Google's Chrome OS revealed

[FloatingFatMan]

On the contrary, you seem to be the one confused. I said i can visibly tell difference up to around 200fps/htz. By that i meant the refresh rate is 200htz and the program onscreen is performing at 200fps or more. In other words, i'm not just noticing tearing, because there is none.

FPS (frames per second), and htz are NOT the same thing. The human eye CANNOT see the difference above 25-30 fps due to persistence of vision, but it CAN see the difference between refresh rates of 60htz and 75htz.

[undu]

The "fps gaming" problem lies that the input lag in a game running at 40 fps is much bigger than on a game running at 60 fps, that's why on multiplayer games need high fps to be played smoothly, it doesn't have anything to do with "my eyes see/ don't see single frames at X fps".

Now, geting on topic, The main issues with chrome OS are that the web is not really suited yet to handle desktop computing and that in many places wireless internet connection are not that easy/cheap to come by.

This OS succes rests in that web cloud develops provide any desktop computing services and the cloud is accessible anywhere, anytime, things that google can't control, which I see as a terrible flaw, either way I'll follow the developement process to see how it turns out :)

[FloatingFatMan]

I personally don't see Cloud computing going anywhere until there is free, national WiMax coverage everywhere.

[hdood]

Which ones would those be?

Don't expect an answer.

[PurePhoenix]

Don't expect an answer.

Don't expect to proof that you're right either. There's absolutely no point in explaining something when there's a damn good chance he's not going to understand anyway.

[hdood]

Don't expect to proof that you're right either. There's absolutely no point in explaining something when there's a damn good chance he's not going to understand anyway.

He just asked you to name some of the "majority of encryption algorithms" that have fixed keys. He isn't going to understand it? What?

Either you can simply answer the question, or we can just add it to the list of your incorrect statements in this thread.

I stand by my previous statement on the subject, which was:

Again, no, it doesn't. What takes time is brute force cracking the encryption. Even with a short 128-bit key (which is the smallest key safe today), there are 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,456 possible combinations. Multiply this by the time it takes to check each key, and you will see that it simply is not possible to perform such a brute force attack. The only potential for breaking it is if there is a flaw in the encryption scheme, and this is far more likely to be the case for a closed proprietary solution than an open and peer reviewed one.

I'm not sure what I have to "proof" I'm right about.

[PurePhoenix]

You have to prove everything you claim now, yuo've been proven wrong too many times. I haven't. That's the difference. Your opinion does not equal fact. I provided facts proving i'm not wrong in previous posts outside of this thread. I don't need to sustain my reputation to you or anyone - i don't lie and i don't post innaccurate crap, taht's already been proven.

Now if you doubt my words, prove the GoogleOS uses a different decryption key for each user - and that key isn't in the open-source code.

[hdood]

You have to prove everything you claim now, yuo've been proven wrong too many times. I haven't.

Nonsense. Your earlier claim that most videos can't be accelerated because they use non-standard bitrates and resolutions was a factually incorrect statement. It's simply one wrong claim of a long list. As is your earlier claim about the need to maintain a constant 60/80 FPS, which is purely personal opinion and not a fact (in fact, most people do fine with much less).

Now if you doubt my words, prove the GoogleOS uses a different decryption key for each user - and that key isn't in the open-source code.

No, you provide some examples of the "majority of encryption algorithms" that have fixed keys. Your claim, your onus. You show that Google uses a fixed key for anything. Again, the onus is on you, because it was your claim. It is not our job to disprove it.

[PurePhoenix]

Yes it is your job. Quite trying to dodge responsibility just because you can't prove your opinion.

[hdood]

Huh? Do you live in backwards land or something?

I haven't made any claim nor stated any opinion about Google's encryption. You made the claim that the "majority of encryption algorithms" have fixed keys, and are implying that Google's OS does as well. This isn't my claim, it's your claim. I don't have to disprove it, you have to prove it. Why won't you? Why do you keep dodging it?

[Fred Derf Veteran]

I personally don't see Cloud computing going anywhere until there is free, national WiMax coverage everywhere.

Now that I do agree with. I'd buy this product as soon as it was available if I wasn't concerned about usage charges and monthly download caps. 3G internet service isn't cheap in this country and WiFi isn't everywhere. On a product like this, partial Wifi coverage (moving from hotspot to hotspot) just doesn't cut it.

If I lived, worked and played downtown then I'd consider paying $29 a month for OneZone Wifi coverage:

[ichi]

There's absolutely no point in explaining something when there's a damn good chance I'm going to be proved wrong.

There, I fixed it for you ;)

[PurePhoenix]

http://www.mycrypto.net/encryption/crypto_algorithms.html

Read, only one of the top six allows you to use a customised key.

The algorithm never changes. Values != algorithm.

Learn to read & comprehend a post.

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=define%3...lient=firefox-a

Definitions of algorithm on the Web:

* a precise rule (or set of rules) specifying how to solve some problem

FPS (frames per second), and htz are NOT the same thing. The human eye CANNOT see the difference above 25-30 fps due to persistence of vision, but it CAN see the difference between refresh rates of 60htz and 75htz.

