This is a terrible page and the product manager of this thing should be ashamed.
The inmates are truly running the asylum. The technical specs are completely irrelevant to the interests of the majority of consumers. This page needs to show what this is capable of without the foreknowledge of what Chrome OS is or is capable of or what Googles other offerings are.
Sell me a story! Tell me why my life is going to be better with it.
What most people going to ask:
Can I use my social networks?
Can I do my internet banking?
Can I get my photos off of my camera and share them?
What about my music?
Can I watch movies?
How about spreadsheets and word documents?
So, we're looking at a relatively deep link, which assumes the reader has been shown the main OS features and is looking for which specific product to buy. That said, I agree that this page doesn't do much except show pretty pictures and throw out a few tech specs, and won't sell the product on its own.
When I search Google for chromebox the first result is the link that was submitted. I concur: it is a terrible landing page for a product. Consider the first page results for things like macbook, ipad, or mac mini and you can see where the failure lies. They do, after all, have control of search results, don't they?
It's nuanced UI-related. There's a lot of psychology involved to understand the holistic effects. You need to include things like someone's brand perception into deciding how effective a UI will be, such as trusted brands will let someone assume that what they are looking at is trustworthy - and therefore of enough value for them to care and look further into it / to get interested.
It's the brand of the company that matters; It's the foundation for what a user will expect, and will let them trust what they are seeing in front of them as valuable to them - prior to even knowing anything specific about it.
I'd say a lot more goes into a company's revenue than two single product landing pages. Don't use Apple's earnings as justification for all it's actions.
McDonald's sells the most burgers in the world, that definitely means it's the best in everything burger-related right?
Most likely, your desktop would have to print gold to make up for the difference in your power bill compared to a ChromeBox too. My desktop needs a couple hundred watts; my Google TV box needs closer to 10. Running a full-size desktop where you don't need the power is equivalent to a voluntary subscription fee versus a one-time payment.
I'd be curious to compare your time from power off, to viewing a web page.
They're very different machines, with very different goals. If you compare the components, then yes, it probably doesn't make any sense for you to get a Chromebox. If you look at the features they both have, then it might make more sense.
If I were buying a machine for my grandmother, I'd buy the Chromebox over your $377 desktop, in a heartbeat.
It's still not good enough for me, though it is a million times better.
"Go fast". The set top Androids are also pretty fast. Also, as someone said, who reboots these days? (though it's a selling point for a media player replacement)
"Stream HD movies without a hitch", ok, that's a selling point, though my cheap Android phone does well enough on "good enough" quality, so I'd expect the Android set top boxes or equivalents to do just as well.
"Go straight online to creating, sharing and enjoying. Chrome devices come with built-in apps for editing photos, creating documents and presentations, and video chat, so you can get everyday tasks done right out of the box."
Ok, though the Android boxes do that too.
"Google+ Hangouts. You can also integrate multiple chat accounts with apps like imo or eBuddy. "
Not a selling point for me (what is a Hangout?)
Edit: I tried explaining myself. Why the downvote instead of a rebuttal? (I can accept those)
Apple is great at identifying context. A lot of people don't realize that Apple does "sell specifications", because they're mostly exposed to Apple's advertising, which rarely uses specification. However, when you get to their website, they recognize that you're probably looking for more detail. That shows an understanding of context.
There's another contextual difference they play as well. Have a look at their pages for traditional computing hardware, then have a look at their pages for iOS devices.
Notice the difference in pitch? There are even identifiable differences in the iPhone/iPod Touch and iPad pages. Which one is closer to a traditional computing device? The iPad. Which page is more specification oriented? The iPad.
A lot of lip service is given to Apple's avoidance of specification, but I think too many people treat it as a black & white scenario: you either do talk about specification, or you don't. Like many stereotypes, this focuses on the wrong distinction. It's not a matter of do or don't, but a matter of when and why. Specification isn't the best way to get customers interested in your product, but once the customer is in the door, you do need to be prepared to communicate the specifications clearly and in a relatable way. Apple is very adept at identifying that transition and guiding the customer on their way to a sale.
Most consumers don't even know what an Intel Atom CPU is. A large portion might have some vague brand awareness of Intel, though, so mentioning Intel is good in general. For a consumer product to succeed you can't sell it and market it to only people who know the difference between different processors. That's a very small group of people.
Intel "Core" is a brand that's got nice soft rounded-rectangles and friendly blue lettering. It's designed to appeal to consumers. They don't have to know what it is exactly, they just have to recognize it and buy it.
But Apple's page doesn't give nearly as much focus to the tech specs as Google's does. Most of the page "above the fold" is given over to a description of what it can do and the details they do give are more about relative improvements (2x faster, etc.) than raw numbers. The specs are available and it's clear where to see them but they're not the first thing the eye is drawn to.
Apple spends time on different kinda of specifications.
Instead of listing how much it can compute, they talk about how big it is (x inches by y inches by z inches), relative speed improvements (which aren't useful since the consumer may have no idea how slow or fast the prior one is), lots of specs around the price (price is a specification), what kind of I/O it has (thunderbolt), the processor (just not the Ghz), the graphics part (just not which model, but strangely they list the CPU speed over there -- and of course it's the rated speed for the more expensive model) then some generic statements about which Apple software you can run on it.
But because some people still want to have an idea of what it can compute they still offer
Perhaps they should change the emphasis. But IMHO they should change it in the way that maximizes conversions.
