On Wednesday, 3 June 2015 at 04:36:31 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
> On Wednesday, 3 June 2015 at 03:41:39 UTC, Joakim wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 2 June 2015 at 22:38:47 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
>>> They're insanely popular, especially in educational environments. They do everything 98% of modern computer users do, which is generally check email, browse facebook, and use twitter.
>>
>> Not really.  While they do sell some in education, they were 1.8% of the PC market last year, much less than even Macs despite being much cheaper:
>>
>> https://www.petri.com/chromebook-continues-to-be-a-tiny-slice-of-the-pc-market
>>
>> Compare that 5.7 million in sales to a billion Android devices sold last year, native is definitely winning.
>
> chromebooks weren't even really usable until the latter half of 2013/start of 2014 when Acer/HP/Dell/Toshiba/etc all got on board and it stopped being just Samsung making them. 2% is huge for less than 2 years. That was the chromebook revision that featured the ultra low power Haswell CPUs(2955U,) before that they were incredibly slow and suffered from general netbook issues.
>
> And they're not even comparable to an android /phone/. Compare them to tablet sales.

Oh, I forgot the most important part.
The acer c720 was $200 on release, it was the cheapest chromebook to date. C700 launched at $349, and the samsung series 5 launched at $399 for reference.


Before the haswell iteration they just weren't ready to be a thing.

"Ola Fosheim "Grøstad\"" <ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang@gmail.com> writes:

> On Monday, 1 June 2015 at 16:09:34 UTC, Dan Olson wrote:
>> Timely!  I and stack overflow struggled for a couple hours to find
>> an
>> equivalent C++ template for something that was straightforward with
>> a
>> couple macros.
>
> …but without an example it is hard to figure out what macros are needed for.

Stringify - here I want to rapidly prototype code with syscalls that need return values checked, and get nice output when they fails. My C++ template skills are weak and was unable to come up with an equivalent replacement.  Is this a way?

#define STRINGIFY(x) #x
#define STR(x) STRINGIFY(x)
#define SYSCHK(syscall) \
    ({__typeof__(syscall) r = (syscall); \
    if (r == -1) die(__FILE__ ":" STR(__LINE__) ":" #syscall " failed"); \
    r;})


    int fd = SYSCHK(open(fname, O_EVTONLY));
    int kfd = SYSCHK(kqueue());
    struct kevent changes;
...
    struct kevent kevs[5];
    int n = SYSCHK(kevent(kfd, &changes, 1, kevs, 5, 0));

Dan Olson <gorox@comcast.net> writes:
>
> Stringify - here I want to rapidly prototype code with syscalls that need return values checked, and get nice output when they fails. My C++ template skills are weak and was unable to come up with an equivalent replacement.  Is this a way?

Meant "Is there a way?" to do such a thing with templates.

On Wednesday, 3 June 2015 at 04:40:14 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
> On Wednesday, 3 June 2015 at 04:36:31 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 3 June 2015 at 03:41:39 UTC, Joakim wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 2 June 2015 at 22:38:47 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
>>>> They're insanely popular, especially in educational environments. They do everything 98% of modern computer users do, which is generally check email, browse facebook, and use twitter.
>>>
>>> Not really.  While they do sell some in education, they were 1.8% of the PC market last year, much less than even Macs despite being much cheaper:
>>>
>>> https://www.petri.com/chromebook-continues-to-be-a-tiny-slice-of-the-pc-market
>>>
>>> Compare that 5.7 million in sales to a billion Android devices sold last year, native is definitely winning.
>>
>> chromebooks weren't even really usable until the latter half of 2013/start of 2014 when Acer/HP/Dell/Toshiba/etc all got on board and it stopped being just Samsung making them. 2% is huge for less than 2 years. That was the chromebook revision that featured the ultra low power Haswell CPUs(2955U,) before that they were incredibly slow and suffered from general netbook issues.
>>
>> And they're not even comparable to an android /phone/. Compare them to tablet sales.
>
> Oh, I forgot the most important part.
> The acer c720 was $200 on release, it was the cheapest chromebook to date. C700 launched at $349, and the samsung series 5 launched at $399 for reference.
>
>
> Before the haswell iteration they just weren't ready to be a thing.

