Recently it was reported that Barclays analysts have concluded that the tablet will be a device that replaces gadgets like netbooks and low tier laptops. This can be attributed to the fact that the pricing for these types of products are similar, plus the fact that Apple has captivated a market of early adopters with their iPad and its easy to use interface.

Does that mean in the future that people will carry and smartphone with them and keep a tablet for lounging around at home? While the whole typing experience still seems troublesome, that may be the case. If this is indeed true, then it makes sense for Google to develop two distinct operating systems bases on very specific needs. While we have seen Android-based tablets like the 5″ Dell Streak, it’s likely that tablets with larger screens would be more popular rather than something that just looks like a smartphone but cannot make traditional wireless calls.

Of course, the intention for Chrome OS initially was not for tablets. In fact, all evidence up to this point leads one to believe that right now a commercial product will actually be a netboook or larger laptop-like device. That’s probably not the ideal product anymore, at least at this point. No one has really stepped up to Apple to compete in this very new tablet space.  At least, not yet. But with this market doubling in size very quickly according to predictions, there is room for several rivals.

And that’s going to include Microsoft, as they are planning to work with manufacturers to release a good number of Windows tablets this year.

Asus is working on an ARM tablet that will run either Android or Chrome OS and will be released by its AGAiT subsidiary.

A Google Executive has thrown in his opinion on the AT&T limits on data the company is imposing.

It appears that a Google Music service could be coming this fall, with some exciting features to compete with Apple.

Mobile devices that blur the line between smartphone and computer heat up the competition between Qualcomm and Intel.

Google sure does have a lot of money in its coffers to invest in or acquire companies with.

The idea of Chromoting as a way to bridge the gap between the web-enabled environments of the future over to the old model of installed applications on Windows, Mac and Linux seems to fit with the overall theme of Chrome OS. That theme is to get away from natively installed applications, though many of us still will rely on these “legacy” apps to some degree.

In the smartphone realm, the use of remote desktop is possible to go into our computer at home or at work to do things. Chromoting will be no different than that, installed as an extension on a Chrome OS device with another application on whatever other machine you need to remote into.

As cloud computing in ramps up from an operating system standpoint, there is going to be some software that simply will not be available in the cloud. Although it is true when Google says that most major applications are coming out today arrive web-based, there are still some resource-heavy tasks that require a traditional computer. Chromoting thus offers power users the ability to possibly use virtualization on servers to harness both Chrome OS and whatever applications they may need directly through the cloud.

I can see a variety of uses for Chromoting, and not just as a stopgap solution for legacy purposes but also as a path to allow Chrome OS to act as a window to more process-intensive computing capabilities. One would not only be able to use it to access powerful software tools on a thin client Chrome OS device, but the enterprise would benefit as well. I could see IT support analysts, salespeople and health professionals utilizing Chromoting on a tablet or netbook to access resources in a safe and controlled way that perhaps other devices would be unable to.

What other intriguing purposes could Chromoting provide for that I have missed?

Now, this is what i like to see.

For anyone with some time and perserverance, you can put an open source browser on a mobile phone. Sure, it may not work perfectly, but its a start. That’s why when someone puts Chromium on a Nokia N900 phone – which is running the open source Linux-based Debian operating system, you’ve got to put the instructions up, right?

These points are included in the readme:

• This package doesn’t work with app manager – you have to install them using dpkg in console
• Chromium should work with libxss from extras-devel repo or libxss from here
• Note: If you use extras-devel repo version you will have to use some –force when installing chromium

Installing Through X-terminal in N900:

1. Download these files to root directory in Nokia N900 then
2. Type root
3. type cd /home/user/MyDocs/ dpkg -i name-of-the-lib-file.deb
4. dpkg -i name-of-the-chromefile.deb

Source: Maemo Arena

Remember 2007? That summer was a magical time for smartphone enthusiasts. That was the summer that Apple introduced the iPhone, and while many said it wouldn’t work (marrying an iPod with a phone would be crazy) the exact opposite happened. Apple changed the smartphone market, created an application store that developers now salivate over and created an operating system platform that now extends to their newest product, the iPad.

It wasn’t too long after that Google announced it would lead a consortium to develop an open source platform for mobile phones called Android. Unlike the iPhone, however, Android took a different path to development into a highly touted architecture used by many smartphone manufacturers. The first phone with Android, the G4 manufactured by the little-know HTC with wireless service by T-Mobile, was a curious device and one that only captured the interests of the most early of the early adopters.

Now Android is a successful commercial system, but because of its open source nature it is not only in smartphones but also in netbooks, tablets and even cars. I can’t wait to run Android on my fridge. It’s so hard to keep organized right now.

