bluetooth) which are usually not a problem, I can't think of any difference. Perhaps Linux might not look very good on very high DPI screens, but that's it.

<comment><USER17> Look at what the Project Sputnik people are saying about getting Linux working on the current XPS 13 -- they're working on drivers for various portions of it that don't currently work currently on Linux. (If you install Ubuntu on the XPS 13 today, it will have problems.)

It's great that Dell is doing that, it really is. But if they were building a laptop for Linux first, they never would have sourced those components.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> > What's in the box: Chromebook Pixel; Universal Type-C Charger, 60W; Quick > Start Guide

So the new MacBook isn't the only USB-powered notebook anymore. It does, however, appear to have two type C ports, along with two type A ports (USB 3.0), headphone, and SD card. The type C port also supports display out (up to 4K).

It also has a "regular" processor (Intel® Core™ i5 Processor, 2.2GHz or Intel® Core™ i7 processor, 2.4GHz) and "up to 12 hours" of battery life; but it weighs 3.3 lbs (1.5 kg) to Apple's 2.1 lbs.

You can buy Google's 60W USB-C charger for $60. [https://store.google.com/product/universal_type_c_60w_charge...](https://store.google.com/product/universal_type_c_60w_charger) The C to A adapter (for your existing peripherals) is $13. [https://store.google.com/product/usb_type_c_to_usb_standard_...](https://store.google.com/product/usb_type_c_to_usb_standard_a_adapter)

<comment><USER20> At least the MacBook is a real computer, not a browser on steroids.

<comment><USER21> You can install linux on it. I own the previous version of the Pixel and I run ubuntu on it and its close to perfect.

Two things I would change are

1\. Improve thermal cooling or move to a underpowered cpu. I have worked around it by rate limiting my CPU to not go over 800 MHz. With a few tweaks, it sips ~8.8W and gives me > 6 hrs of battery life.

2\. Make the hinge a bit stiffer.

My only other complaint is that it refuses to install FreeBSD.

<comment><USER22> Did you get touch features working on your older Pixel? I'm very curious about whether the Pixel series would be a good machine for Ubuntu .. care to share your experiences?

<comment><USER23> It should be possible to get working. All the drivers are in the chromiumos source repository. Until very recently X was used, so the X server should have the touch support. (Haven't tested on the new Pixel because I don't have one, but the old one, definitely.)

The kernel drivers are in src/third_party/kernel/v3.10 for first-gen pixel, and v3.14 for this one. If you're going to run your own Linux, I'd use that kernel rather than the one the distro provides. Or figure out what patches are different between the two, and cherry-pick those onto your distro's kernel.

<comment><USER23> I meant 3.8 for the old pixel, btw. Doh.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> A source that circumvents Google's decision to prevent non-US people from even _reading_ about the device:

[http://www.theverge.com/2015/3/11/8190513/chromebook- pixel-2...](http://www.theverge.com/2015/3/11/8190513/chromebook- pixel-2015-review)

<comment><USER25> This URL works from Germany: [http://www.google.com/chromebook/pixel/](http://www.google.com/chromebook/pixel/)

<comment><USER26> I can see the page from Germany, but the "BUY NOW" button gives me a 404 page in German:

       Die angeforderte URL wurde auf diesem Server nicht
       gefunden. Weitere Informationen liegen nicht vor.

<comment><USER27> $999 8 GB RAM, 32 GB SSD

$1,299 16 GB RAM, 64GB SSD

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I'm not sure why this is better than the cheapest macbook air?Similar battery life, similar processor. 4gb more memory, smaller hard drive. And the cheapest pixel is $100 more. What do I get for that $100? For me the downsides are: can only use apps from the chrome web store, no unix command line (maybe it exists and I don't know?).

I'm really happy someone is trying to compete, but not sure why I would buy this.

<comment><USER29> I don't know a single person in real life that has a chromebook. Who is buying these?

<comment><USER30> A lot of people apparently: [http://www.zdnet.com/article/top-3-holiday- computers-on-amaz...](http://www.zdnet.com/article/top-3-holiday-computers-on- amazon-were-chromebooks/)

If I were to buy a second computer for travelling and lightweight stuff at home, and not developing, I guess a Chromebook would be a nice choice. But not at the price of a Macbook Air, though.

<comment><USER31> I'll buy it and run linux on it. I've long ago put all my data on my own storage boxes and all my systems have 64GB SSDs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> As a previous owner of a Pixel I have to say it was one of the most beautiful and well crafted laptops I've ever owned. The Pixel had some major flaws, the CPU and overheating was a killer. However the biggest problem here is the underdevelopment of ChromeOS, such promise but it seems to be going the way of most of Googles products.

<comment><USER33> Personally, if overheating was a major flaw I probably wouldn't consider the laptop well crafted. Thermal management seems part of the overall design to me. I don't dispute it's a nice looking machine though!

<comment><USER34> Indeed. But it was a very nice machine. Hopefully this one won't overheat. Any idea if it's fanless? There's no specific info about the CPU, but it doesn't seem to be according to the clock frequency.

<comment><USER35> Apparently it has two fans instead of one now and doesn't overheat like it used to:

 _Another quirk of the first Pixel was that it could get quite noisy and warm while running. No more: Thanks to a revamped cooling system, which features two fans that spin at lower revolutions-per-minute than the original model 's single-fan setup, the new Pixel stays near-silent and doesn't get hot while you use it._ [http://www.computerworld.com/article/2895014/new- chromebook-...](http://www.computerworld.com/article/2895014/new-chromebook- pixel.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> I don't get it anymore... 8-16 GB RAM for what? I have not used Chromebook. Do you all use it for gaming? For serious computation? with only 32-64 GB SSD?

For this price, it would be nice to be able to upgrade SSD though. Then I will also want to install a Linux distro or Windows on it.

<comment><USER37> Did you not notice that it has a built in SD card slot if you want more storage?

Also, ChromeOS will happily use 8-16GB of RAM if you have enough browser tabs open and stuff running in the background.

<comment><USER38> > Did you not notice that it has a built in SD card slot if you want more > storage?

Wish Google would adopt that attitude for their Nexus line as well...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> My main issues with my first gen Chromebook Pixel that I received at Google I/O in 2013:

1) Poor battery life (~4 hours)

2) Lots of heat

3) Instability of Linux environment (with Crouton) made it a poor dev machine.

They seem to have fixed 1) and 2), I'm still nervous about making this a primary machine due to 3). I would have situations where the system would force shut down when closing the lid instead of sleeping/resuming properly. That, and two years ago, no Linux desktop environment supported high DPI screens properly. Maybe this has changed.

Other than that, this looks like an amazing machine. Love that 16GB of RAM is an option - XPS 13, which I'm also eyeing, only goes up to 8GB. 64GB max SSD is a bit of a problem though.

<comment><USER40> I think you mean 2011, that was when gave out the first Chromebooks. It was not a bad little device but the CPU was woefully underpowered.

<comment><USER39> Nope, definitely 2013.

<comment><USER40> Ah, I misread your post, I thought you just said "Chromebook". My bad.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> Google develops a laptop that I have high interest in, but no use for.

