It has been made clear by the Chrome team this is a hero device, and is not meant for mass consumers. It is a developer device, not sure why you keep making the comparison to MBP. You will never see an ad for Chrome Pixel.
This.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Chromebook Pixel is overpriced/underpowered
- Thread starter Bahroo
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It has been made clear by the Chrome team this is a hero device, and is not meant for mass consumers. It is a developer device, not sure why you keep making the comparison to MBP. You will never see an ad for Chrome Pixel.
This.
A Little overpriced? Compared to a lot of PC hardware most of it is ludicrously overpriced.
Overpriced maybe, but you'll have to say the same thing about the MBP as well. The specs are more similar then different
But my point is that the laptop itself is a solid built machine that runs an OS that so far appears to be very stable. I'm not a fan of the chrome os, but to say something that is so similar to a MBP being over priced is a bit confusing.
I use Chrome OS every day at work, on a chromebook with the same specs as the Pixel (except for the screen), and I will say it certainly is quite stable. However, it does come up short in various areas. As much as I'd hate to admit it, I don't think it's a very good buy. They brought one into the office for us to play with, and in the end, the experience isn't really different from what I already am using. If it were my personal computer, I couldn't see spending that kind of money and having those sorts of limitations.
The same arguments are being parroted here that are posted in many ignorant tech website articles. I do agree with the notion that this device is overpriced for what you get - and I shared the sentiment that it was ridiculous when it was first released.
I've since come to the realization that it's simply something to prove what CAN be done.
The arguments against ChromeOS are laughable. The vast majority of people spent all of their time in a browser. They're encouraged to buy a Macbook with an i7 processor and 8GB of RAM so they can check Facebook and their email. THAT is what is wrong with today's computer market.
ChromeOS is an answer to that. It's not perfect for every user. Then again, neither is a Windows computer or a Macbook.
I've since come to the realization that it's simply something to prove what CAN be done.
The arguments against ChromeOS are laughable. The vast majority of people spent all of their time in a browser. They're encouraged to buy a Macbook with an i7 processor and 8GB of RAM so they can check Facebook and their email. THAT is what is wrong with today's computer market.
ChromeOS is an answer to that. It's not perfect for every user. Then again, neither is a Windows computer or a Macbook.
So instead of encouraging them to start taking advantage of their big powerful machines, we try to keep them locked in that behavior forever. Great.
I know many who game on their laptops. As a student, and an engineering one at that, none of the software we used could be run by chrome OS even now. Oh and then many people still manage their mobile devices through their desktop computers (and I like that it can act as a big mother ship so to speak for my mobile devices, and a great local backup tool than relying on cloud services).
I like the idea of a cloud computing device but the apps are going to take sometime to reach the desktop counterparts. Also, even with chrome OS a big local storage is a must have IMO so we can keep a copy of our data with us in case we can't access the net for whatever reasons.
How do you propose getting people to "take advantage of their powerful hardware"? What makes you think some people NEED anything other than a browser? What does the average user do that requires extremely powerful hardware?
I'm what some might consider a mildly advanced user, but I LOVE my Chromebook. I have a Dell PC that only gets booted up to watch sports online (so that I can still have access to my Chromebook while watching the game on the TV).
Can I see it becoming a work device? Maybe for some, but not for me (I'm an accountant). I use Google Docs for all personal doc editing, though, and I love it.
That's the problem. You cannot see a use for those powerful machines, but I do. Once these chrome books get a bit cheaper they will be great for people like you.
However to suggest they replace the desktop computers and laptops means robbing the rest of us from our work horses.
Just like while the ipad has been an explosion, it still hasn't been a complete laptop replacement for me. I still do things daily that the laptop excels at and ipad falls short at. Same for a chrome book.
I never said that powerful machines shouldn't be produced. I simply said that the vast majority of users don't need it. I honestly don't know where you've derived that from. Where did I say that I can't see a use for powerful machines? There's absolutely a use - just not for the majority of people.
I'll ask again - how do you suggest we get the average user (a mom, a 15 year old high school student, someone's grandma) to "take advantage of powerful hardware"?
You seem to be saying there is no place in the market for something like ChromeOS. The fact that the Samsung ARM Chromebook was Amazon's top seller for a while, and that they're out of stock in most places, would seem to show that is incorrect.
The difference in our two arguments here is that you're assuming all users need the same hardware. For the price of a $1,000 Macbook, I can buy a Chromebook for every room in my house. For the average user, it's perfect.
