Skip to main content

Android apps on Chrome OS are the antithesis of the Apple platform experience

For a long time, Android and Chrome OS were two different initiatives at Google. They were led by two different product teams. They clearly had separate goals.

The Android team's mantra, under Andy Rubin, was "Android everywhere". It wasn't just for phones. Android was for everything, all devices, all the time. Chrome OS, on the other hand, was for Chromebooks, devices almost the antithesis of Android. The simplicity of life in a browser was a sharp contrast from the complexities of mobile devices.

Google TV was a disaster but the humble Chromecast, much more successful

But Android everywhere never actually played out. Google TV, for example, was an unmitigated disaster. The humble Chromecast, though, has been much more successful. (Even the recently announced Google Home is reportedly based on Chromecast (opens in new tab), not Android.)

Chromebooks have also started selling well. As prices continue to fall and the devices themselves have become more capable in terms of performance, they've become an interesting tool for the classroom.

Now, Google is bringing Android to Chrome OS: Soon, Android apps will be able to run in Chromebooks.

Let's face it, while Chrome does a lot, to date it hasn't competed well when compared with rich, full featured apps. For example, want to edit 4K video on a Chromebook? Not going to be pleasant. That's where Android comes in, providing a richer layer of applications than Chrome can deliver.

Call me skeptical, though. Taking two diverse things and trying to merge them into one, historically, hasn't been a recipe for success. It takes the simplicity of a Chromebook then adds the complexity of Android. It takes Android apps, which have struggled to scale to the tablet, and stretches them out to the PC. It puts the demands of a completely different set of input expectations, namely the traditional computer mouse/trackpad and pointer system, on software designed for multitouch and fingers.

There's a danger that trying to develop for — and use — both will result in compromise, confusion, and frustration for all involved. By contrast, this is exactly why Apple's approach with iOS and OS X makes sense to me.

Apple's goal has never been to see if they can create a single platform for all devices. iOS and OS X aren't likely to come together anytime soon — or ever. There's no good reason for Apple to make this happen.

That's not to say they won't work better together over time. We've already seen how iOS gestures have made their way into OS X via the trackpad. We've also seen Continuity handoff content and sync activity state from OS X apps to their iOS counterparts and back.

iOS and OS X implement features in ways that let each platform be true to itself and the devices it runs on.

There's no need for OS X to run iOS apps, because each system can learn from the other and implement features in ways that let each platform be true to itself and the devices it runs on.

When all you have is a hammer, everything is a nail. When you've been carefully building your toolset for years, though, you can pick the right one for the right job.

You can get the richness and capability of OS X applications. And you can get the accessibility and convenience of iOS apps. That's about the best experience any vendor can deliver right now. Not both on one device, but each on the best device, creates the optimum potential for customers.

I’ve covered the personal technology beat for more than two decades at places like Gartner, Jupiter Research and Altimeter Group. I’ve also had the fun of contributing my $.02 on the topic at Computerworld, Engadget, Macworld, SlashGear and now iMore. Most recently I spent a few years at Apple as Sr. Director of Worldwide Product Marketing. On Twitter I’m an unverified @gartenberg. I still own some Apple stock.