If they want to win the App Ecosystem war, they need to ensure that the developers have the tools to build in their ecosystem. Apple dominates because hackers love macbooks, and provide slick tools that only work in Apple's walled garden. This propagates down to the consumer level, as developers build products consumers love- with Apple taking in the profit all the way down.

Google doesn't have that. They don't have a toolset available to developers to optimize for Android/ChromeOS/etc. They need to fix the fragmentation problem at the App Developer level before they can compete at the consumer level.

<comment><USER17> That's a fine perspective to have, if you are a corporation trying to own an ecosystem. Me, I don't like walled gardens, and ChromeOS's true platform isn't the Chrome App Store, it's the web. I'm good with that.

<comment><USER41> The Web: Brought To You By Chrome, at least. And Google is a corporation, who would very much want all your online interactions in their garden.

But you are right, I dislike Apple because its walls are so high. Google has the opportunity to embrace open-source (or at least well-adopted) technologies to shape an open garden- where your interactions benefit both Google, the web as an open platform, and end consumers who don't know any better.

I feel that Google can become caretakers of a "open garden" by aligning the technology available to independent developers and the app ecosystem used by end consumers. And I feel that Google can curate the technology of the web better by targeting the developers than the consumers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> [http://www.google.com/chromebook/pixel/](http://www.google.com/chromebook/pixel/) this works (Italian IP)

<comment><USER43> Thanks. We changed to that from [https://store.google.com/product/chromebook_pixel_2015](https://store.google.com/product/chromebook_pixel_2015), which was 404ing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> Well, nice that they put a viable amount of memory in this iteration. I can't see the specs or price of this machine in my country.

For anyone in the same situation, here's the price and specs left out of their landing page:

$999 model:

\- 2.2GHz (2.7GHz Turbo) dual-core Intel Core i5-5200U

\- 8GB RAM and 32GB storage

$1299 model:

\- 2.6GHz (3.2GHz Turbo) dual-core Core i7-5600U

\- 16GB RAM and 64GB storage

</comment><comment><USER45> My MBP was out of commission recently, with the video issue. I made do with an HP Chromebook for a month, using crouton to have ubuntu in a chroot.

I was extremely pleased with the setup, and it barely affected my productivity at all. Emacs was a little slower to fire up and sift through my agenda files, but apart from that, I barely noticed the difference.

When I wasn't working, it was great to use ChromeOS to surf or cast Netflix to the TV.

I'd definitely consider getting a Pixel.

</comment><comment><USER46> Owner of a 2013 Chromebook Pixel here - This new model definitely excites me. I've switched between running Debian natively on boot and running Ubuntu in crouton. As a Java/Web developer, my main gripes with the original Pixel are:

-4GB RAM is uncomfortable. Usable, but you need to manage what's running

-Battery life isn't great... I was seeing ~3-3.5 hrs during my 'real use'.

-Overheating - Gets very hot when doing cpu-intense tasks

-Charging time feels like it takes forever.

-Hinge is a little loose and the F-keys are weird, but neither are a deal breaker.

This 2015 model seems to fix almost all of this, with the possible exception of overheating... I guess time will tell. Chances seem high that these will be given out at I/O 2015, but if I can't get a ticket for that I'll still buy one of these immediately. Crouton has come a long way since 2013, but I'm hoping they keep the 'legacy boot' option from the first model - That way you can boot into native linux with ctrl+L or ChromeOS (and later crouton, if needed) with ctrl+D.

If this laptop was 15", it would literally be my dream laptop, however it still checks enough boxes to guarantee that I'll buy one.

<comment><USER47> As an actual owner of a Chromebook Pixel... what would make you buy the new model instead of a similarly priced MacBook Air (much better battery life, more realistically sized SSD, better designed with no loose hinges etc, can still boot into Linux if you want)? Just prefer ChromeOS to OSX? Or the touchscreen? Something else?

<comment><USER46> I was tempted to get a MacBook Pro instead of the original pixel, but at that price point at the time the only one available was the 13" non-retina model (possibly even with a HDD, can't remember). The trade-up to SSD/High-res and the curiosity of the 'new shiny laptop from Google' sold me.

In terms of upgrading to one in 2015, Google are claiming 12 hour battery life and The Verge said it got 14 hours in their testing - which is more than enough for me. I personally just don't like OSX, although I'd be happy installing linux on a MBP. ChromeOS is fine for a few quick browser tasks (Amazon, Booking Flights, etc), but it's not worth keeping around really. So at that point it just boils down to personal preference on the hardware, and price. The build-quality of the keyboard and touchpad on the pixel are on-par with the high quality of the MBP, and they've made the hinge more solid this time around, so with an i7 processor and 16GBs of RAM at $1300 I'm pretty happy! The 64GB SSD is definitely a major buzzkill, but considering I won't be using this laptop for gaming, and I stream all of my music/tv/movies, I don't actually need a whole pile of local storage. With my current pixel's 64GB I never ran into any issues - the only thing that I feel is a threat to my diskspace is VM images for virtualbox, which I luckily don't have to use much anymore as I now have remote access to windows servers should I need them. The touchscreen (for me) is pointless, I'd much rather have a 128GB/256GB SSD, but it's not the end of the world.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> Si I cannot even look at the product because I do not live in the US?

Who makes these decisions?

<comment><USER22> >>Who makes these decisions?

Americans.

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> I'm sure it's a fantastic machine, I just can't understand what niche this is aiming for... there seems to me to be a better alternative to this machine for anybody...

Chrome OS developers?

<comment><USER50> I recently bought a ChromeBook for development (The $199 one). It's a super light linux machine that lasts for days. So I have all my dev tools and I can easily work on any git repo. I don't do any Chrome OS development.

I tried using a tablet for this, but as an emacs users, I have very specific keyboard bindings that the tablets always had issues with.

<comment><USER51> Which Chromebook if you don't mind me asking?

I've been using an old Thinkpad T61 but it just seems a little bit underpowered/dated/inefficient now - considering jumping to something new.

<comment><USER50> ASUS Chromebook 13-Inch HD with Gigabit WiFi, 16GB Storage & 2GB RAM (Yellow) [[http://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B00O5VX2AA/ref=oh_aui_det...](http://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B00O5VX2AA/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1)]

I've been really surprised at how smooth the experience has been, especially since I'm running ubuntu in chroot.

It's not quite powerful enough to play minecraft, it runs but really slowly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> Can it run Ubuntu? That is the first thing I would do to it.

I've done it with Acer C720 with i3 processor. Initially got it as a portable light machine used for travel. But now it kind of became my default. I used to lug around my trusty old Thinkpad T60.

<comment><USER2> Owner of a previous Pixel here. It runs Ubuntu just fine under Crouton. If you're trying to completely wipe out ChromeOS and boot directly into Ubuntu, I believe it's possible. Personally, however, I find ChromeOS to be decent, and I prefer simply popping open Crouton whenever I need a linux-only app. The fact that Crouton can now run in a single tab instead of having to do an environment switch makes it even more useful.

</comment></comment><comment><USER53> How is ChromeOS? Can you get a decent terminal or terminal app? Install and keep up to date the basic terminal utilities (ssh, tmux, vim, rsync, etc)?

What about other software? Is the browser like the regular Chrome? Can you play regular media files (flac, x264 mkv)?

Are there any unpleasant surprises?

