10 Web Operating Systems Reviewed

Stan Schroeder writes "Waiting for GoogleOS? Why not try some of the WebOS applications that are already available? Believe it or not, there's already over 15 of them, and here you can find a review of the 10 most promising WebOSes. Most of them might not make you want to ditch your desktop OS just yet, but some are very good and can be used on a day-to-day basis. Highlights include DesktopTwo, Goowy, YouOS, EyeOS and Glide. You can find the whole bunch here." Note: for the purposes of this article, "WebOS" is defined as "a set of applications running in a web browser that together mimic, replace or largely supplement a desktop OS environment."

what use?

I still don't get what actual use of these can be relatively to other existing options.

Re:what use?

Ever heard of those computers that come pre-loaded with a ROM containing only Microsoft Bob and a web browser?

Well... me neither, but it doesn't hurt to be prepared.

Uh, what the fuck?

A "WebOS" is defined as "a set of applications running in a web browser that together mimic, replace or largely supplement a desktop OS environment."

How are you looking at this without using a browser? Or do WebOS include browsers. That would make so much sense.

What browsers do they work with ?

Shame that he didn't say what environment he was using to test. OK: I know that they are based on flash, but it would have been nice to know what browsers/... it ran under.

Average Users

I'm sitting on the edge of my seat waiting for "the call".

Yeah joe ?
Uhhh, I registered for a Web OS, you know so I don't have to use Windows, then I deleted Windows, how do I get my new Web OS to connect to the internet ?

Why I succombed to using these things...

One simple answer: shared documents. Sure, I have five+ computers at home and one of them is a dedicated linux machine that I use for file storage and whatnot. The problem is, it is a multi-step process for anyone living in my house to access these files at work. While I have no problem of whatsoever establishing file shares and so forth, not everyone is as comfortable with the idea.

Luckily Google spreadsheets solved at least one problem for me - maintaining a shopping list. I can pop on any computer with internet access and be able to see what my better half added to it. Any other features? I don't need or want them.

Re:Why I succombed to using these things...

take a look at http://www.rangboom.com/ [rangboom.com]

Rangboom is a free service for securely sharing or accessing your files over the Internet.

It uses 9p [swtch.com]

and appears as a shared drive in Windows

Argh.

It's a desktop environment or, at the very least, an application suite. Not an operating system. Until some website is handling process and memory management, it's no OS.

But I guess "Online Desktop Environment" doesn't quite sound as cool does it?

Why?

I can see one reason for a Web OS, and that's that it makes it easy to access your desktop from anywhere. However, from a technological point of view, the web browser has to be pretty much the worst choice of interface - the only compelling reason for using it is that it's ubiquitous.

Browsers were never meant to do this sort of thing - AJAX is a hack that's hard to get working 100% reliably across all browsers at the best of times - just look at the hoops one has to jump through to get the back-button working properly, not to mention handling the differences between Firefox and IE. Why on earth would you want to base an entire desktop on such a shaky foundation?

(Bearing in mind that 74% of all statistics are made up on the spot...) I suspect that 99% of internet users access the internet from the same machine (or at most 2 machines) 99% of the time. The cost in increased bandwidth, sluggish response, lack of high-bandwidth media support seems to me a heavy price to pay for portability. Even if we do decide that it's worthwhile, there are technologically better ways to do it.

This is a joke, right?

How is this an operating system?

I guess "WebOS" sounds a lot sexier than "crappy useless Flash programs that just barely work".

Re:This is a joke, right?

Again, like "Web 2.0", this is just a term coined by bloggers to hype a new kind of feature.

For most people, an OS is nothing more than a collection of software which comes with a computer. So a WebOS is basically the equivalent of these apps, but online.

A better fitting name would probably be Online Desktop, but since those failed in the previous bubble (desktop.com anyone?), I doubt people will be calling them that :)

WebOS

Sounds like the spanish word for testicles...

Isn't this a step backwards?

Back in the day, one of the arguments for the "personal computer revolution" was to free computer users from central control. The idea was for the user to own their own basically self-sufficient computer, rather than sharing that stuff. But as time has gone on the the Internet has become ubiquitous, computer users are voluntarily being re-centralized with things like GMail, IMAP, web-based applications, etc. Are we voluntarily surrendering the freedom of personal computer ownership?

Umm... promising?

I just don't understand how this is promising. To use the OS, you must already have an OS. You can't install it yourself either... And you also need a browser to access it. How is this an OPERATING SYSTEM at all?

Re:Umm... promising?

Well, because Windows and OS X users rarely if ever have needed to separate between the OS and Desktop Environment, if they at all understand what Windows is then it's as an operating system. So when you make an online desktop environment, you call it WebOS people actually think right even though it's technically wrong. It's the same way people think a 10/100 Mbit Ethernet connection would be "broadband", when it's technically not. But in their minds they get the right idea of "fast internet". Still, if I wanted anything like a WebOS, I'd much rather have a remote login to a real desktop.

Stupid, Stupid, Stupid

I don't even know where to start.