What I took offense at was the suggestion that the specs are irrelevant and by consequence should not be shown _at all_.
(Also note that on my screen, the "fold" is below the Core i5/i7, Radeon HD and Thunderbolt blurbs. Meanwhile even above that, it emphasises "2x faster processors", "Thunderbolt I/O", "upgradeable memory", as well as physical size and software.)
Good spotting. But I think Apple's desktop OS is already quite familiar to most people. Chromebox is offering quite a radically different experience that needs to be communicated.
I really would like to know 'what' a Chromebox does as opposed to 'how' it does it. Whereas with a Mac product I'm more interested in the 'how'.
No one thinks the iPad 3 is too slow and any modern Atom processor is quite a lot faster so it shouldn't be a problem at all. These machines are extremely limited by the OS so hardware limitations are a distant concern in my opinion.
Is that what it is? That's certainly not clear from the "landing page". I assumed from the form factor that it was some sort of Home Theater PC (HTPC). Honestly.
But the complaint (and a legit one I feel) is that this page is the opposite. This page has very little information that techies want (as seen by all the complaining here.)
Are we reading the same complaint, or is this more a catch-all of complaints? The root of this thread says-
Sell me a story! Tell me why my life is going to be better with it.
Those are not details that techies want. It is clearly extolling the mythical Apple advertising (the one where they aren't talking about quad core GPUs and retina displays and 5MP "iSight" cameras) that, supposedly, is lifestyle focused.
The Chromebox is a fast, compact home or office device.
The first sentence describes this as a device not a computer. This seems like a poor choice, as is that the page mentions the word 'computer' not once.
And "device" without context is as appalling word without context. When I was an editor I always banned it without context, telling the writers "Would you use the word 'thingy'? Because that's what you've just called it."
Exactly, this is why I always tell people that if you let technical people run companies you'll run into huge failures like you see with companies like Google and Facebook.
That's not the first page of the site, It's a link to a spec page comparing the different models available.
IMHO, it doesn't differ significantly from this page: http://www.apple.com/ipad/specs/
I disagree (mostly). Technical specs do tell you what a device is capable of.
However, putting the specs up front and not under the specs tab (which is strangely almost empty) is poor. The overview should be pushed up to the top and expanded upon a la Apple's products pages.
Even with all the specs, there's one I care about that's not on here, how much can I store on the device? All the USB ports aren't doing me any good if I can't jam my photos or some movies onto it.
how much can I store on the device? All the USB ports aren't doing me any good
I think you're completely missing the point of ChromeOS. You're not supposed to jam photos or movies onto it. It's a web browser in box. Google Docs/Drive, Youtube, Picasa. These are all available on the first boot. Ford doesn't advertise how far their cars can go when driven off a cliff because it's a car, not an airplane. You can't fault them for that.
That's seriously underpowered. My phone holds more than that and considering the expectation that they've set (not mentioning cloud storage at all) horribly low for what looks like a home computer.
As tech geek it's not clear to me what the "device"'s capabilities are. Is it running Linux? Can you install your own OS? Is it a PC? Is it a console? Is it a TV with with browsing capabilities? The page is very vague on that.
The only clear thing is that you plug mouse/keyboard/monitor in it, but that's it. I'm not sure what exactly that "device" is and does.
> The Chromebox is a fast, compact home or office device.
If it's aimed at tech geeks, what does it do that we're not already able to do with our myriad of existing devices?
I noticed that it conveniently comes with a remote desktop utility.. you know, in case you want to do something other than use Gmail or Google Docs with it. And you're too comfortable in your chair to just go to your real computer.
Indeed.. Why would I buy this instead of, for example, a MUCH cheaper Android set top? (as in, four times cheaper).
Does it do anything different?
I'm in tech and I don't know anything about Chrome OS, and I wouldn't buy even if I had disposable income (and I do want a media player/home theater PC someday). Heck, I could probably buy an equivalent Windows-based HTPC for a similar price.
DealExtreme is kind of a crapshoot, quality-wise, IIRC... and this should have a larger community of English speaking users, in terms of community support.
It reminds me "HP Invent" motto. One thing that Mark Hurd made very clear during his tenure was that "invent", at that point, was less than "sell" (or "market", maybe). Hurd's point was that people were spending too much time on the lab and less time talking to customers. "If innovation is fuel, selling it is oxygen".
The imagemap to the right of the specs is horrible as well, you have to hover over their tiny "+" icons to see the quick selling points which are actually of interest to consumers. Saying "boots in 7 seconds" is great, but only if the user can see it right away.
At this stage in its life, the Chromebox is most certainly geared to people who very much care about specs. It is not going to be Sally Average who's signing up for one, and really if they did they would likely be disappointed.
Come on Google, use an ARM processor, make it a dongle with a HDMI plug that attaches to the majority of cheap LCD displays, and price it at $99 or free with the first year (per seat) of a Google Apps Enterprise Account.
Now add a local ActiveDirectory proxy as a stadalone router-like box and hit Microsoft where it hurts. (Before Larry does).
The inmates are truly running the asylum. The technical specs are completely irrelevant to the interests of the majority of consumers. This page needs to show what this is capable of without the foreknowledge of what Chrome OS is or is capable of or what Googles other offerings are.
Sell me a story! Tell me why my life is going to be better with it.
What most people going to ask: Can I use my social networks? Can I do my internet banking? Can I get my photos off of my camera and share them? What about my music? Can I watch movies? How about spreadsheets and word documents?