More alleged Chrome OS screenshots for your viewing pleasure

Well, here we go again -- another set of unverified, likely-fake Google Chrome OS screenshots has just landed in our inbox. Our tipster claims that while most apps are online, Picasa runs locally for photo and movie viewing, and the "System" tab displays the contents of SD cards and digital cameras. Do we believe it? Well, no -- all of this is just too easily mocked up -- but it's certainly interesting stuff, and there's something about that super-nasty blue scroll bar that we find oddly intriguing, even though it's mysteriously missing some pixels at the top. We'll leave it up to you to decide if this is real -- hit the gallery and let us know what you think.

Gallery: Alleged Chrome OS screenshots

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

[John Doe @ Jul 13th 2009 1:48PM]

This looks like the Chrome web browser is taking over as the OS.

[Jack @ Jul 13th 2009 2:04PM]

It sure does. So I'm assuming there will be monopoly charges leveled against Google for bundling their browser in the OS?

[Najakwa @ Jul 13th 2009 2:06PM]

where have you been? that is the primary basis for Chrome OS. Whether this is real or not is a good question.

picasa being stored locally is an indication that this is a fake. If they are going for cloud computing, why would even put a local picasa in the alpha? Are the photos stored in the intertubes?

[Joe @ Jul 13th 2009 2:26PM]

Jack, how would that work when Google DONT HAVE A MONOPOLY.

[John Doe @ Jul 13th 2009 2:20PM]

So...if you're not connected to the internet, you will not be able to access any of your pictures or create/read any documents (.doc,.xls etc). I am assuming these would all be running under Google Docs which is server housed?

[Platinum_Skeet @ Jul 13th 2009 2:20PM]

Isn't this kinda what Microsoft did with Internet Explorer with linking it in with Explorer?

The security needs to be real good with this browser or else it could lead to a tone of security holes like MS had with their browser...

[Twenty5 @ Jul 13th 2009 2:32PM]

"Unfair Practices"

Part 1: http://www.flickr.com/photos/25pics/3713572643/
Part 2: http://www.flickr.com/photos/25pics/3714385858/

[10minutehobo @ Jul 13th 2009 3:25PM]

Jack, +1.

[10minutehobo @ Jul 13th 2009 3:26PM]

Twenty5, +1 too.

[loosely_coupled @ Jul 13th 2009 3:48PM]

Thats the whole point.

[Jon Doe. @ Jul 13th 2009 4:47PM]

"It sure does. So I'm assuming there will be monopoly charges leveled against Google for bundling their browser in the OS?"

Only when Google starts abusing their monopoly and uses predatory business practices. As of right now the score on that count is maybe 1 or 2 to around a bagillion. Microsoft has a known history so anyone with a brain does not implicitly trust them. When Google starts acting this way...lets talk.

[deanb @ Jul 13th 2009 8:32PM]

The charges against MS with IE are for using their monopoly in one market to push for a monopoly in another, so using their OS monopoly to make a browser monopoly. Google have neither a browser or OS monopoly.
They do have a monopoly in search, but as of yet they've not really levied that except the Yahoo thing last year(was it a year ago?) where they backed out after a threat from DOJ.

[akao @ Jul 24th 2009 6:39PM]

Anti-trust law, American style, has become very protective of innovation and regular business practices. Even if Google had monopolies in both markets, I would guess Chrome OS would be just fine, since it is quite innovative.

The difference with MS, is that MS took several steps to prevent IE from being removed or usurped. It wasn't the integration that was the problem, it was everything else. They prevented OEM's from replacing IE. They pressured ISP's to only use IE. They didn't let users remove it, at least to the extent that would not break the integration. et al. Essentially, MS prevented alternative browsers from competing on the merits.

Europeans have a different view of competition, and I know little. My impression is that they want to foster competition, even if it means making big companies take proactive steps to help competitors.

[Kit @ Jul 14th 2009 12:03AM]

@10minutehobo

There is no problem using +1, but can you guys put something more constructive effort in it?

There are too much on the comment lately, such as 'Veeeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrry Good! +1'. Which is totally meaningless in most of the case.

[jrb @ Jul 14th 2009 3:53AM]

joe, so you're saying that when IE's monopoly has whithered away - and its only a matter of time - the EU will reverse its decision to make microsoft unbundle IE from the OS?

[10minutehobo @ Jul 14th 2009 12:32PM]

Kit, -1

[jg @ Jul 13th 2009 1:51PM]

I think that is where Google is going with it

[Scarhawk @ Jul 13th 2009 8:27PM]

It makes sense to let photo editing & video playback get closer to the hardware, for GPU acceleration.

Chrome OS seems like Google is trying to blur the distinction between OS and browser rather than actually make everything run inside the browser. Some software needs to get outside the browser to function well. What security issues will that open up?

[cosmicrob @ Jul 13th 2009 1:52PM]

Interesting that the screen shows DOS style paths rather than Unix.

[Mam00th @ Jul 13th 2009 2:16PM]

Very interesting indeed. +1

[Doug @ Jul 13th 2009 2:41PM]

I was about to say the very same thing. I am very disappointed in that, I was actually wondering if it will be a Linux kernel running this thing. I suppose it will be FreeDOS?