<comment><USER54> It's completely simple to get a real terminal/SSH running with Crouton.[0]

ChromeOS supports every common media format you'll come across.[1]

[0][https://github.com/dnschneid/crouton](https://github.com/dnschneid/crouton) [1][http://www.chromium.org/audio-video](http://www.chromium.org/audio-video)

<comment><USER53> You can install only the command line tools[1]. Does this work as a nice terminal window within ChromeOS? I can't find that kind of setup on Youtube.

[1] [https://github.com/dnschneid/crouton#i-dont-always-use- linux...](https://github.com/dnschneid/crouton#i-dont-always-use-linux-but- when-i-do-i-use-cli)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER55> What is odd about this Chromebook is that it has ports and decent hardware, but abysmal storage (I have 50GB of MP3s, let's not get started on videos, documents, source code and compiled software) and a crippled OS. It's like a toy, but a toy that is dependent on a remote toy (the "cloud").

I don't understand how the break away from mainframes to microcomputers has come full circle where we now use very very very powerful microcomputers to connect to effectively mainframes (the "cloud"). Surely the liberating part of microcomputers was the ability to be untethered/unshackled and do stuff locally, not do stuff locally for a little bit or to some extent and then resync periodically. Many of the people using chromebooks for development (from what I can tell) SSH to another machine to do work on a remote server (with X or VNC or something like that), which reduces the extremely powerful local microcomputer to a dumb library terminal. It's stupid.

Client/server stuff keeps getting reinvented and it's annoying. I prefer to be a client when I choose, not a permanent client at the mercy of the server.

</comment><comment><USER56> Can you boot linux on it?

<comment><USER57> Would be very interested to see how well Ubuntu runs on this. As a once die- hard Apple fan I'm so sick of the mess that is Mac OS X Yosemite that I'm willing to abandon Apple and try a Linux laptop, but only if:

1) The wifi and sound work out of the box

2) Battery life is better than 2hrs

3) Suspend/resume works

<comment><USER58> Toshiba R30-ASMBN22

I have mine configured with:

256GB SSD

2TB HDD

MATTE 1080p screen

16GB ram

802.11ac 2x2 wifi

has lenovo-like nub mouse

cost me less than 1500

runs windows 7, linux mint, and OSX

battery life browsing web at medium brightness over wifi is over 10 hours in windows, 8 in linux, 7 in OSX

<comment><USER59> A matte display is essential for a developer (imho) so the Pixel is a non- starter.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> How well did non-ChromeOS linux work on the last Pixel?

<comment><USER21> Fantastic. Everything works out of the box on ubuntu and fedora.

<comment><USER60> Is it still done through that chroot wonkery?

<comment><USER21> I am old school in the sense that I like to run my os as a native install directly on the machine without any chroot / vm / hypervisor trickery. This guide walks you through how to do a native linux install and blow chromeos away on the pixel. [http://vger.kernel.org/~davem/chromebook_pixel_linux.txt](http://vger.kernel.org/~davem/chromebook_pixel_linux.txt)

<comment><USER16> Whoaaaaa this seems waaaayy hackier than I expected. Will this void the warranty? I just ordered... I will be returning the thing if I can't get Debian installed and given a thorough trial run.

Edit: Nevermind it's really not that bad, just replacing the BIOS, that should be fine. I see little risk of "bricking" a machine here, I'm sure I can get Debian running with these instructions and return the product if it doesn't work well enough.

<comment><USER61> Start with creating a chroot. chroots are easy and can be wiped/recreated quickly if you mess them up. I run Debian Jessie in a chroot and have a simple bash script that provisions the additional stuff I want (apt-get, etc..) and edits a few config files.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER62> After digging around the store and url jumping, it looks like Google no longer sells the Nexus 5 nor 7 anymore. Interesting...

</comment><comment><USER63> "The Cloud" Can Go Fuck Itself.

Addendum; If you ever want it to be taken seriously you must urgently fix two things.

1) Telcos. Being constantly subject to obscene per megabyte usage charges with miserable reliability and speed for access to your bulk storage in the cloud vs $100 per terabyte reliable and fast subscription for life easily portable local storage costs is utterly unacceptable.

2) States. Being constantly subject to unlimited invisible invasive personal data theft without oversight or justification is not an acceptable state of affairs. The existence of states guarantees that they will always insist on being able to do these things. The only potential solution to this problem without actually destroying states (Shock! Horror! ROADS!) is easy and perfect homomorphic encryption.

Until you fix these two (quite possibly unfixable) things, "The Cloud" is pipe dream marketing bullshit.

</comment><comment><USER64> It is only me, or Dell XPS 13 9343 is simply better?

<comment><USER16> If you compare the new Dell XPS 13 or even a Vaio Pro 13 (sadly not sold in the US anymore), it's pretty surprising to compare them to the Pixel.

They both have much more connectivity options, 16:9 13" screens while being a full pound lighter. The Sony's keyboard was great. There's not much of a selling point in favour of the Pixel given that it's heavier and doesn't have a real disk drive or many ports / connectivity.

Unfortunately I returned my new Dell XPS13 because I was so disappointed by the keyboard. But it's really not that bad, I was going to get it again when the Linux version is launched. But now I'm going to try a Pixel out instead. If I could still get a Vaio Pro, or a Panasonic Let's Note, or many of the other Japanese high-end ultrabooks in the US, I would gladly do that instead of the Pixel.

</comment></comment><comment><USER65> Am I the only person who was interested in LTE?

Yes I have a phone, but I'd rather not tether, if only to save phone battery.

</comment><comment><USER66> $999 (32G) and $1299(64G) I am not sure I would buy this, the spec looks ok

<comment><USER67> $999 (2.2GHz i5, 8GB RAM, 32G SSD) and $1299 (2.g4GHz i7, 16GB RAM, 64G SSD), 2560x1700 12.85" touch screen, Intel 5500 graphics, 2 USB 3.0 ports, 2 USB Type-C ports, SD card, audio jack, 720p webcam, Bluetooth 4.0. Really a very nice machine; seems a little overpowered for the cloud-oriented ChromeOS. Stingy SSD can be fixed with a generous high-speed SD card. Presuming it's dual-bootable, I'd be tempted though. I'd been planning to spring for the new Macbook Air but now that Apple's declared war on ports, this looks more my style.

<comment><USER68> The Air is unaffected by the 'port war'.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Pretty neat. And caveat the port issue[1] pretty nice. I wonder what the battery life is like with Linux installed (probably not 12 hours :-) Now if they added a wireless charging option so that when I set it upon my desk it was powered/charging wirelessly that would be pretty neat. I'm amazed as how closely it tracks the macbook 13. They could be twins.

[1] The whole one port to rule them all which is fine except that it becomes a single point of failure for the device, I would be totally ok if it came with _two_ C connectors and either could be power or data or whatever, then if one failed or got gunked up it would still be usable until I got it repaired.

<comment><USER69> Doesn't this have 2 USB C ports?

<comment><USER70> It does. Two USB-C ports and two USB 3.0 ports.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER71> FYI the time-lapse movie playing on the screen is TimeScapes ([http://timescapes.org/](http://timescapes.org/)), which is fascinating on big HD screens.

