Did you mean ChromeOS? Because Chrome browser itself is technically quite good. In fact, it’s the best opensource browser. And I have to admit, it has way more restrictive sandbox (then IE – nobody else does this yet), which is probably the only way to mitigate all those bugs in WebKit.

Yes, I meant ChromeOS. Which is unfair in a way, because I’ve never even tried it. It’s the whole concept of pitting two “different” OSes against each other, for no better reason than that you can.

Chrome the browser, on the other hand, I’m fine with that. If only because it clearly dooms Firefox to a belated, but much deserved, grave.

Ah, I fully agree with that.

As for ChromeOS – I just can’t see how expensive netbook that boots into browser directly is any better than inexpensive one that is able to run exact same browser.

Meanwhile Google failed to push one successful (undeserved success, but unfortunately it is successful) brand to a new platform (year of Android on tablets) and I fully expect them to fail to push another successful brand to a new platform (year of ChromeOS on netbooks).

Microsoft employee calling a market leading competitor “incompetent”. News at 11.

Nasty troll calling The Freetarded Company a “market leading competitor”. News at 12.

http://www.bgr.com/2011/07/05/android-market-share-jumps-as-blackberry-slides-smartphones-now-owned-by-1-in-3-americans/

Yes, market leading competitor.

@Dr(Bad)Loser

You are aware that the Nexus S and the Nexus One run vanilla Android, which is a much better OS than WP7 in any sense? Games, appearence, features, everything? So much about being incompetent.

Sure, other OEMs may fill Android with crapware and insert instabilities (although the latter happens very rarely), but nothing prevents you from buying vanilla Android.

As regards Chrome OS, it’s Google’s windows media audio/windows media video. They know they probably won’t win, it’s just a “what if” project, because if it does, it will be a massive win for them.

PS: I can’t wait for you to post a 500 words list of how WP7 is better than Android. Doesn’t matter, the buying public has voted WP7 down with it’s euros and dollars, smartass!

*because if it does = because if it does catch on

Android IS crap, even though it’s successful. I can give you an example of another crap, that has been HUGELY successful: Windows 95. Only Microsoft replaced it with an excellent OS in 5 years. Android is 8 y.o. (3 if you count from first device released). Any information on decent Google OS to phase out Android?

Say Kurkos, would it be too much if we ask you not to project your fanboism and Gadget Zeal™ onto others?

———

Ahh, I see our good man – well teenager really – AK has provided us with a link.

A link!

And to what does it lead I wonder? A great and previously totally unknown truth (or is it “truth”) about the Durden Search Company?

Or is it merely the same tired idiotisms about the supposed greatness of Android*?

Hm, I’ll go with the second.

• A name most undeserving by such a lousy product.

———

As far as Win95 is concerned – it was not the greatest of OS’ when it came to robustness or stability, but when it came to compatibility coupled with low resource requirements, it was second to none.

For those who needed better, there was always Windows NT4.