First off, these aren't "operating systems." An operating system is the system of software that interacts with the hardware of the computer and provides an interface for regular application software to use and share that hardware. Most operating systems do quite bit more than that, but at it's heart, that's what an OS is for. These "Web operating systems" don't do anything like that, by any stretch of the imagination. At best these would some kind of user interface.

Second of all, they're SLOW. Way to go, guys, your "WebOS" makes my 2+ Ghz Athlon 64 and gig of memory run like a slow 386.

If that's not bad enough, there's really no use for these things. At best they're remote desktop for people who are too stupid to setup a regular remote login or VPN. I mean, shit, I can tunnel X over ssh and log in to one of my home machines from work, and get full access to a regular X session and all of Linux. It's not as fast as being logged in locally, but it's still much faster than these "Web OSes"

And finally, it's an abomination of the underlying technology. Somebody really needs to have a little talk with these people about using the right tool for the job. This isn't even like using a hammer to pound in a screw, it's more like using a jack hammer to to fix a watch.

What about...

...my personal favourite: Windows RG [albinoblacksheep.com]?! You know, familiar user experience has always been a key element to success.

WebOS are cool

They do everything a desktop can do but they they do it in a browser, do it slower and hog a lot more resources. Wow, how innovative!

What's are Weboses?

Are they some kind of expensive Internet speaker system?

BS

The term "Browser System" or BS suits them better, I'd say.

Wonderful

Because writing an "OS" in a language designed for document markup is such a great idea.

GoogleOS already "out" under this def'n

Since you already have access to common (windows) desktop app's such as spreadsheets, word doc's, and even low-time-budget games on Google Personalized Homepage, it appears GoogleOS has already been released. Though its interface is minimal, it's clean and straight-forward... without the hassle of cutesy icons that make you do what you don't want to do.

imho, whoever wrote the blog doesn't know what a real O/S looks like... that, it's not the pretty icons and "windows-gui-like" interface that makes something an o/s, but rather the function.

I'll only say this:

The day they take linux/X/fvwm/gnu away from me, they'll have to pry them from my cold dead fingers.

Sure, having your desktop run remotely from a web serve means your desktop follows you everywhere you go, but that also means you have to trust another party with your data.

And that ain't happening, not with me.

Min system requirements

For SSOE 1.0a, from TFA:
--------
SSOE might not be the biggest OS, but it eats CPU like nothing else around.
For the best experience, ensure your computer meets the following basic requirements:
# RAM: 256MB or Greater
# Hard Disk: Unimportant. Have 4KB free for all it matters.
# CPU: 2.6 GHZ absolute minimum. The faster, the better. Dual core if possible.
# Graphics Card: Have at least 64MB VRAM. Hardware T&L preferred.
----------

Good grief. Blows Vista away.
I'll stick with some flavor of Linux and be able to use my PC when I'm *not* online, too.

Missing the Mark?

I've seen several posts which come close to explaining the WebOS, but think of this: Imagine having devices (TV/PDA/Cellphone/future PADD ala Star Trek) which can connect to a network (LAN/WAN/WiFi/etc). These smart devices won't need to have a full OS installed in order to function. All you need is network access. You could then have full access to your desktop 24/7 no matter where you are. In the home, you will be able to work in any room without the need of owning several computers. I realize that many of us here already have similar setups using multiple computers (I myself have at least one in every room with the exception of the bath and utility rooms). The future "non-techie" users could have a fully integrated smart home with only a couple of computers and the network running everything. Right now, there may be no need for WebOS, but this is just the beginning. Only with time will we be able to see if this will be a viable solution to questions that haven't even been asked yet.

Does JS/UIX count?

I'm rather impressed with this [masswerk.at]

marketdroids on the lose

"WebOS" is defined as "a set of applications running in a web browser that together mimic, replace or largely supplement a desktop OS environment."

So in other words the definition can also be "not an OS at all"? I guess "WebDeskTop" is not as catchy...

Multitasking

The current state of Javascript and Web browser technology makes it impossible to efficiently implement memory protection and/or preemptive multitasking between multiple "processes" running in a web based OS. I have tried myself to get around this problem by implementing a virtual machine in Javascript and running the processes on the virtual machine, but this is slow and messy. Until we have web browsers which are actually designed to run this sort of stuff, a web based OS will never really be able to approach a traditional OS in functionality for anything but the most trivial applications.

common software?

The whole point of this is to be able to work anywhere. Most computers have all the software anyone will ever need installed on them. The challenge of being able to work on large documents at different locations is virtually nonexistent with usb drives and even free online storage solutions. Why would I work on a spreadsheet program within a browser if the Excel icon is behind it?

Re:But . . but . . .

LinuxBIOS of course! http://linuxbios.org/index.php/Main_Page [linuxbios.org]

Re:It's been said here before.

Of course, you're ignoring the fact that nobody wants to run emacs. Emacs reversed is scamE. Do you want to run a scam(E) on your computer? I DIDN'T THINK SO!

Re:Flash? Forget it...

A ten-pack of gold stars has been mailed to you.