Readers on both sides of the Google fence share their thoughts on Chrome and
the upcoming Google phone:
Browser is awesome; I've been using it all day. The installer sucks.
It is a user-based install, which forcedly dumps itself in the current user's
Application Data folder. I like to run as a limited user so this does not
work well for me. Whether I tried installing as admin, or using 'Run As' while
logged in as my limited user, it forcedly and secretly places the installation
in the administrator's Application Data folder, which I cannot access or execute
files from while logged in as my limited user. What I had to do to get it
working the way I(kind of) wanted was temporarily give my limited user admin
rights, install it, then de-admin myself. Why not give me the choice to install
for THIS USER or ALL USERS like most programs or, for heaven's sake, at least
let me choose which folder I want to install the software in!
Other than that, though, it seems like a really great product, simple and
easy to understand.
Though this may place me squarely within a minority among technology specialists,
I'm not impressed with Google to the degree so commonly expressed these days.
Not that Google isn't a powerhouse, because it is, but I don't agree with
those that want to see it as a company predestined to rule the world and/or
seemingly content to give it a free ride because they simply see it as the
anti-Microsoft. I see Google as intent upon and involved in much for which
there would be an unending public outrage if coming from Microsoft. Such is
the way of the world, unfortunately.
I welcome the entry of Chrome into the marketplace, however, primarily
something from which everyone will benefit. On the other hand, I have no faith,
nor any interest in, suggestions of Chrome as an emerging application platform.
I see such expectations as entirely unrealistic in today's world, a throwback
to failed attempts by others to achieve the same in years past, and again,
something which would be the focus of intense ridicule and consternation if
suggested by Microsoft rather than Google.
No, I'm not excited about the Google phone. I just want a nice, high-quality
cell phone that doesn't do anything but be a cell phone. That's getting harder
and harder to find, if it's even still possible.
Anyway, I think Google or Apple can stamp their names on any piece of
junk technology and the Google and Apple fanatics will automatically go gaga
over it, even before they know anything about it.
I am like a little, giddy schoolboy when it comes to the Android platform.
I am a IT technician and I rely on my phone very much when I need to get online
at any given moment. I have kept track of the Anroid platform since its first
press release. I, like so many others, where hoping that Sprint would be the
first carrier to provide the Android platform (it wasn't). But when it does
offer it, I am for sure going to be there to trade my phone in.
Apple overpriced? In many respects, it is. To the average consumer, its
prices are ridiculous.
I work as a desktop admin for a school system of around 25,000 machines,
half Apple, half PC. Apple does cut us some pretty good deals on the cost
of the machines from its side, but the downside is our Apple support tickets
are two-fold that of the PC tickets. The man hours lost in supporting them
does not equal out to being worth the intial cost of the item. No, this isn't
me saying we have a Dell 755 running against an eMac. We have models from
all years but the old Dell GX110s chug along just fine, when the eMacs lose
a hard disk or logic board daily. We have new 755s that you can swap an HD
or other part on within seconds compared to the two- to three-hour service
time for a new iMac. Apple costs too much in the forefront for the consumer,
and costs too much to support for the enterprise.