Microsoft is indeed a formidable competitor and that the strongest part of this article's argument. However, the claim that "we aren't ready to run everything on the web" doesn't hold much water with people, such as myself, who do 90% of their work on the web already and will perhaps be doing 100% of their work on the web within a year or two. I could care less whether the underlying O/S is Linux, Windows, or Mac - so long as the browser is as fast, capable, and secure as Firefox (with NoScript, Adblock Plus, etc.) is now.

I wrote a post recently about the Desktop versus the Cloud which describes a typical morning for me - which is almost entirely on the cloud. I also tried to present a balanced view of the pros and cons of cloud use. Here's the link if anyone is interesting in seeing what a typical day in the cloud is like - right now.

<link>

P.S. If the Chrome O/S can nail security as well as they did with the Chrome browser, that would be of huge benefit to consumers and enable them to grab a good chunk of market share, IMHO.

Cloud computing is a nice idea, but it's doomed because of a lack of control. There is no way in hell any intelligent company is going to let anyone but themselves have control of their proprietary documents (strategy, accounting, proposals, HR documents, etc.).

Maybe companies could set up an internal web server hosting the software with the employees' computers using cloud-computing apps to connect to the secure server. But I think Google has in mind that they host the apps in order to get the traffic. I could be wrong, but I don't see any advantage to this versus individual seat licenses or network licenses through a MS Windows network.

Millions of individuals from small businesses and sole proprietorships are already using Google Apps. There are certainly some industries that require more privacy and security than Google Apps currently offers (banking, finance, law, etc.). But there are also many small businesses that don't have such stringent requirements, don't have IT staff - all they really want is simple/cheap/effective. Google Apps is FAR simpler than maintaining your own MS Exchange server.

And don't forget that some basic security features ARE offered, such as forced HTTPS, postini, etc.

And don't forget that security in a Windows environment is not really secure at all because people burn documents to disc or load on to usb drives or lose (or steal) laptops or hard drives. In fact, in the long run cloud hosted documents with the right permissions required and security features are likely to be more real-word secure. The lack of a persistent connection could be an issue, but perhaps sensitive documents shouldn't be available on a device unless they can be accessed via a secure network anyway.

Cloud computing and Chrome OS are interesting ideas. But reliability is the main reason that I won't be an early adopter. When I turn on my PC, I'd be more surprised by a hardware failure than an internet problem.

But reliability is the main reason that I won't be an early adopter. When I turn on my PC, I'd be more surprised by a hardware failure than an internet problem.

Reliability is not just about hardware which turns on. It's also about software which works as advertised and a system which is secure. Windows XP (and to a lesser extent, Vista and Windows 7) is a computing environment that requires considerable expertise to use securely - way beyond the average user. To me - this is a way in which Windows is very unreliable.

Recently, Microsoft updated the .net framework in automatic updates. This caused an extension to be silently installed which allows for software to be installed on a system with no user knowledge this is happening. This is reliable?

What I personally hope for most from Chrome O/S is a computing environment that is far more secure than current computing environments. I'd gladly give up access to desktop apps if it meant I no longer had to spend much time or effort securing my Windows system.

Of course - at this point Chrome O/S is just a vaporware announcement. Can they actually deliver? Time will tell.