Better than Chromebook? A $250 PC gets it done

I'm glad that the Chromebook has forced Windows to bring better value to the lower end of the market. That;s a win for the consumer. However, it's clear that the author really doesn't understand Chrome OS so I found his comparison lacking. A few points he missed...

a. Due to several reasons, Chrome OS is basically a virus free platform. That's huge for a large % of the market - kids, the elderly, casual computer users, etc...

b. Due to its architecture, Chrome OS does not get bogged down the way Windows machines do. My 2012 Chromebook runs at the same pace as the day i got it without having to maintain it. Chromebooks can run on weak processors because the OS doesn't require the same resources that Windows does. I can only imagine what a $250 Windows machine runs like on month 6 of regular use. How about year 2? Unless you are taking proper precautions (that the target demographic usually doesn't take), this this $250 Win machine will be a slug in no time.

c. Chrome OS also updates itself and in the rare instance where you need to reinstall the OS, it's a 5-10 minute process where all of your software and settings can be instantly restored vs spending hours on a PC and then having to find and reinstall your software and settings. Again, I'm speaking for the "normal user" the author refers to.

I could go on but I'll stop there. He's missing the point completely...

From the article:

"And here's the kicker: Windows can actually run Chrome OS web apps even better than a Chromebook because you can pin anything, not just apps in the Chrome OS web store.

At this moment in time, we stand on the cusp—dare I say the threshold—of a new era in Windows computing. Up until this time, the low-end of the PC market has been marked by large, heavy and bulky PCs because that type of machine is cheaper to build. These PCs don't get great battery life because they don't need to: They're used around the house, not lugged around on cross-country flights or to and from a workplace....

Outfitted with 4 GB of RAM, a surprisingly OK Celeron N2830 processor, and an actual hard drive—i.e. not solid state storage—the Acer has handled everything I've thrown at it."

So pinning things makes it better? Having 4GB of RAM is nice but newer Chromebooks are starting to get built with 4GB. It's easy to get a low-end Windows PC with 2-3GB RAM so that argument is a wash. The hard drive versus SSD one seems to be misguided. With a 16GB SSD vs 500GB HDD, the SSD will fill up but it will be fast. The HDD is 5400 RPM; it will be a bottleneck. I give them points for having a large screen size for that price.

I wouldn't say better than Chromebook. Maybe, as good as.