dkediger
New member
- Aug 29, 2013
- 671
- 0
- 0
Potentially MS might provide the most compelling platform, but the devil is in the details as always. When I look at modern GUIs, Chrome OS is flat out better than Windows 8.1. You can bet that consumers look at Chrome OS and think "yeah that's sort of like Windows desktop that I'm used to but with excellent Google services". That's the rub isn't it? Google consumer services are flat out better than anything else on the planet:
Search, Maps, Youtube, Mail.
These are all best-in-class that everyone uses if they act objectively and not as an MS ******. Why would you deliberately use worse Bing search, maps and Outlook.com except to be a ******? Believe me I really like Outlook.com GUI compared to Gmail, but the implementation is fundamentally flawed for me and so it remains a secondary account. Bing search results are still a joke compared to Google and Maps are equally worse, especially when you look at POI data and lack of street view.
.....You can bet that consumers look at Chrome OS and think "yeah that's sort of like Windows desktop that I'm used to but with excellent Google services". That's the rub isn't it? Google consumer services are flat out better than anything else on the planet:....
Maps are equally worse, especially when you look at POI data and lack of street view.
Maps is a valid point, but its best feature is its a standalone product.
I've had zero interest in anyone in my org asking for a Chromebook, either for work or in their at home use. People ask us about iPads for home all the time, Chrome zilch.
We had mass revolt when we switched our mail to Google Apps several years ago. The switch was driven by moving away from Blackberry/BES/Exchange to iPhones. People loved getting mail on their iPhones, but hated the desktop GMail interface. So much so, we returned to desktop mail clients like Outlook and more recently eMclient. None of the other services are used, based in large part on experience with the GMail UI. Nobody wants to try - its too distracting from regular work.
The good news/bad news aspect of mobility - which is what the discussion is really about: devices and services- is its the proverbial 80/20 conundrum. You find you can do 80% or work away from a traditional desktop. But you also can't do 20% of your work away from a traditional desktop.
The literally billion dollar question is whether the value of that necessary 20% justifies the cost of multiple devices. Because it mos def is NOT a linear proposition on the expense side for acquiring and supporting the extra devices.
Last edited: