Image by michperu via Flickr

At its core, an operating system is an interface between the underlying hardware and the software running on the computer. Windows, Macintosh and Linux/Unix each handle the task of controlling the hardware a bit differently (see hardware abstraction layer or HAL). Above the code that handles hardware is the user interface layer, the parts of the operating system that provides our familiar desktop, shortcuts to applications, start menus, etc. This layer gives the user access to both the software and some control over the hardware. You could call this the “look and feel” aspect to an operating system. It’s also the windowing part.

If Google builds the Chrome OS on top of a Linux kernal, it’s using Linux to handle the HAL while Chrome will provide the windowing. The look of the desktop, the way shortcuts work, the way we access the hardware, all that will have a distinct “Google” look and feel. Google will in effect provide a unique window manager apart from Microsoft’s Windows Manager (look at “Services” in the Windows Task Manager, you’ll see an instance of WDM-Windows Desktop Manager-that is always running), Linux’s Gnome or KDE (K Desktop Environment) or any of the other umpteen Linux window managers or Mac’s OS X. The difference between how the menus work in Windows and Mac is a result of the difference between their window managers.

All indications are that Google intends to simply “paint” their window manager on top of a customized Linux kernal. Since the Chrome OS won’t actually handle the hardware layer, just the windowing layer, some consider Chrome to be nothing but a windowing system, not a true and complete operating system. If we call Chrome an OS we might as well call Windowblinds an operating system.

I have to add that it’s because of the manner in which each OS deals with the hardware layer that many of us prefer Linux or Mac over Windows. It’s not (just) the perceived elitism, it’s not that we enjoy having fewer apps and interoperability issues with Windows, it’s not because we’re just hate Windows for no reason. Linux and Mac control the hardware layer in a far superior manner to the way Windows does. That’s the reason Mac’s aren’t considered “upgradeable” to the extent a PC is. Mac and Linux are tied closely to the hardware. They access the hardware more efficiently than Windows, thus there are far fewer system freezes or crashes.

Everyone appreciates an attractive desktop, but the true test of a computer is at the hardware level. The better the windowing system works together with the software and hardware, the better overall performance the user sees. A stable system allows the user to accomplish their tasks without having to think about what all is going on inside the magic beige box. An unstable system, like Windows, drives its users nuts by interrupting their work with freezes and demands to reboot (something only done in other OSs for changes in hardware) because the processes confuse the processor.

I also like the way the file system works in Linux better than the one in Windows (I’m still slightly confused by Mac’s file system). And software generally installs better, more logically, in Linux and Mac.

No system is perfect though some are less perfect than others.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Google announces open source Chrome OS (en.onsoftware.com)
• Chrome OS: Google Takes on Microsoft (blippitt.com)
• Google’s ‘War’ With Microsoft is a Shell Game (gawker.com)
• Chrome will be different but won’t displace Windows (computerworld.com)
• Odds stacked against Google OS success (cnn.com)
• Google OS may force Microsoft to reinvent Windows (computerworld.com)

A glitch occurred this morning, lasting for about 10 minutes or so, that had all Google search results showing a warning that “This site may harm your computer”.

These sites may harm my computer?

Below are several blogs that mention this.

http://thenextweb.com/2009/01/31/day-google-broke/#

http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/01/31/google-flags-whole-internet-as-malware/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/pmtorrone/3241481388/

This might all just be funny if it weren’t for the fact that Google is a repository of a lot of information about us.

Privacy experts have long been concerned about the amount of data Google collects from internet users. Every time you do a search or use Gmail or any other Google application, you supply information to Google that it stores in its vast array of servers. We want to believe that information is secure or anonymous. Every time Google suffers a hiccup like this, our trust takes a hit and our concerns increase.

Update: A Google blogger explains the error, http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/01/this-site-may-harm-your-computer-on.html

Maybe this is why Gmail remains in perpetual beta; the labs team can keep adding useful functionality without having to announce version 1.7, 2.5, 3.0…

Google has been rolling out new features for Gmail at a furious pace lately, with something new popping up almost once per week. This week’s gem? Instant e-mail-to-document conversion.

Software engineer Jeremie Lenfant-Engelmann explains, “More than once, I’ve had a conversation over e-mail and later realized that the information contained in the messages would make a great starting point for a document. So I built an experimental feature for Gmail Labs that does just that: with one simple click, ‘Create a document’ converts an e-mail into a Google Docs document. No more copying and pasting the text from your e-mail — just open the message you wish to convert, click the ‘Create a document’ link on the right side of the page, and voila, you have a brand new document which you can then modify and share!”

I enabled the feature this morning and tested it out. It works perfectly. The document is created in a manner similar to when you choose to save an e-mail attachment as a document. It takes perhaps three seconds, depending on the size of the e-mail and what it contains. This works with simple text e-mails as well as HTML e-mails. (Source-InformationWeek)

This is especially useful for bloggers. I often get thought-provoking emails that I want to use to form the basis for a post. Being able to put them into document format, I can create my post right in Google Docs then transfer it into my blog.

Can you suggest other uses for this new ability?