For that price I can easily get a tablet with keyboard, with the advantage of real native applications + a web browser.

For example, Lenovo A10-70 just one randomly picked out at German Amazon.

Eventually Google will realize they are as useful as WebOS and will merge them with Android.

--
Paulo

On Wednesday, 3 June 2015 at 04:36:31 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
> chromebooks weren't even really usable until the latter half of 2013/start of 2014 when Acer/HP/Dell/Toshiba/etc all got on board and it stopped being just Samsung making them. 2% is huge for less than 2 years. That was the chromebook revision that featured the ultra low power Haswell CPUs(2955U,) before that they were incredibly slow and suffered from general netbook issues.

So you think they're about to break out?  I don't see it.

> And they're not even comparable to an android /phone/. Compare them to tablet sales.

Why?  Do phones not "do everything 98% of modern computer users do... check email, browse facebook, and use twitter?"  Seems like phones have taken over those use cases these days. :)

There is a giant market for devices that don't catch viruses and have all kinds of registry settings, but Android and iOS have taken 99+% of that market.  I was going to make the same point Paulo just made: just get an Android device and you can put a Chrome browser on there too.  I don't see the point of limiting yourself to just the browser, even though that is what a significant fraction of people probably use most of the time.

ChromeOS strikes me as google trying to use their one hammer everywhere, even when there are no nails, ie they're built around the web so they made an OS out of it.  But it's frankly kind of a dumb idea, I don't see it lasting.

They're working on a multi-window mode for Android, early versions of which have been found by those spelunking through the recent Android M preview.  Once that's done, I suspect they'll start putting Android on laptops too and kill off Chrome OS.

On Wednesday, 3 June 2015 at 08:34:22 UTC, Joakim wrote:
> On Wednesday, 3 June 2015 at 04:36:31 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
>> chromebooks weren't even really usable until the latter half of 2013/start of 2014 when Acer/HP/Dell/Toshiba/etc all got on board and it stopped being just Samsung making them. 2% is huge for less than 2 years. That was the chromebook revision that featured the ultra low power Haswell CPUs(2955U,) before that they were incredibly slow and suffered from general netbook issues.
>
> So you think they're about to break out?  I don't see it.
I think cornering 2% of the PC market in 2 years is a pretty big deal.
>
>> And they're not even comparable to an android /phone/. Compare them to tablet sales.
>
> Why?  Do phones not "do everything 98% of modern computer users do... check email, browse facebook, and use twitter?"  Seems like phones have taken over those use cases these days. :)

because phones are used for communication, my mother has a smart phone and to her it's a confusing landline phone.

>
> There is a giant market for devices that don't catch viruses and have all kinds of registry settings, but Android and iOS have taken 99+% of that market.  I was going to make the same point Paulo just made: just get an Android device and you can put a Chrome browser on there too.  I don't see the point of limiting yourself to just the browser, even though that is what a significant fraction of people probably use most of the time.
>
> ChromeOS strikes me as google trying to use their one hammer everywhere, even when there are no nails, ie they're built around the web so they made an OS out of it.  But it's frankly kind of a dumb idea, I don't see it lasting.
>
> They're working on a multi-window mode for Android, early versions of which have been found by those spelunking through the recent Android M preview.  Once that's done, I suspect they'll start putting Android on laptops too and kill off Chrome OS.

chromebooks sell because touchscreens are a gimmick and android is terrible with a keyboard.

but hey, if it didn't work so well
why is Microsoft trying so hard to copy them, going as far as making commercials about how "awful" chromebooks are, then releasing their own chromebook - I mean, stream.