</comment><comment><USER72> Exciting that there's a 16GB RAM version; should be a good dev box if you can live with 64GB (max) SSD

<comment><USER73> I wonder if it could be made into a hackintosh. Probably not if it doesn't have the exact same hardware as some Macbook.

<comment><USER74> Isn't the new Macbook or the MBP if you go with 16G of RAM pretty close in price?

If it's not specially to have chromeOS or linux and use the touchscreen, I have a hard time understanding the appeal of this machine.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Probably want to link to the blog, which I think is available in every country: [http://chrome.blogspot.com/2015/03/for-whats-next-new- chrome...](http://chrome.blogspot.com/2015/03/for-whats-next-new-chromebook- pixel-and.html)

</comment><comment><USER75> Last-gen Pixel owner here (recently upgraded to the new XPS 13).

I wish more manufacturers would follow Google's lead and start using 3:2 displays in laptops. An XPS 13 (2015) with a 3:2 display and USB C would be the most amazing device ever.

</comment><comment><USER76> I get 404, from a canadian IP

<comment><USER77> Same here, Spanish IP.

</comment></comment><comment><USER78> Nice work Google. It has two 2 USB Type-C (vs 1 on the new Macbook) and 2 USB 3.0 ports. This is the way to introduce USB-C and provide practical value to the customer (vs selling $79 adapters).

<comment><USER79> Yup, and if it had 5 ports value vould be five times as much, right? For some value is not in the ports.

</comment></comment><comment><USER80> The first generation pixel ate up many hours of my time installing and reinstalling linux on it. Now I have Ubuntu running nicely on a Surface Pro and don't think I could be happier.

<comment><USER81> Do you think touchscreen support is up to par? I'm running a Windows tablet with similar specs (Acer Iconia W700P -- no pen support though) and I have really wanted to put Linux on it, but haven't tried. I've just been using a Debian VM for when I need Linux for now.

<comment><USER80> Its good enough for travel, which is what I use the SFPro for because I like to keep my travel bag weight to a minimum. For desktop work it would make me insane and stick with OSX.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER82> ChromeOS is a non-starter for any development work I'd like. At one time, before 2 kids and a busy job, I would have entertained and enjoyed tinkering and formatting a brand new machine to load up Linux. Now, I don't have time or the energy to waste on that type of thing. I use to like building my own systems, now I just need it to work and do what I need.

At this very high price point (for a computer that just surfs the web) I wouldn't want to be the guy responsible for making sales targets.

</comment><comment><USER83> I just bought one, I'm going to give it an honest shot at being my only computer. As the reviews say, most of what I do is web (and web dev), so I would really like it to work. The question is will I be able to do any sort of docker/node/server-sidey stuff. We'll see. I'll give it a fair shake and even try running that stuff remotely. The Android apps thing is an interesting stop gap, maybe it'll be easier to get a text editor running from that environment?

<comment><USER84> You can try Caret, which is a very nice editor, and Zed, which works with Dropbox. However, you will not be able to do much (if anything) with Docker without going into developer mode, and even then it will depend a lot on whether this model will break Crouton in any way.

I'd say the tiny amount of storage will make it really hard to do anything productive with containers...

<comment><USER85> Caret has an absolutely horrible UI. :(

I think Text is OK. [https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/text/mmfbcljfglbok...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/text/mmfbcljfglbokpmkimbfghdkjmjhdgbg)

Personally though my favorite is Tailor, even though I never got the live reloading to work (for HTML/JS.) It can pull from GitHub repos, which is pretty useful. [https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/tailor/mfakmoghean...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/tailor/mfakmogheanjhlgjhpijkhdjegllgenf)

Now that Polymer/Paper is out there I wish someone would use that for an editor, as it's likely it'll finally be the standardized UI for Chrome OS. Might be a fun weekend project...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> It looks like a very nice machine.

At $999 though, it's about the same price as a MacBook Air. I haven't compared specs (SSD? Ram?), but the Chromebook is a device intended to store all your data in 'the cloud', right? On the other hand, it's got a touchscreen which the Air does not. The Air's a lot smaller/lighter/prettier though.

At any rate, the Chromebook is definitely no longer priced below a premium laptop like the Air.

<comment><USER86> I think the biggest thing this has going for it vs. the Air is that the screen is way nicer.

</comment></comment><comment><USER87> Loads okay in the UK. Maybe it is markets where the product will not be sold that are 'barred'.

As for the device, it fixes the problem of all-day-battery which is a common feature on Chromebooks (e.g. Dell) but wasn't on the original Pixel.

I am glad they are continuing the product. Initially everyone laughed but, as time goes by, Chromebook is quite acceptable for 'serious web surfers'.

<comment><USER19> It's interesting that this is on "Google Store", not "Google Play Devices". This may explain why it isn't working yet in all countries -- and maybe also why it works in the UK, since London is home to the first physical Google Store.

</comment></comment><comment><USER88> As it turns out this Pixel cannot have upgradable storage, which really stinks. I hope they wise up and offer a larger model eventually.

</comment><comment><USER89> If the specs* they list are correct, it charges fully in 1.5 hours, which, at 60W, is 90Wh of storage. 90Wh over 12 hours is 7.5W of power usage. That's a nice small number. It's 50% more than the new MB, but significantly more computer as well.

*: They claim to charge enough for 2 hours in 15 minutes. The charger is a 60W charger.

<comment><USER90> this article claims it's a 72 watt-hour battery:

[http://www.pcworld.com/article/2894970/hands-on-googles- new-...](http://www.pcworld.com/article/2894970/hands-on-googles-new- chromebook-pixel-makes-big-changes-under-the-hood.html)

<comment><USER89> That would put it at running at roughly 6W and the 60W charger is only being used at 48W.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER91> Does anyone know how feasible it is -- using Crouton -- to setup one tab in Chrome that is a shell running tmux, vim, git, server processes, etc, then test the website you're coding on in another Chrome tab?

A lightweight dev environment like that on a cheap and light notebook is pretty appealing.

</comment><comment><USER92> > *Yes, we know there are five senses, but we don't recommend trying to taste > or smell your Pixel.

C'mon Google. Surely you know that there are more than five senses. At the very least, can't balance and proprioception get any love? Not to mention the entire gastrointestinal tract.

</comment><comment><USER93> Why do you people like this 3:2 screens? (I presume that I'm writing to an audience of programmers, mostly). Wider screens are perfect to work with to two files side by side. 16:10 is my perfect ratio, but I'm genuinely curious about your reasons.

</comment><comment><USER94> 3:2 high res screen, i7 CPU, 16GB RAM, 64 GB storage...

I will seriously consider this as my next Linux laptop.

</comment><comment><USER95> I always see these spec lists and can't help but think that if I replaced the SSD with a much larger one and installed a real OS on it that this would actually be a tolerable machine; though I remain unconvinced that it is worth the price…

<comment><USER96> The machine looks good,no question. But 16GB ? 32GB ? 64GB SSDs? frankly, it's a no Go for the price ($999). For half the price one can get a better computer. I don't buy the "but you're supposed to be always connected and store files in the cloud" bullshit. I bought a $500 laptop with better specs ,that runs linux without driver and issues and yes, I can surf the web with it.

I'm no fan of Apple but even the latest 13' macbook air at $999 makes way more sense that this product. And yes,it has a browser and Yes you can run Linux on it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER97> The page sends me into a loop.

