@ Skip:

Sigh… You are getting this wrong. In most modern Linux distros you can do almost everything via some sort of GUI. The problem is that in Linux the UI is just another module. So basically to help someone via UI you must ask the following questions first:

1. Which distro are you running?
2. Which version of that distro are you running?
3. Which window manager are you using?
4. Which version of window manager are you using?
5. Did you install the following packages.

Some distributions have their own GUI components that let you access system settings. Some do not and you may need to use specific packages. Some window managers have built in control panels (KDE and Gnome for example) while others do not.

But 90% of linux settings is stored in text files in /etc/ or similar locations and all distros have Bash with a full set of POSIX tools. At some point it becomes easier to just say:

“Ok, open terminal and paste this command in” rather than write up a 30 step instruction set that will achieve the same via GUI. And then do it again for the other popular window manager.

Another benefit of using command line is that you can put your stuff in a script, save it and then you never have to look the solution up again. You just run the script, and maybe tweak it a bit if needed.

On Windows the command line is vestigial. Most IT folks do not use it much because 80% of the time you don’t actually need it. If you look through Microsoft knowledge base articles and Windows centric forums most solutions start like this:

“Open REGEDIT navigate to HKEY_CURRENT_USER and…”

There are only few things that almost invariably require you to go to command line: for example re-registering or un-registering DLL’s or using netsh to fix WINSOCK problems. It’s just that most people will tell you to just copy and paste these into the RUN box because it’s not like these commands give you any meaningful output anyway.

In Windows editing registry is equivalent to mucking around on the command line in Linux. ;P

I find the lack of a terminal to be refreshing. It’s good to see Google took that away from you guys and forced you to use their interface. Ok I’m not happy it doesn’t have a file system either. But I get SOOOO tired of Linux enthusiasts giving instruction with the first thing out of their mouth, “open a terminal window…”. You have no idea how old that has gotten. The average user does not want to learn commands to use an OS. By “use” I mean do ANY type of uninstall, install, removal of stray files, modding of stray files, etc. If I have to do that from a command I will, but I grit my teeth every time I do.

While the command line still is very functional in Windows, I can do all of that without ever touching it. Many IT people never go to the command line anymore in Windows unless absolutely necessary.

We’ve grown past it and Linux needs to as well.

IceBrain wrote:

I haven’t tried it yet, but it doesn’t seem a great “technical innovation” (it’s not like we couldn’t do this with a linux distro.

Well, that’s what Chrome OS is. Linux distro composed solely from the kernel and Chrome browser. It’s not innovative, but it’s something no one attempted until now. Because let’s face it – most of us Linux enthusiasts like the OS precisely because it does not try to “protect us from ourselves”.

ChromeOS is basically a new take – a stripped down linux for your grandmother. An OS that requires no maintenance whatsoever. You just boot it and it works. And that’s the point.

As I said – I wouldn’t use it, but I know a lot of people that just can’t wrap their head around the whole “computer thing”. I mean they are good at facebook, and know all the tricks for Farmville and Mafia wars but doing the simplest task outside of the browser makes them incredibly uncomfortable. This is the OS for them.

sounds like iPhone OS

On the good side, both machines I tried it on flawlessly detected the wifi and ethernet cards which is sort of the most important thing with this OS.

With the help of our good friend, the Linux kernel ;)

I haven’t tried it yet, but it doesn’t seem a great “technical innovation” (it’s not like we couldn’t do this with a linux distro).
No, Chrome OS is the IPhone philosophy applied to OSs:
“Restrict the user to protect him from himself”.
This is something that I as a geek have a hard time seeing as being a good thing: all my time with computers ’till now has been spent removing those barriers and freeing myself (the move from Windows to Linux was a natural step).

But while I fortunately don’t have to provide support for that kind of users (my mother, while having a completely different background, is an inquisitive person and isn’t afraid to try stuff and learn), I can understand that some people are better off with something like this.
It’s the same reason why I gave my grandparents a remote with only 5 buttons.