On Wednesday, 3 June 2015 at 08:38:09 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
> On Wednesday, 3 June 2015 at 08:34:22 UTC, Joakim wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 3 June 2015 at 04:36:31 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
>>> chromebooks weren't even really usable until the latter half of 2013/start of 2014 when Acer/HP/Dell/Toshiba/etc all got on board and it stopped being just Samsung making them. 2% is huge for less than 2 years. That was the chromebook revision that featured the ultra low power Haswell CPUs(2955U,) before that they were incredibly slow and suffered from general netbook issues.
>>
>> So you think they're about to break out?  I don't see it.
> I think cornering 2% of the PC market in 2 years is a pretty big deal.
>>
>>> And they're not even comparable to an android /phone/. Compare them to tablet sales.
>>
>> Why?  Do phones not "do everything 98% of modern computer users do... check email, browse facebook, and use twitter?"  Seems like phones have taken over those use cases these days. :)
>
> because phones are used for communication, my mother has a smart phone and to her it's a confusing landline phone.
>
>>
>> There is a giant market for devices that don't catch viruses and have all kinds of registry settings, but Android and iOS have taken 99+% of that market.  I was going to make the same point Paulo just made: just get an Android device and you can put a Chrome browser on there too.  I don't see the point of limiting yourself to just the browser, even though that is what a significant fraction of people probably use most of the time.
>>
>> ChromeOS strikes me as google trying to use their one hammer everywhere, even when there are no nails, ie they're built around the web so they made an OS out of it.  But it's frankly kind of a dumb idea, I don't see it lasting.
>>
>> They're working on a multi-window mode for Android, early versions of which have been found by those spelunking through the recent Android M preview.  Once that's done, I suspect they'll start putting Android on laptops too and kill off Chrome OS.
>
> chromebooks sell because touchscreens are a gimmick and android is terrible with a keyboard.
>
> but hey, if it didn't work so well
> why is Microsoft trying so hard to copy them, going as far as making commercials about how "awful" chromebooks are, then releasing their own chromebook - I mean, stream.

Surfaces have always been full-blown laptops with detachable keyboards.

Stream?! I had to search for it, only found the HP Stream model, running a full Windows 8.1 OS, not a browser pretending to be an OS.

--
Paulo

On Wednesday, 3 June 2015 at 08:44:28 UTC, Paulo  Pinto wrote:

> Stream?! I had to search for it, only found the HP Stream model, running a full Windows 8.1 OS, not a browser pretending to be an OS.
>
> --
> Paulo

Yes, and that "full Windows 8.1 OS" makes it run 2-3x slower than equivalent hardware Chromebooks.

http://www.engadget.com/2014/11/28/hp-stream-11-review/

On Wednesday, 3 June 2015 at 07:47:04 UTC, Dan Olson wrote:
> Dan Olson <gorox@comcast.net> writes:
> Meant "Is there a way?" to do such a thing with templates.

I don't think there is a way to turn symbols into strings without a table or #preprocessing. In C++ I would personally have used a table instead, but as a quick hack for testing, a macro would do.

I am not sure if this should be possible with templates as the actual name of the symbol should be transparent to the type-system. The type system should only care about identity/uniqueness of symbols, not spelling, sorting etc. So if C++ made it available it should not be through the type system IMO.

On Wednesday, 3 June 2015 at 08:48:03 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
> On Wednesday, 3 June 2015 at 08:44:28 UTC, Paulo  Pinto wrote:
>
>> Stream?! I had to search for it, only found the HP Stream model, running a full Windows 8.1 OS, not a browser pretending to be an OS.
>>
>> --
>> Paulo
>
> Yes, and that "full Windows 8.1 OS" makes it run 2-3x slower than equivalent hardware Chromebooks.
>
> http://www.engadget.com/2014/11/28/hp-stream-11-review/

So what, a lousy laptop model from HP vs a lousy OS experience from Google?

You will never convince me there is any good stuff in Chromebooks, as well as, I will never convince you they belong alongside WebOS and Symbian Web Widgets in OS Heaven.