Scripps Employees Called 'Hackers' For Exposing Massive Security Flaw
Suspected PayPal Hackers Seek Deal To Stay Out Of Prison
Blump'it: Could a Firefox plugin squash ChromeOS?
Google is positioning its upcoming Chrome Operating System as a browser-based, web-only OS for netbooks. Netvibes founder Tariq Krim's Jolicloud does much the same thing, although it can also run local applications. And Singapore-based company Fusion Garage got a lot of hype earlier this week when it announced that it would bring a web-centric tablet PC called the joojoo to market (despite a threatened lawsuit from TechCrunch and CrunchPad founder Michael Arrington).
But I've been scratching my head for a while, wondering why anyone would want an operating system or device that does so much less than existing options. Sure, if you're primarily interested in using web applications, you don't necessarily need all the bells and whistles that you get with Windows 7 or OS X Snow Leopard. But it's kind of nice to have the ability to save data to your hard drive, edit documents while on an airplane, play video games, or run apps you're used to such as Office or Photoshop.
That's why I'm intrigued by Blump'it. Basically, the company's approach is to offer some of the same features you'd get from Chrome OS or a joojoo tablet, but in the form of a Firefox plugin. Blump'it adds an on-screen keyboard and support for touchscreen gestures to Firefox.
There are also widgets for photos, weather, news, and email. And there's a sort of app store for adding games and other widgets.
Because the whole thing is based on a browser plugin, it should work on any machine that supports Firefox. That includes Windows, Mac, and Linux devices with touchscreen displays. Blump'it is making the plugin available for free if you already have the hardware. But you'll also be able to purchase a tablet from the company's web site.
Blump'it is currently available for Firefox, but the developers say now that Google's Chrome browser supports extensions, they'll be working on a version of Blump'it for Chrome as well.
TechVideoBlog caught up with Blump'it at an event in Paris this week and shot a video overview which you can check out after the break.
[via SlashGear]
Comments
9
Subscribe to commentskojo87Dec 9th 2009 2:19PM
i still haven't made up my mind as if i think ChromeOS is useful or not.
btw: please fix the title
Eric HDec 9th 2009 2:46PM
How much looks interesting!
DaleDec 9th 2009 3:53PM
Blump'it is way too close to blumpkin for my liking.
KeegdnaBDec 10th 2009 7:29AM
Blumpit is way too close to BumpIt for MY liking
sodapopDec 9th 2009 2:54PM
Those of us using iPhones, iTouch etc are more or less very close to a web-only operating systems experience. Plus there are people like my parents who use Yahoo mail and Flickr etc. ... I am even trying to get my Dad to use PS online and/or the Flickr editing tools. We all want light and fast. We are uploading images direct to Facebook. And we are getting used to using app suites such as Google Docs. It's ultra convenient to be able to access your data from any internet capable machine. And a lot less IT headache and cost for an equitable set up than device-based operating systems.
We'll probably always have a second computer for the things you will miss, just the same.
Maybe the web-only operating systems should offer an option to store data locally?
My fantasy is to have the iPhone OS on a laptop (preferably an older Apple G3 or G4 laptop. Tho, the touch screen is a minor hurdle in that scenario.
Eric HDec 9th 2009 2:54PM
how much for that tablet?
techpopsDec 10th 2009 7:29AM
Reading this it almost seems like you ignored all the information that came out recently from Google about ChromeOS.
"But I've been scratching my head for a while, wondering why anyone would want an operating system or device that does so much less than existing options"
It's free, it auto updates itself, probably much better security than Windows or OS X by its very read only nature. Free software ready to go that again needs no updating. Less to learn and therefore easier to use. Based on an already familiar concept, that of the browser that most people understand and it has Googles name to give it credibility which could be witnessed by the feeding frenzy on blogs the world over when Google announced it without actually showing a line of code.
"But it's kind of nice to have the ability to save data to your hard drive, edit documents while on an airplane, play video games, or run apps you're used to such as Office or Photoshop."
HTML5 answers the first part with its offline capabilities. I think we can pretty much assume at this point that data will be available locally as will the apps where it makes sense. I mean that's mostly true right now with web apps from Google.
And as for two industry standard professional applications in Office and Photoshop, they just don't seem relevant to what ChromeOS is as described by Google themselves.
I'm sure there will be alternatives, some good ones you can use right now today, but really good ones in a years time that can use most of the data formats professionals use. Overall for the target audience of ChromeOS powered devices, this doesn't really seem important.
Clearly you're ignoring pretty much everything about ChromeOS so you can sing the praises of some unknown thing, that has as much chance of catching on in the mainstream, as every other me too product that's going to be springing up in the wake of ChromeOS.
MagnaCartaHGDec 10th 2009 7:30AM
"Clearly you're ignoring pretty much everything about ChromeOS so you can sing the praises of some unknown thing, that has as much chance of catching on in the mainstream, as every other me too product that's going to be springing up in the wake of ChromeOS."
Dude, aren't you reading Download Squad? Don't you like downloading new apps and installing them on your computer? I think point that was made by the previous commenter is valid given the context.
The question I have is this: Sure Google Chrome is fast, but you need offline access or it's not a reliable system. But once I'm running these offline versions of websites, aren't I losing the benefit of having big sites with big servers do stuff for me? This isn't a big issue with sites like Google Docs where most of the content is my files, but what about if I want to play games?
We're moving to a period where browsers are gaining a lot of useful upgrades. Flash is hardware accelerated, WebGL will come to browsers, and Opera now has a built in web server and a bittorrent client. Aren't we just building all of the overhead back into the browser?
Power users might not have as much of an interest in using just a browser, but eventually if this becomes the norm, won't I still need a computer good enough to run Photoshop without a server in order to use "Photoshop Online" on a plane? (Or any situation without the internet)
Basically it's hard for me to believe that people won't eventually end up wanting all of the programs that you want to use offline to be available online. I think the browser is faster now, because it's a limited use application, but once you rely on it for your OS, people will want more and developers will have to make more complex applications with more offline overhead.
And no, I don't that mean the average person who only checks their Facebook and E-Mail will be unsatisfied because they can't play Crysis on their netbook. I simply expect the browser to become more complicated as time goes by.
OlivierSeresDec 12th 2009 5:29PM
Thanks Brad for the article. I sent you a mail btw.
The Blump'it ! approach is to offer a useful environnement to get the best out the web in tactile.
IMHO :
1°) tactile UI will lead us to imagine new use cases, different from the PC.
2°) Tablets will not replace Keyboard&mouse PC for long typing and photoshoping that need accuracy
3°) We need a new format for websites, at least including big buttons and gestures
Here an interesting article by Mike Elgan : Hello Tablet, goodbye netboo !ks http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9142162/Mike_Elgan_Hello_tablets._Good_bye_netbooks_