"The Chrome store in not available in your country". Then it shows the option of looking at the US store page. I click on the Chromebook there and it goes back to saying it's not available in my country.

</comment><comment><USER98> I could see myself installing Windows on it. I mean why not? The touchscreen screams for a Windows version >=8.

Disclaimer: I currently own two Macbooks (15"retina, 11" air). I use Windows usually in a VM and Linux in the data center.

</comment><comment><USER99> Can anyone explain what Google means by "Contextually Lit Keyboard"?

</comment><comment><USER100> I am glad they gave this model a reboot. If I was in the market for a new linux laptop, this would be a my number one choice over the XPS13 as a close second.

I am glad more companies like Dell and Google are supporting linux.

</comment><comment><USER101> IMHO, a single USB port is an awful idea

I keep my mouse pluged in permanently. With a single port, I can't use my mouse while charging (unless I carry around a USB hub, which just proves my point).

The same goes for the latest MacBook.

</comment><comment><USER102> I like its design and specs are good too, but boy is it expensive. I imagine ChromeOS is pretty useless outside of browsing web or taking notes, so why not just buy a tablet for half the price?

</comment><comment><USER103> >Google Store is not available in your country.

The site has a link to the US version.

<comment><USER104> Yes, it goes to the main US site, and then you click on the Chromebook and it shows the same "not available in your country" message.

</comment></comment><comment><USER105> "we don't recommend trying to taste or smell your Pixel"

</comment><comment><USER106> >*Yes, we know there are five senses, but we don't >recommend trying to taste or smell your Pixel. You should ALWAYS smell your laptop. The Surface Pro 3 smells WEIRD.

</comment><comment><USER107> If it had at least 256Gb of SSD, I would buy it, throw away my macbook pro, and use it as my dev machine. Without it, it's useless for me and is just an expensive toy.

</comment><comment> X-combinator Comparison out: [http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2478167,00.asp](http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2478167,00.asp)

</comment><comment><USER108> The new macbook in your link looks thicker than the old ones.

</comment><comment><USER109> Has anyone heard if this is getting an Australian release?

</comment><comment><USER110> Google is doing, what a $300 Billion enterprise can do., than a billion people need. Most enterprises of their scale are focused on the later.

I meant, Glass and Chromebook are 'awesome'., but did or does it make sense, theverge repeatedly said, it does not make sense to buy it.

I like the notion of 'web' based OS, but I guess, for time being, that's for our tablets or phones only, a Laptop is multi-purpose machine and will remain so for perhaps ever, I meant its ridiculous to have one laptop for 'web' and other for 'work'., when most of them can do both at once.

</comment><comment><USER111> How useful is a ChromeOS? Can you use it yet to develop either ChromeOS apps Chromium itself? Can you use it develop Android apps or Android itself?

<comment><USER112> > How useful is a ChromeOS? Can you use it yet to develop either ChromeOS apps > Chromium itself?

ChromeOS apps are just web apps. There are web-based IDEs which work in Chrome that can be used to develop web apps. So, ChromeOS _can_ be used to develop ChromeOS apps.

</comment></comment><comment><USER113> Honestly, I'm not interested in this kind of device until Google manages to unify Android and Chrome so we have a real ecosystem to work with.

</comment><comment><USER114> Works in the US for those that may claim 404 elsewhere. Perhaps it is a region release or the respective data centers have not been updated yet?

<comment><USER115> Google has absolutely no idea of how to run worldwide services w.r.t language/content. Their forcing of Chrome to _change its UI language_ based on IP is one fantastic example of their absurdity. The idiocy of the store is another. Leading to security holes, too! Install app while in-region. App releases critical update. Click app to update, then find out "app does not exist". Bizarre.

Not to mention they often (2/12 months) decide my Denver IP is in Poland or France. Or that my Azure (West-US) machines are in Hungary.

<comment><USER114> I recall that the US allocated IPv4 to be saturated, so Azure has been using IP addresses from Brazil and possibly others (such as Hungary?)

As for a residential (I assume) in Denver, that's just whack.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER116> What does contextually lit keyboard mean exactly ?

</comment><comment><USER117> Does it allow an external monitor with 4k 60hz?

</comment><comment><USER118> What is the price. Cannot see it where I live.

<comment><USER28> Starting at $999.

</comment></comment><comment><USER119> How much does this thing cost? I clicked on the purchase link and got a 404 (badly implemented regional restriction maybe)?

<comment><USER120> Looks like it starts at $999 for the 8GB RAM and 32GB SSD and $1299 for 16GB ram and 64GB SSD.

</comment></comment><comment><USER121> Hope that it can be installed Windows easily. I love this screen but ChromeOS/Linux is not good.

</comment><comment><USER122> Yes yes, but can I run windows on it? Seriously :), can you boot windows using Pixel bootloader?

<comment><USER123> I would also like to know this. The screen, ports, and overall hardware looks great as a Windows laptop.

</comment></comment><comment><USER124> Google, the company, is really selling the new Chromebook (i have one). They're like, "Ok nerds come & watch this video our marketing department made of this product our engineering team built." Great, Google. No one is paying attention!!! There was a new one last year & the year before & it sold then

</comment><comment><USER125> I really wish this didn't look like a bad imitation of an Apple product. Surely it's possible to build a nice looking laptop that doesn't look so similar to a MacBook.

If you're going to do something different, just be different. I think these things are actually kind of sweet, but I can't stand the way they look.

<comment><USER126> #fanboy4life

Show me a good looking laptop and I'll show you a laptop that somebody will say looks like something Apple made first.

There are many ways this does not look like an Apple laptop. But you know what? It doesn't fucking matter. Buy it, don't buy it. Like it, don't like it. Whatever. Just - for the love of Ullr - please don't dirty this otherwise wonderful website with such fucking banal commentary. Say something meaningful, say something funny, but please don't say something that sounds like a failed (or ironic) attempt at trolling.

<comment><USER127> Examples of beautiful laptops that don't look like MacBooks:

[https://brooksreview.net/imgs/sony_vaio_505.jpg](https://brooksreview.net/imgs/sony_vaio_505.jpg)

[http://www.sony.co.in/product/resources/en_IN/images/hubpage...](http://www.sony.co.in/product/resources/en_IN/images/hubpages/vaio/Hub- Child-Feature/feature10/p13_11/ultrabook_0.jpg)

[http://venturebeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/voodoo- env...](http://venturebeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/voodoo-envy-white_- flat-view-02.jpg)

[http://blog.laptopmag.com/wpress/wp- content/uploads/2012/12/...](http://blog.laptopmag.com/wpress/wp- content/uploads/2012/12/sony-x505.jpg)

[http://www.lenovo.com/shop/americas/content/img_lib/530x430/...](http://www.lenovo.com/shop/americas/content/img_lib/530x430/x1.jpg)

Believe it or not, it is possible to design great looking products without being called an Apple-clone. Most companies just try to stick with what works.

<comment><USER128> Oddly enough, that superthin diskless Sony X505 pre-dates the first MacBook Air ;-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER129> Anybody know if you can upgrade the HD or is it some kind of soddered on nonsense?

