Let me explain. Most probable Google Chrome OS will consist in a Linux kernel, a new window manager and Google Chrome browser on top of all these. Keep in mind that Ubuntu as of 9.04 has an official release for ARM processors. If you need a similar experience today you can get Ubuntu Mini iso (which is a 12 MB download) for x86 architectures. Most probably starting with 9.10 release it will be available for ARM architectures also.

Then, check the instructions from this ubuntu forum . Idea is that you need to install a few packages from the command line:

sudo apt-get -y install gnome-core gdm network-manager-gnome fast-user-switch-applet human-theme x11-xserver-utils tangerine-icon-theme gnome-themes-ubuntu ubuntu-artwork jockey-gtk gnome-screensaver gnome-utils

apt-get install laptop-mode-tools ubuntu-laptop-mode wpasupplicant # this one is for supporting a laptop

apt-get install maximus # this one is for achieving the maximizing effect from the Ubuntu Netbook Release .

Then using Ubuntu Tweak and Add / Remove Programs from Ubuntu desktop environment you can install Firefox 3.5, Google Desktop (with gadgets support), Google Gears, AWN and Firefox Prism . I’ve also installed Pidgin and VLC. The bottom line you get an web oriented OS which takes around 80 MB of RAM (at idle) and is very responsive.

On the other hand take a look at all these links:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10282037-56.html?part=rss&tag=feed&subj=Webware

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10280270-56.html

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10006582-56.html

http://friendfeed.com/scobleizer/3a1eac42/why-did-google-announce-chrome-os-this-week-well

And all these announcements from Google related to Google Apps out of beta this week and Google Chrome OS makes more sense.

So the way I see things Google won’t be able to change the status quo in the OS world.

But if Google some how succeeds we will run a Google OS on a Google approved device using only (is going to be only a matter of time ) Google services (no Facebook or Twitter for you). And btw you will probably have Google Analytics at desktop level .

For all these reasons I will stick with the Web OS option that I described at the beginning. If I am wrong in my assumptions let me know in a comment.

The development of web based applications has decoupled the user interface from the business layer as well as its software and hardware. As a result, a user working at a personal computer (or a smart phone) with a web browser can access a variety of business applications for the cost of the Internet connection and the subscription to the service.

The number of companies embracing the SaaS model has grown steadily, especially in the last couple of years, with small companies leading the charge. The SaaS applications that most companies are using are messaging (email, instant messaging and calendar), marketing, project management, time and billing, accounting / financial, customer relationship management, inventory management and payroll.

By purchasing a software service the company has no up front acquisition costs, no hardware or software to buy, and no support staff to hire and train. The cost of acquisition is reduced to the cost of training employees on the application and converting existing data. The low acquisition cost of software services makes the access to those services affordable to a broader range of companies. This affordability gives small companies the opportunity to use the same feature rich software solutions as those of larger companies. Going into details the pros are:

• Lower total cost of ownership (TCO). Hosted software carries a set price per user per month
• Financial predictability. It is much easier for a company to predict monthly IT expenses in a subscription based model then on a licensed application model.
• Lack of over provisioning or under provisioning of the IT infrastructure needed to run in house the licensed application
• Scalability. Hosted offerings are designed to scale seamlessly for large numbers of simultaneous users. As such, they are able to easily maintain performance levels and up time as your company grows and the volume of data expands over time
• Frequent upgrades. Updates are made frequently and for the company effortlessly. Because the software is delivered over the Internet, SaaS providers have greater flexibility in upgrading applications and rolling out changes to customers.
• Accessibility. Hosted software can be accessed from any web browser around the world. Users in different countries can access the same information in real time without the delay of synchronizing changes as is the case with a client server on premise solution.

Before a small company decides to select a hosted application it should have a sense of the limitations also. Yes, there are limitations, but if the model is used correctly, the limitations will be very small compared with the benefits. Using a software service prompts several concerns about integration. The chief concern is data security. This stems from an uneasiness people still have about sending confidential data across the Internet, though this concern is starting to wane. The other concerns surrounding software services are : system security, backup and recovery, and disaster recovery. In addition to these concerns, a company looking at a software service should also ask: ” What would I do if the service provider went out of business? Will I be able to retrieve my data, and how long will it take me to get data back up and into a new system where I can access it ? ” The software service is providing both hardware and hosting, s the loss of the provider means the loss of both services. This creates a single point of failure, a sizable risk. Also accessibility can also be a Con if one does not have access to the Internet.

In the last part of this piece I will try to describe a SaaS implementation process with all the steps involved.
Let’s stard with planning and design. The first order of business is to evaluate the features offered by each SaaS provider. Once you have a SaaS application pilot running you should have a GAP analysis which should compare the company’s existing needs to the functionality of the application. The analysis may reveal limitations that have to be made up by licensing one or more additional applications from the provider, or building custom code.