48 Comments
  • Your comparison isn't good. You are comparing a very light weight Chrome OS to a fully featured OSX. Of course you don't need iOS apps running on it because OSX has had plenty of support from 3rd party developers. Why would you need it run iOS apps on it? Chrome OS and Chromebooks are very limited as of right now, granted the platform is selling quite well. Stick Android apps on there, and you make Chromebooks popular all over AND make up for a ton of missing functionality. Lastly, Android and Chrome OS are very different, however whose to say that Google doesn't merge them together the same way Microsoft is doing with Windows 10 and Windows 10 Mobile? 1 app development platform for all devices? It is very possible. Overall, it's not a bad move for them to support Android apps on a Chromebook. In fact, it just makes sense for them to. Posted with the Nexus 6, Nexus 5, or Surface Pro 3
  • They're only different in some ways, in other fundamental ways, they're the same. The high-level parts of both Android and Chrome OS both sit on top of the same Gentoo-derived kernel and userland, but their user-facing layers are yes, still quite different. Adapting the Android Runtime for Chrome OS would mean little more than creating ART libs for Chrome OS that allow Android's APIs to be exposed. It could be, though, that there's a full Android layer along with the Chrome OS layer, and it's been designed to play nice with Chrome's windowing system. That would be very interesting, and could very much lead to the merging of the two, simply by declaring that Chrome OS contains both Chrome and Android APIs, and is a superset of mobile Android. Chrome OS becomes Android Pro? ;)
  • Jimmy, Google has abandoned the Android Runtime for Chrome and now is using containers. Which was rather brilliant. Not sure sure why time was wasted on ARC initially. My guess is that initially they wanted to have Android also run within the Chrome browser on Windows and OS X. So you can still run Android apps on OS X with ARC but suspect the future of ARC might be limited. The new approach means that Android apps run natively on Chromebooks which makes them super fast. But more importantly it means that Android apps will have the security of ChromeOS instead of Windows or OS X. Google is also controlling both the ChromeOS and Android on the Chromebook so it will get updates even faster than the other platforms plus with the Google A/B system updates are completely transparent from users. No restarting your PC cr*p. The author of this articles is very confused about computer architecture. First, the same kernel that Google uses to run every node in their cloud is the same that is on the Chromebooks. This allows Google to bring everything together in ways not possible for other companies. This is a fundamental change for computing as the unit of work is the container and NOT the EXE or equiv. So for example say you developed an Android app and you have continuous integration/deployment well now you can have 1000 containers spun up for testing your app. But this foundation Google has built with containers will allow them to be far more agile. Google was founded by very strong engineers and they have leveraged to do some pretty incredible things.
  • You mention Microsoft and Windows 10? Ugh. Not exactly a good thing to be referencing considering how much hate the Windows 10 strategy has been bringing against Microsoft. If anything, Windows 10 has been an unmitigated disaster. Nobody I've talked to actually likes Windows 10, most people would gladly go back to Windows 7.
  • From my consumer view, W10 > W8 > W7. From my business view, it is W7, clients and servers. I have W10 on 9 personal devices; Desktop, Laptops and Tablets. All except the Desktop have touchscreens. I'm considering putting a touchscreen on the Desktop or upgrade to an all-in-one. I'm posting this from my Nexus 7 (2013) because I don't believe there are W10 Apps for iMore or Android Central, and, this Android tablet is beautiful. Posted via the Android iMore App!
  • U mean becoming the second most used OS in less than a year. Yeah, a total disaster indeed. /s Actually, it is making wonders for Microsoft, with the exception of the mobile part. The whole thing is really a smart strategy, specially getting the Xbox and Hololens in part. Posted via the iMore App for Android
  • I know of people who will not EVER upgrade to Windows 10 because they see Windows 10 as spyware and some even see it as malware. The fact that Microsoft hasn't come clean on what exactly Windows 10 is sending back to the mothership is why these people feel the way they do. Telemetry? What's contained in this so-called "telemetry"? Just what is Cortana sending to Microsoft? Is Cortana listening to everything that goes on in my room? Is there a keylogger built into Windows sending everything that I type to Microsoft? We don't know. Crash dumps. What exactly is contained in these crash dumps? Could they potentially getting a compressed version of what I have in system RAM? There are people who are deliberately turning off Windows Update to make sure that they don't get Windows 10 and any of the other things that a lot of people see as spyware that's being ported back to Windows 7 and 8.x such as the new telemetry systems. The people who are worried about privacy are running away from Microsoft in droves to the likes of Linux and Apple. If you ask me... Google, Microsoft, Facebook, and Apple know so much about me that at this point I have no privacy. I run Windows 10 myself but that's only because I figure that well... they already know more about me than I know about myself so... shoot, let them have my data; I don't care anymore.