Fast forward to today. I do apologize for being repetitive, but here’s the story so far.

Apple introduced the iPad, and while many said that it won’t work (supersizing an iPod Touch would be crazy) the exact opposite may or may not happen (600,000 sold already is not bad though). Apple potentially has changed the tablet market, with an application market that developers are salivating over and offering a device that is far cheaper and more widespread than any other tablet that is on the market.

You can fill in the rest for Chrome OS. I don’t have that information yet, but I would assume that the iPad is leading the way for some interesting open source development when it comes to tablets and other devices.

So, how fast is the iPad? According to the hardware analysis site Anandtech not as fast as might have been expected. While the iPad’s custom designed A4 processor is faster than the Nexus One’s Qualcomm Snapdragon, the results don’t put the iPad that far ahead. Both the devices were compared with the iPhone 3GS and measured by how fast that each of them were able to load certain web pages.

The reviewer, Anand Lal Shimpi, writes that the “iPad loads web pages 10% faster than the Nexus One” and that “despite the early reports of the iPad being blazingly fast, I found it just “acceptable” in my limited time with it thus far”.

In fact, it may even be possible that with those results that the A4 is really not all that unique anyways. Regardless of that, if this chip were to be put into the next generation of iPhones, the Nexus One would be beat. Since the only way to compare the device is to load web pages, I wonder if Apple’s operating system with Safari is better refined and optimized than Android 2.1 and its namesake browser that is running on Nexus One.

So there you have it. Many reviews are glowing about the iPad being an amazing device, and I don’t discount that because of how profoundly different it is. And although the iPad and the Nexus One are hard to compare since they run in different segments (phone vs. tablet) speed is still a very important metric to measure in terms of user experience.

One of the biggest challenges faced as devices get smaller and smaller is that the traditional keyboard still requires a certain footprint in order to be useable. This fact is even more evident when you look at tablets and phones which don’t have a keyboard at all – they require you to use an on-screen touch interface in order to write. For many, this trend could be problematic since there is an enjoyable degree of tactile feedback that comes with using a traditional keyboard.

That’s why when I came across this post from Wired I knew I had to write about it. Sure it’s only a mock-up, but this is the best way that I have seen so far on solving the keyboard problem, which is to fold it:

Designer Yang Yongchang has put up some images and a small write-up on how his device, the iWeb 2.0, would work. I really like the idea, and although I’m sure this has been tried in design labs before if it could be pulled off by being usable there would be appeal for this. Two things come to mind, however. A folding keyboard would have many parts making it expensive and possibly fragile. Another problem could be that although the pictures look good, it needs to be comfortably useable to a vast amount of people in order for something like this to sell.

With the mobile device market creating new genres of gadgets such as the tablet and especially the smartbook which will blend together elements of a netbook with a smartphone – the keyboard problem becomes magnified. Whether it runs Android, Chrome OS, Linux or some variety of Windows a smartbook is going to need to have a real keyboard.

I know that in the mobile phone market the trend is to shy away from manufacturing smartphones with full-on keyboard. The Nexus One has done so, along with other Android devices. The Motorola Droid, however, does come with a keyboard. I suppose it is all in terms of a person’s taste, but for those who like to write having a keyboard is really helpful. Especially if you’re clumsy with a touchscreen.

Kyocera has announced that they will release an Android phone called the Zio M6000 that will cost only $169 upfront, with CDMA technology. This is pretty affordable for those who want to get an Android phone, and since new ones are seemingly arriving every day it seems like buying an unsubsidized on would be the best way to go. Plus, it looks like although the Zio will come with Android 1.6, it will be user upgradeable to 2.1. Check out this video:

While a service provider for this phone hasn’t been announced yet, ARMdevices has said that Kyocera traditionally has been a manufacturer for pre-paid mobile services, which would include companies such as Virgin Mobile, Cricket, Boost Mobile and MetroPCS as possible suitors.

If this is indeed a prepaid phone, it would be a great deal. And it also means that the hardware for Android is becoming cheaper. Take a look at the specifications for the Zio M6000:

3.5″ 800×480 touch screen
600 Mhz Qualcomm MSM7227 processor
3G (CDMA for now), WiFi and stereo Bluetooth
3.2-megapixel camera
Android 1.6 but it will be user-upgradeable to Android 2.1

Sure, it’s not a Nexus One “superphone” but it gets the job done for the average user. Plus, in the video above by Mobileburn, they state that this is one of the lightest Android phones that they have come across.