You i forgot about. Don't you dare argue with me. I worked at an internet cafe with many of australias' best gamers and the worlds best Half-Life Death Match player.

Trying to tell me that it's impossible is like trying to tell me the sky doesn't look blue most of the time.

[0nyX]

FPS (frames per second), and htz are NOT the same thing. The human eye CANNOT see the difference above 25-30 fps due to persistence of vision, but it CAN see the difference between refresh rates of 60htz and 75htz.

Nonsense. Your earlier claim that most videos can't be accelerated because they use non-standard bitrates and resolutions was a factually incorrect statement. It's simply one wrong claim of a long list. As is your earlier claim about the need to maintain a constant 60/80 FPS, which is purely personal opinion and not a fact (in fact, most people do fine with much less).

/\ /\ /\

FACTS

+1

It is a fact that the human eye can not notice the difference from 25fps and above.Also a screen's refresh rate is different then the FPS you get in a game which is what i am reffering to.

If someone thinks Hz and FPS are the same thing then he shouldnt be allowed to use a pc.

Edited November 24, 2009 by 0nyX

[leedogg]

I thought google already had a 'cloud' OS which they developed to host/run google? It basically allowed them to add or swap new/old pc's in/out of the network without disruption or loss of data. Sortof like an OS@home network

[hdood]

http://www.mycrypto.net/encryption/crypto_algorithms.html

Read, only one of the top six allows you to use a customised key.

Ignoring the fact that those aren't the top six, none of the algorithms in the list use a fixed key. Not a single one.

The algorithm never changes. Values != algorithm.

Learn to read & comprehend a post.

Why would the algorithm change? The algorithm doesn't need to change, the keys do. That's how encryption works.

/\ /\ /\

FACTS

+1

I don't know why you're quoting me, because I haven't claimed that humans can't see more than 25 FPS under any circumstances. I don't believe that's true, as the eye is more complicated than that. 25 FPS sounds like just the frame rate they picked to give flicker-less moving images in movies. What I said is that you don't need a constant 80 FPS to game, and in fact most people game with far less than that. It's kind of like how you can play games just fine on an LCD, even though certain professional gamers insist on using CRTs because they think the delay is unacceptable.

I thought google already had a 'cloud' OS which they developed to host/run google? It basically allowed them to add or swap new/old pc's in/out of the network without disruption or loss of data

Yes, but that's a professional server system. No use for a home user.

[dead.cell]

It is a fact that the human eye can not notice the difference from 25fps and above.Also a screen's refresh rate is different then the FPS you get in a game which is what i am reffering to.

Uh, I'm definitely not sure about you, but I can surely tell the difference between 25 and 60. Hell, even 40-60 is still a bit noticeable. Around maybe 50 or 55 and up though, the game becomes very smooth to the point that I can no longer see the difference at all. I'm not exactly sure how to describe it other than the animations simply being very smooth and comforting to look at, which is how I know I've hit the sweet spot with or without the fps meter going.

I've sorta just jumped in the conversation here and realize I may be off-topic, for which I do apologize. I just seriously don't agree with the idea of someone saying just how "impossible" it is to notice the difference beyond 25 frames a second. :/

Now, whether or not you can tell the difference beyond 60 fps, that perhaps is another story. At the very least, I know I don't really see any difference...

[0nyX]

Ignoring the fact that those aren't the top six, none of the algorithms in the list use a fixed key. Not a single one.

I don't know why you're quoting me,

Because i 100% agree with the facts you are providing therefore i agree with you and FloatingFatMan :)

[cropcircles]

I know it just came out and it will continue to develop. Loaded it up on VirtualBox and signed in and its the Chrome browser ! So basically its a browser based on everything will be stored on the internet "cloud" technology. No desktop just a OS for the mobile culture. I don't get it!

[darth_mark]

Don't mind me, just enjoying watching PurePhoenix crash and burn ITT.

What? Google Chrome OS? What's that?

[ichi]

http://www.mycrypto.net/encryption/crypto_algorithms.html

Read, only one of the top six allows you to use a customised key.

The algorithm never changes. Values != algorithm.

Learn to read & comprehend a post.

Of course the algorithm of an algorithm never changes, that's why they are called "algorithms" and not "mutating pieces of code".

The key does change, though, and that's what was being discussed. If the algorithm is proven strong obscurity is irrelevant: you just can't break it with the current existent computing power. Maybe you could bruteforce them 20 years in the future with some quantum computers or whatever, but it's not like something you do with ChromeOS today would be relevant then.

Far from the claimed "half the work done", anyway.

[hdood]

Hmm..

[guru]

wish google had put more efforts on Android than this. Android could have been the base to run chrome+ they are calling an OS.

[PurePhoenix]

I was exasperated with this a long time ago since retards clearly refuse to read.

I was reminded of it though and decided to point something out that yet again hdood you ignored.

Customised key. As in, the end user gets to pick thier own key that they made.

Randomized key generation and assingment doesn't qualify as custom.

[Cy-Kill]

wish google had put more efforts on Android than this. Android could have been the base to run chrome+ they are calling an OS.

I have a strange feeling that Android & Chrome OS will become one.