No I am not saying that. Others are saying that. I am saying that for me to consider it, it needs a 1 TB local storage, and apps that run like the ones I run on my desktop computer and ability to be loaded offline if the Internet is not available.
As a 15 year old high school student, I used to run C++ IDE's, play those hardcore video games, use autoCAD (our school had an autoCAD class) etc, and I knew many students who were already dabbling in things like maya and other animation software. Things I doubt chrome book can handle.
I am really disappointed if all the current 15 year olds do is spend their time on Facebook on their machines.
We've already determined that it's not right for you. What I'm trying to get you to understand is that there is a large portion of the computer using population that it IS right for. I'm advocating more choice for consumers.
That post basically recommends exactly what I'm arguing against. Buying an overpowered computer for day-to-day use. The Pixel wasn't created to be a major seller. It's simply a proof-of-concept.
Yeah that's fine. I am not against that choice at all. Put some nice educational web apps and I might even consider buying one for one of my kids later.
I actually get the blogger's point. She argues that it is a future proof device for web users. Can't argue with that. You can use it 10 years down the road and still not worry about the specs.
After reading this thread I am intrigued by the OS. I'd like to have a central computer for the household to share. Look up cooking directions in the kitchen, watch videos in the dining room, friends and family could use it for Facebook, browsing etc.
I'm not a fan of the device though because of the price. I want a better hardware and software experience at that price.
I'm not a fan of the device though because of the price. I want a better hardware and software experience at that price.
Chrome OS is basically just a browser. Who would pay over $1,000 for a laptop that only has a browser? Plus the design just looks like a crappy Chinese MBP knockoff.
I'm disappointed at Google with this and I doubt they'll sell very many at all. But then I don't think they expect to. This is Google, they just like experimenting.
I'm disappointed at Google with this and I doubt they'll sell very many at all. But then I don't think they expect to. This is Google, they just like experimenting.
Again, they don't intend to sell a large number of them.
Regarding the construction of the device, that's been touted as very well done by many reviewers (who agree with you on the OS, even).
Eh? The Apple Store is showing the 13" rMBP with 2.5GHz i5 (faster than the Pixel) 128GB flash (2x more than the Pixel) 8GB RAM (2x more than the Pixel), USB3 and Thunderbolt (the Pixel, bizarrely, only has USB2) for $1499 ($50 more than the Pixel).
The Pixel loses, significantly in every respect except that it has a tad more screen area and 100 extra vertical pixels (which is nice). Currently the $1199, 13" MBA matches or beats the Pixel in everything but screen resolution (and, from what I hear, is thinner and lighter). If Apple, as rumoured, is about to bump the Airs to retina displays then, game over.
...and that's comparing it with Apple who are renowned for being "reassuringly expensive". Half-decent PC Ultrabooks are available for less.
If you want the advantages of ChromeOS then you might as well buy a Mac, stick Chrome in 'Startup Items', tell Gatekeeper to set its phasers to "kill" and lock up the admin password. It's not like OS X fouls its nest and needs mucking out every few months the way Windows used to.
However, I think I've worked out what the Pixel is for.
Chrome OS works well in a corporate environment - lots of good arguments for keeping all data and apps centrally and not having to maintain lots of individualised PCs with their own local apps and OS. However, if all the serfs have a $300 samsung Chromebook or desktop chromebox then what is the boss going to have!? You can't have the boss driving the same company car, or sitting on the same chair as the plebs, can you? He needs his BMW, his $1000 leather office chair and his $1500 blinged-up Chromebook.
I acknowledged this in my post.
I'm sure it is, but it still looks like a crappy Chinese copy of an MBP.
Maybe this has been mentioned... But the storage isn't a big deal... It comes with 1tb free on Google drive... Meaning the pixel pays for itself in the course 3 to 4 years I think.
The pixel may become outdated but 1tb in the cloud won't.
The pixel may become outdated but 1tb in the cloud won't.
Um... what?
If you spend 90% of the time surfing the web and checking emails, it's dumb to spend $1300 on a MacBook, but paying $1300 for a chromebook pixel is a good idea? Where's the logic?
At least with a $1300 macbook, you can play some graphic intensive games, work on high end photo/image editing apps like photoshop, work on pro-sumer video editing apps, encode music or video. The MacBook running MacOS X is a lot more flexible than a Chromebook running ChromeOS.
The argument isn't about ChromeOS alone, it's about ChromeOS on a $1300 laptop. Doesn't make sense to most people.
Chromebooks at $200 or $300 seems like a good option. At $1300, it's dumb.
----------
I get unlimited cloud storage for $29 to $60 a year.