Chrome OS

Why would any company try to create a new commercial operating system?

By the classic definition, an operating system bridges the computing machinery (hardware) and those software (applications) that interact with human beings. The modern day operating systems also serve as the stable layer that enables hardware and software to innovate relatively independently. Those innovations stimulated each others, created values, and pushed the OS itself to evolve. In time, entire ecosystems emerged, centering the operating system.

Desktop computing is just one of those ecosystems that Windows has reigned for decades. There are other large ecosystems like data centers, networking, and mobile devices. Unlike desktop, several OSes compete in those ecosystems. Today, there must be several dozen stable and mature operating systems for all possible computing needs. Probably none is perfect, but the costs to differentiate enough, yet remain compatible with the existing ones, are prohibitive. This is why no one tries to dethrone Windows.

Why would, then, Google enter this foray? I honestly don’t know the reasons, but that does not stop me from opining.

• They have many bored engineers.
  Google makes money by selling ads on their search engine. Yet most of its engineers work on something cool yet other than the famed search engine. Some of them probably felt like working on operating systems. We knew that others at Google work on email, cell phone technologies, cloud computing, routers, green technologies, or whatever sounds cool.
• They are invincible.
  Google has not failed as a company. Whatever they do, the cash kept on coming and stock kept on rising. Since they can’t fail, why take on a lesser challenge? In fact, what’s the worst possible outcome? If Chrome OS fails to topple Windows, there will be no consequence to Google’s search-based revenue what-so-ever.
• They have a new ecosystem without an OS.
  Many thought a gigantic ecosystem centered around HTTP, the technology behind browsers: the new OS, some stated. Microsoft tried to destroy this new ecosystem by dragging it into the desktop. Google saw a prize. It gets to do to Microsoft what Microsoft did to IBM (taking over the new ecosystem, the desktop, with a new OS). That is pretty cool.

What constitutes an ecosystem for an operating system? IHV (independent hardware developers), ISV (independent software developers), and, of course, users and administrators. IHVs make those thousands of devices and write drivers and administration utilities (control panel applets). ISVs write applications for all niches and business models. They hire developers who need tools and libraries. For them to monetize, there must be a distribution mechanism to reach those who pay.

Think about this. How do IHV, ISV, distribution channels, and customers connect for Windows, iPod, cell phones, PDA, and mainframe vendors? Imagine how much money we are talking about. Now compare the new ecosystem surrounding the browsers with the one for desktop. The IHV and the customers are the same. What would be different is the ISV and the distribution.

With Chrome and netbook, Google would cut Microsoft off from low-end: billions of people who never saw computer, let alone Windows, in their lives in China, India, and Africa. Of course, Google needs to do this before Microsoft cuts off its ad revenue with Bing.com.

Isn’t this fun to watch?