<comment><USER61> I haven't seen enough details about the pixel. But other chromebooks are easy to upgrade. Just a few screws... Look on amazon for NGFF drives. You'll see in the reviews that many people talk about their experience upgrading their chromebooks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER130> can you install windows on it?

<comment><USER21> On the last pixel I was unable to install Windows 8. Dont know about this one.

</comment></comment><comment><USER131> I think that's a lot of money for low-end storage and Intel 5000 graphics.

</comment><comment><USER96> Could anybody archive the the bloody page so people can see ? stupid google.

</comment><comment><USER132> Funny how the superfluous Caps Lock key gets replaced with a search key.

<comment><USER16> Whatever it says it is, I'll always remap it to Control :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> "To place an order, you must have a Google Wallet account."

Ugh, really? Can't I just buy the product?

Will these be sold in stores, or outside of Google's ecosystem? Just curious. Andyes, I want one specifically for the hardware, and will be replacing the OS.

</comment><comment><USER133> Can I put ubuntu or windows on this? Or even make it a hackintosh?

<comment><USER134> Linux with Crouton: [https://github.com/dnschneid/crouton](https://github.com/dnschneid/crouton)

</comment></comment><comment><USER135> Config look cool & cheap, about design: the hinge is ugly

</comment><comment><USER136> and google makes it look like a 4 year old macbook pro.

</comment><comment><USER137> Not available in the Swedish "Google Store".

</comment><comment><USER138> Here comes the USB-C port hype train, choochoo!

</comment><comment><USER139> That is going to be one expensive web browser.

</comment><comment><USER140> Microsoft should buy bluestacks just in case.

</comment><comment><USER141> I hope I can use that port to charge my other laptop. The one that I can actually use with practical ports and can run real apps and not just websites.

</comment><comment><USER20> $999 for a browser on steroids?!

I get why we cannot see the link in Europe, as hardly anyone is buying them over here, so why bother.

</comment><comment><USER142> No LTE!?

</comment><comment><USER143> BUY link goes to a 404.

</comment><comment><USER16> I wonder how much Google makes on these devices in advertising per user.

<comment><USER16> This was a serious question, I'm legitimately curious. We can't pretend that isn't part of the product offering, and it's a unique aspect of the ChromeOS experience. I can only assume this could partially subsidize the hardware.

In the same line of thinking, I wonder how much a Macbook purchase can be offset by the expected revenue from iTunes and other integrated services. Or the pre-bundled spyware that comes with so many other laptops.

</comment></comment><comment><USER144> if this runs ubuntu 15 and the ssd can be easily replaced, I would consider.

$1299 is too expensive for a chrome book. what chrome book app could use 16gb memory!

</comment><comment><USER145> 404

</comment><comment><USER146> Error 404

</comment><comment><USER147> Nice chromebook.

</comment><comment><USER148> For chromebook pixel to be successful among developers atleast, following needs to be done

1\. Provide a good terminal like iTerm 2\. Google cloud should provide a free standard instance always powered and run chrome in headless mode with remote desktop enabled via chrome remote desktop app. 3\. Provide a ebs worth 100GB at least on the cloud.

Standard instance costs 0.045 per hour i.e, 345$ per year.

</comment><comment><USER37> I'd take this over one of the new MacBooks any day. Better proc (with better video), multiple USB-C and USB-3 ports, MUCH cheaper.

</comment><comment><USER149> Current Chromebooks have a major flaw because they tend to be "locked" by Google.

Without any magical hacks, you won't install Skype. There is no normal file navigation Explorer, and DropBox won't run either.

Of course Drive and Hangouts work.

Price is very good, but until Skype is accepted and better file tools provided, this is once again a turn off.</comment>


High Priority Free Software Projects - <AUTHOR> http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/priority-projects

<comment><USER2> I'm kind of dismayed at the lack of innovation, or even appreciation for innovation, in this list. It seems a waste to spend good developers time cloning something like Google Earth, which is marginally useful to begin with, already free (as in beer), just so that it can also be free (as in speech).

Instead, why not spend time working on projects that will attract people to free software because it's only available as free software?

<comment><USER3> Agreed.

The free software approach seems to assume that what a computer should be and do has already been decided and they just need to make free versions of everything. Like there's a certain set of programs that defines a complete system and their goal is just to get from 60% or wherever they are now to 100%.

Apple, on the other hand, reinvents computing every 5 years or so (yes, that's hyperbolic). If a FOSS advocate had created the iPad, the most popular device in computing today would be FOSS. The most popular computers and electronics in the world aren't Apple products because Apple made an Apple version of everything. The most popular computers and electronics in the world are Apple products because Apple innovated.

<comment><USER4> The most popular computers and electronics in the world are Apple products because Apple polished everything to a sheen.

Sure apple created some cool stuff, but the open source world created some pretty darn cool stuff too. Remember, the first web browser was open source.

<comment><USER5> Great example, but that was a long time ago. The argument being made here is that there isn't enough innovation in the free software space in recent years.

<comment><USER4> What about the massive strides that Chrome/Mozilla/WebKit are making? What about the innovations in programming languages such as Clojure and Arc and Erlang? What about the innovations in frameworks such as node.js and sproutcore?

I could go on all day. IMO, it's a lot easier to find innovation in the open source world than it is in the commercial world which seems to be more about copy & polish than it does about innovation.

If you were arguing that open source lacked polish, I would agree with you. But innovation? Hardly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> "Some of the most important projects on our list are replacement projects. These projects are important because they address areas where users are continually being seduced into using nonfree software by the lack of an adequate free replacement."

Why is having a free program that solves a problem that's already solved more important than creating programs that solve new problems, but that also happen to be free?

I find it hard to believe that the most important free software project in the world is a player for passively consuming content in a proprietary format (Flash), that is A) dying and B) more for eye candy than anything useful.

<comment><USER7> Because lack of such free software can hinder people who might be otherwise interested in switching to a free operating system from actually doing so.

A free replacement for Flash is likely to become less useful in this situation, as other non-proprietary solutions are becoming prevalent.

<comment><USER8> Why would a lack of a GPL Flash replacement hinder someone from switching to Linux? Flash is already available for Linux (I've run it under Ubuntu), and while it's not "free software", it's free of charge.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> What a weird list:

\- Flash is slowly dying, so is Gnash really that high a priority? Also, Gnash seems to be far from being a good flash replacement; by the time it will be, flash will be irrelevant. I'd argue work spent on Gnash is mostly wasted.

\- GNU Octave is far behind Python + Numpy/Scipy/Matplotlib. Better abandon it and focus on the succesful platform.

<comment><USER10> For people who only know how to use Matlab, Octave is one less reason to go non-free.

<comment><USER9> I disagree. It's one reason for them to try a free software package, decide that it sucks (it lacks most of the interesting libraries), and go back to using Matlab forever.

If on the other hand they were introduced to the python stack, which has a superior language and a lot of neat libraries (though not yet on par with Matlab), they might have a chance of sticking to it.

<comment><USER10> Porting Matlab code to Octave is much easier -- including more libraries.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Another project I would like to be high priority is GIMP.

Photoshop is the misruler and needs to be dethroned. It's a terrible piece of software that, more or less, forces people to use non-free operative systems. It has to be replaced and/or get some _real_ competition that would force Adobe to get their act straight.