  • I think Apple thus far has done the right thing by keeping OS X and iOS on separate platforms. The Macintosh supports (as you mention above) plenty of 3rd party developers. Those who write their code in Objective-C and/or Swift and those who use Python, Perl, Java, Ruby, a plethora of other development solutions and yes even the .NET framework is now supported on OS X. As a developer, I like being able to choose my toolsets. If Google can successfully make Chrome OS and Android play in harmony with one another, then more power to them.
  • He is not comparing Chrome OS to OS X. He was comparing the philosophies that the two companies have regarding their OS's. And I do agree that moving a touch based app to a pointers and keyboard input is a recipe for disaster. Microsoft *I think* had a much better design language that could easily use both.
  • Not according to the ChromeOS fanboys. They make this comparison all of the time. Try hanging out in a ChromeOS on G+ to see what I mean.
  • Good, concise write-up. Rare.
  • Yeah, comparing chrome to OS X isn't good. Try windows10 if you wanna compare, but don't lie about it. The Windows store now has many more apps than the Mac store. Sent from the iMore App
  • Yeah, if you like apps that look like they're designed by a 15 year old. I've looked at the Windows Store since I run Windows 10 on my desktop and most of the apps featured on the Windows Store are nothing but garbage. Sure, there are some decent apps to be had but they're so few and far between.
  • Garbage like lara croft go, cooking fever, Ioop drive 2, a proper twitter app and flipboard, quite a garbage. /s
    Apparently u do need to look further. I love my iMac, it is probably the best desktop computer, but I have to admit, Windows 10 on convertibles is amazing, some of the apps(the nice apps) expand really well on 13"s and they make better use of them. I finished lara croft go on my 13" yoga and it was much fun than on my phone. And the store has loads of nice apps. I really think Apple should jump on this app store thingy, properly I mean. They do have a store with some apps on it(hello angry birds, one note), but it is just utterly useless. Posted via the iMore App for Android
  • Most of those apps are mobile app, apps meant to run on their now failed Windows Phone platform. If you look at many of those apps that are found on the Windows Store they don't at all act like a desktop program. Hamburger menu? Nope sorry... those don't belong in desktop program. Give me my File, Edit, etc. menu at the top of the window. You have to understand... I am an old school Windows user. I have been using Windows for 20+ years. I expect Windows and associated programs to operate and look a certain way. A lot of the apps that be found on the Windows Store are watered down versions of the their full desktop cousins. Take a look at OneNote on the Windows Store, it doesn't do half the stuff that the full desktop version of OneNote does and if you ask me it's way more confusing to use than the desktop version that has all of the options I need right at the top of the window instead of being buried in a "hamburger menu". You see, a lot of these apps are meant to be run on a mobile device; they've just been shoehorned into running on a desktop. I expect a desktop to work a certain way and I expect mobile devices to operate a certain way and the two user interface paradigms are meant for the device type that they were built for. But here comes Microsoft with their "Mobile first" mantra and they want to shove the mobile stuff onto a desktop where it doesn't belong.
  • I love Windows 10, but not so much the apps. Well, the ones designed with touch in mind. Everything is too big and lots of wasted space. I like the more traditional desktop Windows apps.
  • I don't think there is a need to worry about Google and it's efforts in Android. Android was, is and will always be trash no matter what. Just adding a runtime will not make Chrome OS any good, popular or even competitive to OS X and Windows, it will only lead to OEM's invest more in 2 in 1 Android devices; which by the way is completely pointless since all it will be doing is what the phones/tablets have been doing. Android apps don't even run well on the phone, let alone tablets or notebooks.
  • Good joke, because your post is a joke, isn't?
  • LOL you have got to be kidding, sheep. Posted from my Nexus 6P
  • Because he doesn't agree with you or uses something different he is a sheep ? Way to be closed minded.
  • "Android was, is and will always be trash no matter what" That's what the "bleating" of a sheep sounds like. Posted via the Android iMore App!
  • Because Android is trash that's obviously why it runs on over 80 % percent of the world's mobile gadgets . You ought to think before making stupid statements
  • He's probably thinking back to his last Android device...running on Cupcake...7 years ago. I use the iPhone 6s+, LG G5, HTC M9, and Lumia 640. there is nothing "wrong" with any of the platforms right now other than Microsoft being unable to figure out if it wants to continue Windows Phone, or kill it. I personally like Windows Phone more than my iPhone. Live tiles are nice. For apps, Android wins hands down. For never having any tweaking to do (or lack of tweaking being available) and a phone that just seems to work 99% of the time, the iPhone wins. iPhone users are like liberals - they claim to want to get along with everyone as long as your beliefs are the same as theirs.
  • No, that would be price just like with Chromebooks. Price is the main reason Chromebooks excel in education. Beyond education most people have no interest in them. It remains to be seen whether Android apps will change this. Personally I am pulling for it to because I like competition. Also, basic economics will tell you the cheaper priced item will sell better giving you more market share. But that doesn't translate into better. Also note that Android may have 80% of the mobile market yet less than 10% of the mobile profits. Economics again will tell you that companies that make no profits eventually disappear. Or at least get out of what is costing them more than they make.