Next comes the analysis of the service level and license agreements. The SLA discussion will include up time guarantees, penalties if those guarantees aren’t met and the mechanism used to measure up time. You should realize that the smaller you are, the smaller your negotiation power is in relation to a big SaaS provider.

Next you should try to get information related to the security of the provider’s data center and the application servers that reside there. Whether your SaaS provider runs its own data center, or leases it from a managed hosting provider, the facility should have strong physical and logical access controls. You should ask if the provider engages in regular third-party audits of its apps, including web app vulnerability scanning and manual penetration testing. You should also be aware that most of the time you will get a “No Comment” as an answer to this question.

If you are happy so far, the next step in the implementation is existing data migration to the SaaS provider. At this stage if the provider really wants you as a client, it should do all the necessary steps to help you.
At this stage you should be a reasonably happy user of the SaaS application of your choice.

While I do not consider software services appropriate for all of a company’s application software needs, they can fill many of those needs.

Also another thing that I heard recently (a podcast from The Register) was the discontent that Mark Shuttleworth has regarding the OpenOffice as a whole. He is not happy that it take 9 hours to compile the source code (for that matter I think nobody is happy about it) and he says that if the guys at openoffice.org do not move the software in the right direction he (Ubuntu guys) will take matter in his own (their) hands.

Probably is the time for some sort of rewrite of the suite. The big problem is who is going to pay for this. I wonder if IBM will somehow take over from Sun and develop Lotus Symphony into the new open source office suite. And also I wonder if Mark is thinking to switch Ubuntu to Lotus Symphony or something based on it.

I choose to compare OpenOffice with Firefox because these 2 projects are the most successful open source endeavors which are available in some form on all major operating systems. I use both programs. I like both programs and I really want OpenOffice to succeed.

I really like at OpenOffice the features that the software is offering, the XML standardized file format, the fact that is free and open source but I do not like the fact that it takes 20 seconds to start even on a reasonable new computer after i did the speed optimization tricks. Also I do not like the fact that OpenOffice uses so much memory without a clear reason. I know the fact that OpenOffice is monolithic and loads everything and anything when it starts but honestly as a user I don’t care.

I really like at Firefox the features (the lack of features) that the software is offering and the fact that I am able to extend the browser to do whatever I need it to do. I do not like the fact that it uses too much memory and I needed to change some settings in about:config to make Firefox behave. Again I know that almost everybody agrees that the memory consumption is due to a feature and not a bug, but I think this is still debatable.

First thing I looked for was the number of downloads for OpenOffice. You should try this search also. The best I was able to come up was this link You need to download the most recent spreadsheet which is from sometime in February this year and on the row 387 of the sheet you will find the number of downloads which is around 82.000.000 . Another link that I found was this one . Sadly on this page I wasn’t able to find the total number of downloads.

Then I looked for the number of downloads for Firefox. If you go here you will find on the top right the counter with the number of downloads up to date with the option to share the counter on your site.

For the sake of the argument let’s say that now there are around 90.000.000 copies of OpenOffice and 360.000.000 copies of Firefox in the wild.

Then I looked for the list of extensions for OpenOffice. I found it here There are around 20 extensions there, but nothing really useful. Most of the extensions are in early stages of development. On the other hand if you go here you will see that at the time of this writing there are more than 2200 extensions available for Firefox, from which you will find at least 10-20 extensions that are very useful for your particular needs. Myself I have installed 14 extensions.

Another thing I tried to found was the road map for Firefox and OpenOffice. I found the road map for OpenOffice here . It seems to be up to date and also it seems to be that the organization behind OpenOffice live by the road map. I wasn’t able to find an up to date road map for Firefox.

IMHO I think that if you want to develop an extension for OpenOffice or for Firefox the degree of difficulty would be the same. Maybe I am wrong I am not a programmer, but I know that both software are using an XML based mechanism to allow and develop extensions

So, why there are so few extensions for OpenOffice? Honestly I do not have a clear answer but some conclusions are clear:

• Is clear that the guys behind Firefox are able to “sell” there product much better than the guys behind OpenOffice. Just look at the websites and the links that I provided.
• I wasn’t able to find out the revenue model for OpenOffice if there is any, but I think the lack of income is a major hurdle towards a better marketing solution for them. I know Novell, Sun, Google are helping the project, but I think all these companies have their “selfish” reasons which are not all the time on the same page. On the other hand Firefox has a clear revenue model and they are making money and this is seen in their marketing capabilities.
• The fact that Firefox was adopted initially by geeks which used the browser helped a lot in creating the first extensions. Even if the same geeks downloaded OpenOffice, you should try to answer the question: How much time do you have Firefox open on your computer and how much time do you have OpenOffice open?

I think that now OpenOffice is in a similar position with Netscape in their last days. I think is time for OpenOffice to freeze or even better reduce the number of features, and start developing the software using the Mozilla Firefox approach. Minimum features in the core product and then the options to add extensions.

Let me know what you think…

Maybe some of you guys out there can help with some answers to these questions.
Thanks in advance.