<comment><USER12> The piece of software that forces people like me to use non-free operative systems is not Photoshop, but Gimp. And more horribly, Inkscape.

<comment><USER13> That sounds backward. How could some software that is merely available for free drive you away from something? Also, have you tried alternatives? There is not just GIMP...

<comment><USER14> There are no serious alternatives to GIMP, and GIMP in turn is not a serious alternative to Photoshop. GIMP is an astonishingly user-hostile piece of software--though to their credit it appears the developers have finally begun to realize this and make changes with people who actually use graphics software, not people who write graphics software, in mind.

However, even despite these new-ish developments, there is just no real open- source answer to Photoshop (and Inkscape is only a partial one to Illustrator).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> It's OpenStreetMap. Not Open Street Maps. You can use as reference the domain <http://www.openstreetmap.org/>, the logo with the word OpenStreetMap, or the title element of the page, which says (wait for it) OpenStreetMap. Maybe cut and paste that text, or line the browser windows up to reference.

/end ragefest. But come on, guys. It's not 'The Wikipedias'

</comment><comment><USER16> Octave should be higher, program is really far off from being any kind of competitor to Matlab. Even the installation is daunting on OSX. Language has a lot of idiosyncrocies to matlab. With ML/Computer vision becoming bigger, could help a wave of new startups.

<comment><USER17> when I needed a free version of matlab, I switched to python and have never looked back. better for me in every way. I think that python is a much better direction for that type of computing anyways.

<comment><USER18> Those are my thoughts, but I also want to learn some more R as well. (I hear stories of people going from Python, to R, back to Python, but I don't see why one couldn't use both.) When you have two such powerful tools that can both be extended and embedded fairly easily, why would one need Matlab anymore?

<comment><USER19> 1) There are tons of libraries for Matlab. Sure, you could rewrite them in Python, but most people just want to get their work done.

2) It is deeply ingrained in the academic world.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Regarding Skype, you're not going to get Skype users over to a free alternative by making your own voice-chat program; you need to actually reverse-engineer the protocol and make your own client so they can switch without having to convince other people.

(Of course, someone did reverse engineer Skype however-long-ago-it-was-now, but looking it up, apparently it might have been done by decompilation and so of questionable legality, which is why nobody's making a Pidgin plugin to use it. Annoying.)

</comment><comment><USER21> A free alternative to Oracle Forms? That's a pretty neat idea since in my opinion OF actually serves the developers instead of enslaving them.</comment>


Ask HN: When/Where to Not Use Machine/Deep Learning? - <AUTHOR> It's good to stay away from the hype as much as possible. In what applications do you think using ML is not necessary, or worse still, a bad idea? <comment><USER2> Most often, "machine learning" refers specifically to supervised learning. Generally, such technology requires an historic set of examples of sufficient volume and quality (what this means varies greatly from problem to problem) from which to learn. Some problems do not come with a reasonable set of training data, and none is forthcoming: these situations are a poor choice for machine learning. Each of these factors makes example data less desirable: candidate explanatory variables which are few in number or highly redundant, missing values and poor measurement. All of the challenges one faces in traditional statistical data collection and sampling apply.

Some problems are not learning problems at all. Retail companies with poor management and consequent poor service, for instance, need machine learning less than they need competent management.</comment>


Banned by YouTube, gun lovers are taking their videos to Pornhub - <AUTHOR> https://therooster.com/blog/banned-by-youtube-gun-lovers-are-taking-their-videos-to-pornhub <comment><USER2> this is a 2018 article bit late hasn't stopped a number of the gun channels I watch on youtube.

<comment><USER3> Agreed. All the firearm channels I have been subscribed to still exist. The only words they appear to be afraid to use are related to the pandemic. One of them holds up a Corona beer instead.</comment></comment>


Excuse Me for Being an Optimist in "The End Times" of Our Current World - <AUTHOR> https://butterflyeconomy.blogspot.com/2020/08/excuse-me-for-being-optimist-in-end.html <comment><USER2> This Doreen person has a lot of posts that surface on HN, but it always seems to be a different website, with different styling. How many websites does this person run? What's the point? I say this because the writing and perspective is often interesting and a centralized collection would aid with discoverability.

</comment><comment><USER3> > We aren't all doomed and, please, kindly, stop wasting my valuable and > limited time and energy on listening to your crap about how we are all > doomed, as if the world has never had serious problems before. Either roll > your sleeves up and be part of the solution or at least get out of my way.

This is the conclusion. Don't even get me started on the "I'm a military wife" paragraph.

The environment is not getting better day by day, despite this woman's stressful parenting career.

<comment><USER2> I mean, the environment of humans is getting better day by day. That should count for something.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The Kuwaiti oil fires were indeed an environmental disaster [0]; the main lasting effect is increased acid rain from sulfur dioxide. The fires produced half the USA's entire sulfur dioxide output daily while they burned for months. The incident is considered one of the worst oil spills ever [1].

I didn't really like WarGames; I preferred Hackers. In Hackers, the world is not naturally poor or unpleasant, but is made that way by the systems which humans build. Those systems are used to oppress and control users, leading to hackers insisting that their rebellion is no less grand than one which will "hack the planet" and destroy these planet-scale systems of control.

There will be another Y2K. The year 2038 [2] approaches. The amount of work that we must do to rewrite the past and prepare our entire civilization for overcoming our mistakes is exponential with respect to time; the longer we put off doing the needful work, the more effort we will need. Worse, it's possible to become locked into patterns of just barely doing enough to prevent the problem from getting worse over time, but still requiring growing amounts of effort.

The problem with positive thinking is that it obscures reality. I sympathize; reality is harsh and unpleasant.

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuwaiti_oil_fires#Environmenta...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuwaiti_oil_fires#Environmental_impact)

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_spill#Largest_oil_spills](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_spill#Largest_oil_spills)

[2] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem)

</comment><comment><USER5> This author has commented before about not wearing a mask, apparently not believing in the science behind it. Ignorance is bliss.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24152591](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24152591)

</comment><comment><USER6> I 100% share this sentiment, very well said.

It's action oriented and optimistic but not naive.

Pessimists sound smart, optimists make money.

The doom and gloom mainly comes from the news media needing to sell ads to eyeballs. CNBC talked about the action that businesses were taking to increase face mask supplies while the mainline media did nothing but complain.</comment>


Zoom web interface has been down for hours - <AUTHOR> https://devforum.zoom.us/t/in-progress-web-sdk-web-client-from-browser-403-forbidden/10782 <comment><USER2> Zoom has apparently disabled their web interface. See this article:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22774152](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22774152)</comment>


Apple's Siri will need to learn some new tricks - <AUTHOR> http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/20/tech/mobile/siri-limitations/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

<comment><USER2> Is the excitement about it starting to wear off already? I wonder if people will still use it a month or two from now.</comment>


Scala 2.8.0 Beta 1 released - <AUTHOR> http://www.scala-lang.org/node/4587

<comment><USER2> Cool. I've been writing Scala and Clojure wrappers for a larger Java project, and I ran into a minor hassle last week with Scala/Java integration and I read something that indicated that things would be easier with Scala 2.8. I am downloading the beta right now to see if there are any problems using it with InteliJ 9.