  • Lol! There is always one totally dumb comment. Your 1st the vaishnavite.
  • And who are you to say that , love my android and chrome os devices.
  • This is such a bad article. Your comparison between Chrome and OS X is completely wrong. Chrome was always meant to be a lightweight way to give users a affordable computing experience in an always connected age. I got one of the original beta Chrome computers from Google and still have it. It was and is a very good alternative to a full desktop OS. The addition Android apps running on top of Chrome is very nice and I'm sure will work great for those who chose to get a Chromebook instead of another PC. The contestant bashing of Google and Android in your article don't help you. If anything it makes the whole article feel like a cheep hit piece. You can do better. Sent from the iMore App
  • But if(when) apple does something similar it will be mind blowing and revolutionary. This guy is worse than Rene sheesh.
  • Well he DID used to work for Apple, so some bias is understood... :)
  • He took out the trash in Cupertino. Until Tim Cook caught him trying on his clothes one dark, stormy night.
  • I think both Apple and consumers could benefit by bringing OS X or a good deal of its capabilities over to the iPad Pro line.
  • I think the point is to compare Apple and Google in what they do differently with phones / tablets and with laptops (like Macbooks or Chromebooks). I'm not sure the comparison is actually between Chrome OS and OS X. Just my 2 cents.
  • THANK YOU! No one seems to be reading with context here at all.... no wonder the internet is so angry all the time.
  • This was not a comparison. This was a hit piece on the Google Chome/Android announcement. Very poorly written as to content. "Taking two diverse things and trying to merge them into one, historically, hasn't been a recipe for success." This guy worked for Apple? Posted via the Android iMore App!
  • More Kool Aid from a former Apple marketing shill. Keep on with the FUD. Apple will need it with the boring updates and uninspiring products coming out later this year. Posted from my Nexus 6P
  • I think Google has made a mess of it. I've had a Chromebook now for over 2 years, and it still basically a browser, it hasn't progressed anywhere during that time. I know you can do basics in the browser and thats ok if thats all you need. But Google could of done so much more with ChromeOS, but obviously didn't want to. I guess there was no monetary incentive for them to do anything, with their revenue coming coming from advertising and cloud services.
  • I wonder why Windows wasn't mentioned here. Their windows universal apps work with windows mobile as well as Windows 10. And with continuum those apps on the phone will transform to the PC version if the phone docks to a monitor. Best of both worlds. This is something that Apple needs to do in the future. They can start by making a universal App Store. I'm tired of paying for iOS games and then having to pay for them again on a Mac. Sent from the iMore App
  • Oh yeah, here comes the Windows 10 argument. Good God almighty, it's probably the worst example ever to bring to the table considering how much hate is being thrown at Microsoft for Windows 10. Windows 10 has been an unmitigated disaster. Nobody I've talked to actually likes Windows 10, most people would gladly go back to Windows 7.
  • I like windows 10. Don't like it's forced on people who don't want it though. Posted via the iMore App for Android
  • The hate is mostly from people who do not want to update. Just because.
    And those are the people that Microsoft wants on Windows 10. W10 updates in the background just like Chromebooks do and the latest security patches and improvements are always there. They want to clean up the problems that less technically inclined people have using a PC. Like a Mac, (less trouble to use) and even more so like Chromebook.
    I have upgraded to 10 because I always upgrade as soon as it's available. I have no problem with 10 but I never had a problem with 8 or 8.1 either. I doubt that I would have a problem with a Mac but when I did buy one once I ended up returning it very shortly. Very few of the programs I used daily at work were available for the Mac at the time and the main application I used personally was not available either. So I went back to a PC.
  • I have to agree with you that windows implemented the 'The one platform to rule them all' pretty well. Their design language, although viewed my many as garbage, its actually a good one in my opinion. It supported all types of input based on its design (Metro UI). But I disagree where you think Apple should converge the iOS and OS X. They shouldn't. And if you're tired of paying for the apps in both places, thats not on Apple. The devs are just trying to milk your pocket. They should put things in place like redeemable codes, etc. That way you can get their apps on another platform, whether its a discount of free. I think there was an article on this site that talked about the same problem. Say moving from Android to iOS and vice versa.
  • It's a good thing this is coming to the touch screen Chromebooks first so users don't have to worry about mouse input as you so stated. Of course iOS apps would be hard to use on an osx device, apple doesn't offer the appropriate touch screen options to allow this like other vendors are doing. This article is just wrong and uninformed. Typical imore spreading lies and bull again and again. I'm surprised Rene didn't write this one.
  • Good thing indeed. And you're going to be sitting and desk with a laptop touching the screen all the time. Even the Windows 10 touch screen hype is dying....... Give it a rest.