Although I’m not sure that Google intended to have Android be released on new phones almost every week, I doubt that they are too worried about it. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Chrome OS fragmented in the same way, with Google releasing their own “super” hardware netbook and/or tablet with other manufacturers marketing their own lower cost versions.

We’ve already seen evidence of a $200 tablet by Freescale, and when you consider that Chrome OS will not charge a license fee for its platform I would expect to see devices from manufacturers other than Google releasing gadgets on the cheap, with Google branding their own hardware and commanding Apple-like margins because of their brand value.

Anyways, expect to see the Zio M6000 in the second quarter if you’re looking for a smartphone without a contract.

Gizmodo is reporting today that the Nexus One, released in early January as Google’s flagship Android smartphone product has had very poor sales numbers when compared to its competitors. Counting the seventy-four days since the Nexus One has been released, and then comparing the Droid and iPhone the numbers are paltry for Google. While the iPhone and Motorola Droid tallied a million and 1.05 million respectively, the Nexus One has only shipped 135,000 phones.At that number,  the highly touted iPad tablet already has more pre-orders than Google’s official phone has sold.

But let’s go back to highly touted. Although the tablet from Apple was never really a for sure thing, there were plenty of news stories about it long before it was unveiled, one of the biggest was the fact that Apple already owned the domain name for iSlate – the supposed name for the device at the time. So what about the publicity for the Nexus One? Pretty slim, and it almost seemed like and afterthought once Motorola hit it big with the Droid that Google felt they almost had to release their own phone.

On the subject of Motorola, keep in mind that the marketing campaign for the Droid was in excess of $100 million dollars. There wasn’t a time you could turn on the TV and hear a robot saying “Droid” in the commercial blitz that commenced at the phone’s launch. By contrast, I’ve never seen a Nexus One commercial – the only ads that I have seen are on Google pages and some ads sprinkled here and there on the internet.

Just because the numbers are not that good for Google doesn’t mean that they haven’t learned a lot from this exercise. Remember, this was the first actual product that Google has released. And they decided to do it differently than any other mobile phone manufacturer on the market by selling it themselves. Even though in reality it was made by HTC, it has the Google brand on it.

Now they will sell the Nexus One for AT&T, competing directly with Apple – but you have to pay the full $529 for the privilege.

When it comes time for Google to sell their own computing device, what path will they take? I have a feeling that they will sell one themselves, but they may opt to also get the backing of a large manufacturer as well for mass marketing purposes. Remember, Acer as of late has been doing a lot of posturing about being the first to market with a Chrome OS netbook, that they will sell millions of them this year and so on.

Whatever the choice may be, it’s clear that the Nexus One was a trial run that required very little marketing expense for the company, which is where things could have got expensive. After all, it seems as if HTC is rolling out new phones all the time anyway, why not help Google out since incidentally, the search engine giant lent a hand with the G1 smartphone?

And don’t forget, the Nexus One has received favorable reviews, some calling it the best Android phone yet – even Gizmodo. Google doesn’t care about popularity for its branded devices yet; it’s more concerned with providing the best user experience possible.

So Samsung is working on a Chrome OS product. What a shock. Although maybe in a dry news cycle there is an appetite for anything related to Chrome OS, that unfortunately doesn’t really strike me as news. Maybe I’m cynical, maybe I’m a realist (I could also be dumb, you could comment upon that if you want). The truth is that there are probably a whole slew of manufacturers that want to be the first that gets into the genre of Google’s cloud computing platform. But in being realistic that means that the one that offers the most compelling device specs for the initial launch will win.

It would really be no coincidence that Samsung has initialized a partnership with ARM to provide graphics capabilities to their mobile devices, but other sites are not reporting this little nugget of information. Instead of providing specifications for a future netbook, the interest that I have is more about the synergy that Samsung and ARM will create with this partnership.

Sure, its just a press release, but the reality is that Samsung doesn’t need an integrated processing and graphics solution for a television or a mobile phone. It’s to get into the netbook/tablet/smartphone market. And say what you will about them, but their products are pretty good. Mind you, to compete in the soon-crowded cloud operating system market they are going to be dealing with Taiwan companies that have been successful in the netbook market such as Asus and Acer. However, I would not be surprised to see Samsung do some innovative development that puts them ahead of the pack and eventually have a Chrome OS product that is ahead of their competition.

If Samsung is really interested in entering this market and competing on price, then they could do well. Their track record in consumer electronics is pretty good. But HTC, which came out of nowhere, is currently dominating in Android mobile phone sales because they are ambitious and were willing to take risks that traditional mobile phone manufacturers were not willing to do. Is it going to be a consumer electronics company like Samsung that can heed the call for emerging web operating systems? We will see.