I have to say, thinking about it, I really am not surprised. Google does make a plethora of Win32 programmes leaving Mac and Linux out in the cold. I loathe DOS style paths too!

[DanielT @ Jul 13th 2009 3:31PM]

This fact is what makes this a fake.

[the4thheat @ Jul 13th 2009 10:20PM]

Yeah this seems rather not legit at all...the fonts look like crap and Google would never let something with a UI that shoddy looking see the light of day, probably not even as an alpha.

[redleader158 @ Jul 14th 2009 12:26AM]

so right, man.
all it takes is a simple theme edit on vista or xp to change not only the scrollbar and fonts, but also the nonexistent close buttons with the beta text.

[H3g3m0n @ Jul 14th 2009 12:43AM]

It is possible that Chrome OS is actually a set of tools that can fit on another OS and that its just going to be Linux by default. The full ChromeOS could just be an heavily modified version of Chrome.

For instance GNU/Hurd is actually a set of server, not a kernel (but it has the Mach kernel by default). It would be possible for the Hurd stuff to run on Linux for example and maybe even Windows via Cygwin.

With that said I doubt these are real, it just looks like a full screen version of Chrome with a few plugins, or even just some specially designed web pages.

[AndrewNoNumbers @ Jul 13th 2009 1:52PM]

Looks pretty real to me, but also pretty ugly. Then again just a prototype.

[Steven @ Jul 13th 2009 1:52PM]

Ironic that it's running on a Dell.

[AK66 @ Jul 13th 2009 8:06PM]

quite ironic. ha.

they have a lot of windows machines for being an open source company.

[deanb @ Jul 13th 2009 8:34PM]

When did Google become an open source company and when did Dell stop running FOSS?
Especially with their Ubuntu sales?

[dsteve303 @ Jul 13th 2009 1:52PM]

fake

[ash chapman @ Jul 13th 2009 1:59PM]

Yeah, this looks so damn fake. I love that sticker on the palm rest... "Google Development Team" - now you KNOW it's real!

[UK31337 @ Jul 13th 2009 1:54PM]

Photoshopped Chrome, I sincerely hope.

If this is the real thing then "Eww" is all I can say. Too cutesy and I'd likely deliberately avoid it if I was buying a netbook, plus I couldn't really get into Chrome either so I would avoid this if it turns out to be too similar.

[be.envy @ Jul 13th 2009 1:54PM]

Picasa is only ran through a WINE layer now, so this is obviously bogus or Google has a secret build of Picasa. I couldn't imagine them running Picasa through WINE for their own OS.

[brr404 @ Jul 13th 2009 1:54PM]

bleh doesnt look good =[
like andrew said its just a prototype

[Mitch @ Jul 13th 2009 1:56PM]

Quit posting this shit and giving these morons what they want... attention.

[oliver @ Jul 13th 2009 2:32PM]

What's with the sound icon stating "Loud"
Isn't loud an opinion?

[Dayne @ Jul 13th 2009 3:35PM]

I was wondering if Loud meant 75% or 85%

[Fernando @ Jul 13th 2009 2:05PM]

looks real to me, at least miles more believable than the last screenshot batch

[idiscuss @ Jul 13th 2009 2:08PM]

looks so primitive. XP is much more appealing!

[Shannon @ Jul 13th 2009 2:09PM]

OooOoo, it's like Windows 95...

[cj100570 @ Jul 13th 2009 2:10PM]

Seriously? You know it's fake and yet you still feel the need to post it? Slow news day huh?

[denson_paul @ Jul 13th 2009 2:10PM]

That whole laptop is photoshopped, not just the images on screen. I can tell. Somehow.

[Saul Good @ Jul 13th 2009 2:13PM]

are you impressed? because i'm not impressed.

[Srikar @ Jul 13th 2009 2:14PM]

it has fake written all over it.....engadget...come on....you dont have to post crap if theres no much news....

wat happened to the microsoft event scheduled for today ??? you can update us on that....

[windblownmonkey @ Jul 13th 2009 2:24PM]

If this IS somehow real, then Google OS will fail. Everything jampacked into a browser? Nah. Not for me. Maybe on a netbook...
But I would prefer to keep the browser and the OS separate. However, if you just add in the feature to access other features of the OS through the browser, then you have a win.

[subliminal727 @ Jul 13th 2009 2:28PM]

...the pixels are all wrong!!

[3booos @ Jul 13th 2009 2:27PM]

Is that a Windows logo on the background of pic # 5 humm?!!!

[Mac @ Jul 13th 2009 2:28PM]

It's a fake - someone who photoshopped this didn't put much thought in it. I mean - look at the bottom right bar - what happens when wifi is disconnected? The 'Not connected' message won't fit and moving icons just to fit every message would be ugly.
Fake if u ask me...

[G @ Jul 13th 2009 2:28PM]

Eurgh if this is real, IMO it looks awful.

[Chris @ Jul 13th 2009 2:28PM]

seriously ... F A K E ....

and if it is real it's a 100% EPIC FAIL on googles behalf....

This can't even compete against keeping XP as the netbook OS of choice let alone windows 7, hell i'd have rathered ubuntu than this crap.