  • Thank you Michael for a good presentation of the case for Apple's ecosystem approach (one that I've dubbed "Silo City"). In theory, or perhaps in principle, I resonate MUCH more deeply with Microsoft's ecosystem strategy (which I've dubbed the "changeling"), even though it is struggling to take off, or even to be as cohesive as the vision behind it. Meanwhile, "Silo City", despite my frustrations with it, my philosophical dissonance with the approach, and the problem created at the point of the "too expensive for most people to get both" iOS or OSX dilemma in the 9-13" portable computing range actually does work rather well together (though OSX is feeling increasingly remote and marginal to me, despite the fact that I still personally prefer it to iOS). The Google ecosystem play? While I am excited by it, not only for the potential I see in it to dominate the casual consumer space (the biggest part of the market), I would still be excited even if a I didn't see much potential. Why? Because prior to this, while Google certainly had as broad of a swath of products and services as the others, theirs really was less a solid, cohesive ecosystem, and more a "city of islands with no bridges". "Ecosystem" discussions before this were really only a two-way conversation between the Silo City Apple and the Changeling Microsoft. Now we have a third entrant, a three way conversation! And to me, that's very exciting. ESPECIALLY since the third entrant is not really "copycat"ing the others, but is taking a page from the Monty Python playbook with "something completely different". However, I'm still not quite sure what to make of "Chromedroid" in terms of the practical. The two are very different flavors of computing, with Chrome's single biggest strength also being its single biggest weakness: that it's so light, and simple, and thin. Will adding all the Android stuff imperil the strengths of Chrome, and will the comparably thin Android apps be enough in the face of full-fledged desktop programs on full-fledged desktop OSs like Mac or Windows (or even things like Ubuntu) to redeem the weaknesses of Chrome? Will it be bereft of its strengths while left with its shortcomings? Also, to the question of how well the Android apps will work in a bigger Chrome screen and converted to traditional non-touch interfaces: it depends secondarily on how savvy Google is in deploying it in the desktop environment on the "nuts and bolts" level, but is primarily dependent on how receptive and responsive app makers are. If the answer to both is "well", then it should work just fine, with no smeary, stretched looking apps, and with precious few instances of unserviceable controls. And if that's the case, Android tablets will benefit tremendously as well. But if the answer is "not well", then I'm afraid the Android experience on Chrome will not be too much different than the RemixOS experiment which attempted to apply a desktop environment to Android. While brilliant in concept, it was fairly poor in execution, with so many apps not playing nice, a fairly limited OS, and the limiting feeling of doing 100% of your computing in windowed phone apps. The big difference here, though, besides having a full desktop version of the Chrome browser rather than the Android app version, is having big G behind this themselves, and not a small, remote outfit like JiDe. People are far more likely to listen to the king than to the cook. So in terms of the app devs doing their part, I'm fairly confident that enough of them will participate to make this venture a success (and the benefits of which will stretch so far as to even benefit RemixOS in the long run). However, how long will people be happy doing their computing in windowed phone apps perhaps remains to be seen. The biggest drawback to the Google strategy is that it really doesn't offer anything at all to the power user, and I have a hard time seeing how they can fix that given the constraints of either one of their platforms. But assuming enough apps are updated quickly enough to work, assuming costs stay low, assuming the right messaging goes out, and assuming people don't tire of doing their computing on phone apps, then I can see the potential for Google to take complete dominance in the casual consumer space in a fairly short time. In theory, I still remain the biggest fan of MSs ecosystem play - not only philosophically, but also because should it get all its legs under it, I see it having the greatest theoretical potential of all. But when it comes to silver vs bronze, I'm still not sure yet whether I like Google's ecosystem design strategy better than or even less than "Silo City". I like convergence, and Google's is much more convergent. But it lacks any kind of power user support, which Silo City does have. Whether the lack of power user support or the lack of convergence in an increasingly convergence-driven industry will be more harmful to their respective ecosystem plays in the long term remains to be seen, but even philosophically, I'm stumped. In any case, I'm very glad that Google has joined the ecosystem conversation! :-) Cheers!!!
  • This is, er ... ridiculous. First off, go to Android Central or any of the other Android blogs and sites and they rarely talk about Apple products and strategies. But at iMore or elsewhere, it is endless stuff like this: Products and ideas that are terrible and will fail.
    Products and ideas that are just cynical attempts to steal your data, sell you ads and invade your privacy.
