Chromebook Pixel? Beautiful and wrong

Google’s Chromebook Pixel is a handsome laptop, with an attractive metal case, a beautiful high-resolution display, and solid keys. It exhibits none of the cheap PC feel all too common in laptops, yet is also clearly not a MacBook clone despite its strong quality build. Its Chrome OS now permits some local storage, and it runs some apps that can continue to function when you’re not connected to Wi-Fi.

Oh yeah — Wi-Fi. A Chromebook may look like a PC laptop, but it’s really a Chrome browser appliance. The Web is its operating system, and it needs a live Internet connection to run most functions. That’s the weakness of the Chromebook Pixel — well, and the fact it’s essentially 1990s technology being sold in 2013.

[ Get expert advice about planning and implementing your BYOD strategy with InfoWorld’s in-depth “Mobile and BYOD Deep Dive” PDF special report. | Subscribe to InfoWorld’s Consumerization of IT newsletter today. ]

Web apps are inferior apps Let me start with the notion of the Web as operating system. There’s no question that the Web, the Internet, the cloud — call it what you prefer — is a godsend for computing. I use Dropbox and iCloud continually to access the same files and information across my various computers, tablets, and smartphones. As a technology writer, I use more devices than most, but even regular people these days have multiple devices and get huge benefits from a common repository accessible almost anywhere. Of course, tons of useful websites and Internet services out there all live in the cloud.

You might start thinking that all you need is the cloud. Google has certainly improved its Web apps over the last couple of years. Google Drive — the company’s combination of cloud storage service and basic office productivity tools — finally allows offline usage, such as when you can’t get a Wi-Fi signal or can’t afford to pay for hotspot access at each leg of your journey while traveling. Also, the Chromebook Pixel comes with 32GB of flash storage to store files and images locally, for access when offline.

Chrome OS in the Chromebook Pixel is a big improvement over the first incarnation, but it doesn’t compare with the rich apps you get on a Windows PC, Mac, iPad, or even Android tablet. If you want full-featured office productivity, you need a Mac or PC. If you’re willing to forgo the use of style sheets but still want strong layout capabilities, you can get by with iWork Pages in iOS. If layout is less critical, then you can use Quickoffice in iOS or Android. It’s a similar cascade for spreadsheets and slideshows. In Chrome OS, Drive’s apps aren’t bad, but they’re less capable than Quickoffice, lacking core features such as revisions tracking and user-defined styles. Drive is even less capable on a tablet’s browser, with fewer capabilities on an iPad than, say, Microsoft Office 365 for Web. No wonder Google has reworked Quickoffice on Android to work with Drive, to combine native and Web capabilities.

It’s not just office productivity suites. Basic image editing in Chrome OS is possible via Picasa’s Creative Kit, but it’s awkward to use and can’t do anything creative. For that, you need the likes of Snapseed, iPhoto, or PhotoForge in iOS; Snapseed in Android; or Photoshop in OS X or Windows.

And don’t forget email. I have multiple email accounts: one for work, one for my side projects, one for junkmail, one for e-commerce and banking, and one each forced on me by a platform provider (Google’s Gmail and Apple’s iCloud). On a computer or mobile device, I can use one mail client to manage them all. In Chrome OS, I need to use the Webmail client for each service; the Gmail Web app only accesses Google email. Hopping around all those browser tabs and different-interface Webmail clients is a huge pain.

Web apps are inferior to “real” native apps. Yes, Chrome apps have gotten better, even supporting drag and drop in some cases. But they’re too limited for everyday usage. I can carry a lighter, smaller iPad or Galaxy Note with me and do more with it, both online and offline.

The laptop era is over That brings me to the other issue in the Chromebook Pixel: Why bother with a laptop container for the Chrome browser appliance? Yes, it’s a very nice laptop and with a price to match ($1,299 for the Wi-Fi-only model and $1,449 for the cellular-capable model). That’s the price of a nice MacBook Air model, which weighs less and is smaller and does a helluva lot more both online and offline. Yes, the Chromebook Pixel’s high-res display is gorgeous and crisp, but I can get the same display quality on a much smaller iPad or on a same-size 13-inch MacBook Pro.

A Chromebook Pixel is heavy and large. Sure, it’s in a nice package, but it’s still the kind of laptop design that was king in the 1990s and 2000s. Today, people are buying (and the tech industry is copying) MacBook Airs and iPads — smaller, lighter, more capable. Although the Chromebook Pixel shares only some of the innards of a PC laptop, its battery life is barely better than most Windows laptops: three to four hours. In heavy use, iPads easily exceed nine hours, the 2012-model MacBook Airs approach seven, and the new MacBook Airs approach 12. They all cost the same as or less than a Chromebook Pixel.

A Chrome tablet would have made a bit more sense than a Chrome laptop. The Chromebook Pixel even has a touch-capable display, although I can’t get the zoom gesture to work. And using it reaffirmed that touchscreens on laptops and PCs are an ergonomic danger zone, not to mention uncomfortable to work with. Thankfully, the Chromebook Pixel also has a nice trackpad and cursor keys.

Even a Chrome tablet suffers from the Web app problem, so it’d be a more modern way to package the disappointment that is the Chromebook Pixel. I know, I know: Some people love it. I honestly don’t know why, given that a MacBook Air or one of the better Windows Ultrabooks has all of its advantages and none of its disadvantages. Its handsome enclosure certainly can’t explain it.

Some organizations see Chrome OS as a way to deliver virtual desktops that require little or no setup. It might work well for some education and training scenarios, and of course for call centers. But plenty of thin clients out there do the same. It’s not very hard to convert a Windows PC or Mac into a mindless client, either. Dell and Apple have server tools just for that purpose, for example.

The bottom line is that the laptop era is over, and Web apps can’t function in place of native apps. Old-style PCs and laptops still have a use as modern workstations, Web apps are great as part of a greater computing environment, and tablets and smartphones are on their way to becoming the new style of computing, augmented with smart peripherals. The Chromebook Pixel is none of these, and it fits poorly in both the traditional and modern notions of computing.

This article, “Chromebook Pixel? Beautiful and wrong,” was originally published at InfoWorld.com. Read more of Galen Gruman’s Smart User blog. For the latest business technology news, follow InfoWorld.com on Twitter.