<comment><USER2> Trying 2.8 did break some of my code (as expected from reading the 2.8 beta docs)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Named and especially default arguments is the win for me. I couldn't bring myself to start ripping out our Java code just to have to do all of the same silly method duplication all over the place.

<comment><USER4> For me, too. I learned Scala for a project last semester and named/default arguments were the one thing I missed the most.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I haven't been this excited about a new programming language version in a long time. It almost feels like a bigger deal than the change from Java 1.4 to 1.5!

</comment><comment><USER6> They didn't expand much on the improvements to actors and support for continuations, both of which are quite interesting.

Actors: <http://www.scala-lang.org/node/2041>

Continuations: <http://www.scala-lang.org/node/2096>

</comment><comment><USER7> Along with the new language version comes a new, completely rewritten Eclipse plugin, which can be installed using the update site:

<http://www.scala-lang.org/scala-eclipse-plugin-beta-preview>

</comment><comment><USER8> This language makes me unhappy.

<comment><USER9> Care to elaborate?

<comment><USER8> No not really - it isn't a concrete thing, its like a gut wrenching feeling you get when you look at a lot of clever C++/Perl code.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Is Ruby on Rails for beginners? - <AUTHOR>

	Ruby seems easy, but learning more about these takes time. MVC, REST, Migrations, Database abstraction, Routing,<p>Is this a good language for beginners? <comment><USER2> "MVC, REST, Migrations, Database abstraction, Routing"

None of these things have to do with Rails or Ruby.

Regardless of which language/framework you choose to learn, you'll still find yourself tackling the above concepts in some form.

If you like Ruby and Rails, learn it. There is no "right" choice. What you choose to learn depends on what you want to do with your skills.

Also, taking the above into account, be aware that what language you start with isn't all that important. In the beginning, you'll likely lack the skills to really understand what the differences mean anyhow. The important thing is that you start somewhere and learn.

Don't follow the "flavor of the month" people. There will always be some hot new language or framework to play with.

Pick something that has a knowledgeable and active community for support and you'll do fine with whatever you choose.

<comment><AUTHOR> "knowledgeable and active communities"...such as??? Sorry, I'm a beginner. I would assume RoR and Python...any other suggestions?

<comment><USER2> Yes, both Ruby and Python have active communities and are very popular languages for beginners.

I can't really give you any further suggestions without knowing what you plan to develop. If you're having trouble deciding what to learn, I would suggest doing a bit of research into the specific area(s) of development that interest you and get an idea of what everyone else is using.

Don't fuss about it too much though. If given a choice, just choose one that feels good to you and move on with learning it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Beginning last year I was in the same about you appear to be in. I can say, with a lot of confidence, I disagree with the previous comment. BECAUSE Ruby is such an articulate language it was fairly easy for me to pick up, with no formal CS classes in over 15 years. Might I suggest _IF_ you have 1 year and 4hrs a day do the following:

1\. Spend three months just in Ruby. I recommend LRTHW (Shaw) and LTP (Pine)

2\. Code School 1 & 2.

3\. Hartl (will hurt your head in a good way)

4\. Repeat Step 1

5\. Make apps, learn a few front-end frameworks (bootstrap, zurb-foundation) along the way.

6\. Hit the IRC.

<comment><AUTHOR> I do have the time and am considering Code Academy in Chicago, but after more investigation I have began to wonder if RoR is really for beginners..because it borrows so much from others.

I had planned to take a year and learn it full-time starting in March, but I am having second thoughts.

thanks for the post

<comment><USER3> I think one of the strengths of Ruby and thus RoR is its kind of simple. Although I will admit the leap to 3.1 was probably more difficult than it ought to have been. I can only speak for NYC but joining the local meetup community has done wonders for my skill building. But remember, this is a ten year process =) Good luck!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'd say that Rails is bad for non-programmers to learn programming on. Start with something that has far less magic baked in, like Sinatra; Rails will do a great job of doing things for you, without necessarily letting you learn what's going on. It's awesome for experienced programmers who are tired of doing the same drudge work for the four thousandth time, though.

Ruby is a _great_ language, though, and is fine for beginners. Sinatra is a very straightforward and gentle way to do some web programming with Ruby.

<comment><USER5> There is a very important element of fun in hacking on a cool platform that does awesome stuff behind the scenes.Ultimately thats why we make such frameworks so that its fun to build on top of them.In my opinion deriving fun from what you do is essential to become an expert.

<comment><AUTHOR> It seems ilke you are countering the previous point...Are you implying that I should stay with Rails vs Sinatra?

<comment><USER5> Yeah I think you should stay with Rails initially.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Not any more. The time to be a "Rails beginner" was in 2005 / 2006. I'd jump on Node.js if you want to be in on the ground floor.

<comment><AUTHOR> Funny...that is exactly what I have been considering. Thanks for the lead.

<comment><USER7> The Sinatra Book is free too. <http://sinatra-book.gittr.com/>

<comment><AUTHOR> Someone told me that Sinatra sets the ground work for Rails.

From my little interaction, it appears that they are very separate (sinatra less complexed).

Is Sinatra a building block or just a simple first step???</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Analysis: Which URL Shortening Service Should You Use? - <AUTHOR> http://searchengineland.com/analysis-which-url-shortening-service-should-you-use-17204 <comment><USER2> I've been using is.gd for a couple of reasons. First, "is.gd" is nice and short, and I find it extremely easy to type. The flow from key to key is very smooth. After that, the is.gd home page loads very quickly.

However, I find that the biggest advantage of is.gd , in comparison to bit.ly, cli.gs, TinyURL, etc, is the initial placement of the cursor.

On is.gd's home page, the cursor is placed in the text field, so all you need to do is paste your long URL, and hit enter. On the resulting page, the compressed URL is _highlighted_ for you! So all you need to do is hit CMD+C/CTRL+C, and voila, the compressed URL is in your clipboard.

</comment><comment> andrewl-hn I don't care about tracking and the length of the URL is the only thing that matters to me. That's why I prefer <http://tinyarro.ws/> They use unicode characters to get domains shorter, and I use www. instead of <http://> if I need to squeeze an extra character.

</comment><comment><USER3> I wish they had covered more about the tracking. For example cli.gs has similar tracking capabilities to bit.ly but the cli.gs interface is way more annoying.

Cli.gs also has geo targeting which is unique to my knowledge.</comment>


Practice Makes Perfect? Not So Much, New Research Finds - <AUTHOR> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130520163906.htm

<comment><USER2> The other old saying goes: "success is 10% talent and 90% hard work". Which is both compatible with real life experience and more optimistic than what the article says: "without talent you're screwed". I strongly prefer the former way of saying this!

</comment><comment><USER3> _" >Many theorists argue that thousands of hours of focused, deliberate practice is sufficient to achieve elite status."_

Really?

I feel like any extended experience among a group of "practicers" would dispel this notion.</comment>


Scammers and Spammers: Inside Online Dating's Sex Bot Con Job - <AUTHOR> http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/features/scammers-and-spammers-inside-online-datings-sex-bot-con-job-20160201 <comment><USER2> A whopping 59 percent of all online traffic — not just dating sites — is generated by bots, according to the tech analyst firm, Are You a Human.

There's a tech analyst firm that applies the Voight-Kampf test?</comment>