    And of course ... products and ideas that were stolen from Apple and need to be sued into oblivion. The truth is that Android apps running on Chrome OS doesn't have squat to do with iOS and Mac OS X. Apple and Google are two different companies with different products and different strategies. They just happen to overlap in mobile because the real threat of getting driven out of business by Microsoft and Bing forced Google to come out with Android and Chrome OS. Otherwise, that is it. That is all. Yet, despite that fact, we get nonsense like this. First, his claim that Google TV proves that "Android everywhere" is a failure is hilarious. Never mind that Android TV is far more successful than Google TV was, or that Google TV failed for the same reason that Apple's grandiose plans for the Apple TV refresh did: opposition from TV networks and cable companies. Which is why Apple gave up and just released a copycat of the 2 year old Fire TV. Or dare I say it: an inferior version of the Nvidia Shield TV, which offers far more internal storage and 4K, and a more powerful SOC. In any event, when Chinese manufacturers start coming out with their own devices utilizing the platform, expect Android TV to explode ... especially in China. And speaking of China ... go there or anywhere else in Asia and you will see how his claims that "Android everywhere is a failure" is so wrong, because in the Asian market there are TONS of types of devices running Android, which has largely replaced firmware. And this is happening increasingly in America, where manufacturers are replacing Linux, Windows CE and Java ME firmware with Android in tons of devices that have enterprise and industrial functions. OpenSignal used to release excellent reports on all the many different types of devices running Android these days, but hey I suppose actually researching industry data doesn't dovetail with the goal of depicting an OS that is powering 2 billion devices - all of those can't possibly be phones and tablets! - as some sort of failure. Also, what Gartner utterly fails to understand is that Google is bringing Android apps to Chrome <b>for the same reason</b> as what he is talking about for iOS and OS X. You see, Apple is <b>a hardware company</b>. So they have created <b>a hardware-based ecosystem</b> where different devices are compatible and add value to each other by interoperating and sharing data and functions: watchOS, tvOS, iOS, macOS etc. With Apple, it is all about the hardware - with the operating system being virtual hardware as anyone who took a computer systems or computer architecture class knows - with the software and services being an abstraction. Well Google is a <b>software and services company</b>. They have the same ecosystem concept that Apple does, <b>except that it is implemented with their software and services, not hardware</b>. Their goal is to offer the same products and services across as many platforms as possible, including operating systems because again an operating system is software-virtualized hardware. So, apps and services - especially Google apps and services - are things that Google wants you to be able to access regardless of whether you are on an Android, Chrome OS, Windows, Linux, iOS or Mac OS X device. (That is, except for their blockade of Microsoft Windows Mobile for business reasons.) So I can return the comments of Gartner in kind ... this is why Google has maps, streaming music and cloud drive services <b>that actually work</b> on PC (via browser), Android and iOS platforms. It is also why Google has a browser that works on all major platforms, as opposed to Apple Safari no longer being maintained on Windows anymore and not being on Android at all. Google is in the software and services business. Android apps are software (and in some cases software/services). Getting Android apps onto Chrome OS is Google's version of AirPlay and Continuity. It was why Google tried for 2 years to get ARC to work ... they wanted Android apps to run in Windows and Linux PC and Mac OS X Chrome browsers too. It didn't work, so they just went with containers for now to be able to bring more of their software and services to their Chrome OS users. But you had better believe that they are still working on a way to deliver their Android apps and services to their Chrome browser users on Linux, Windows and Mac OS X because delivering software and services is what Google - a software and services company - does. Just like delivering innovative hardware with great user experience is what Apple does. So here's the deal. How's about letting Apple do what it does with hardware, Google do what it does with software and services, and everyone - including those of us who own devices from multiple platforms (which is most of us, because let's face it ... the vast majority of iPad and iPhone owners use Windows PCs, not MacBooks) and also use software and services from multiple platforms (because again, most iPad, iPhone and Mac OS X owners use Google Chrome and Gmail) and ending this ridiculous back and forth? Maybe if Google is actually able to succeed at getting Android apps running on the Chrome browser on OS X, then that will merit some analysis from an Apple blog. Until then, it really has nothing to do with you guys and I have no idea why you are claiming that it does. That is ... unless it is making you guys consider using an extra $300 lying around towards buying a Chromebook instead of a Mac Mini or a used MacBook Air. Then again, maybe that is what motivated this column after all ;-) !
  • This guy gets it. Technology has never had more viable choices. Stop pontificating about what everyone else is doing and focus on what's happening in your backyard instead.
  • Good post. Very good post.
  • Uber long points. While many are sound, I DO see apple related news all over the web. Even on none apple related sites (crack berry). But I do agree with you! The back and forthing gets stale. It's more evident when these dumbo article writers compare a brand spanking new device to one that's been out like 8 months now! Of course the newer one is going to win!!!!!! Like what would be the point in releasing it? Lol