TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Chromebox, now for simpler and better meetings

259 点作者 slb超过 11 年前

39 条评论

aiiane超过 11 年前
It&#x27;s only mentioned briefly in the blog post, but one of the biggest wins with this system (and the aspect that I absolutely love when using it internally at Google) is the simplicity of screen sharing into a meeting. Anyone who wants to present can simply join the hangout from their laptop and then share their screen. Not only does it mean you don&#x27;t have to fuss with cables&#x2F;adapters (which can also break&#x2F;wear out), it also means that if someone wants to share something while someone else is presenting, you don&#x27;t have to disconnect and reconnect various computers; the other person just shares their screen as well (and&#x2F;or the first temporarily stops sharing their screen). It also means you don&#x27;t have to have dedicated rooms for presenters - someone in a remote office can present from their laptop to a meeting room elsewhere.<p>Having a meeting that doesn&#x27;t involve slides? The meeting organizer can just throw up the meeting agenda with a click or two - or if it&#x27;s in something like a Google Doc, the meeting agenda can even be dynamic, with people adding topics they want to visit as they determine them, and the organizer simply working their way down the agenda as it grows. Add the agenda as an attachment to the google calendar entry for the meeting and people can review&#x2F;add to the agenda ahead of time, and then look back at it after the meeting for a reminder of what was covered.
评论 #7193139 未加载
评论 #7195880 未加载
评论 #7193157 未加载
评论 #7192896 未加载
michaelbuckbee超过 11 年前
I assure you that this is not a joke.<p>The best &#x27;self-contained&#x27; video conference machine I&#x27;ve used in the last year is:<p>1. $400 less up front than the Chromebox<p>2. Has an annual service fee $200 less than the Chromebox<p>3. Has a camera with awesome built in face detection (if one person is in the room it centers on their face, if three people are in it automatically expands to fit them all in, if you wander around the room it follows + refocuses on your face).<p>4. Is voice controlled.<p>5. Plays Lego Marvel Superheroes at 1080p.<p>The XBox One and their Skype integration is really well thought out and solves most of the annoyances surrounding video conferencing, focal length, bad speakerphone mics, etc. highly recommended.
评论 #7192979 未加载
评论 #7192764 未加载
评论 #7192744 未加载
评论 #7193007 未加载
评论 #7192928 未加载
评论 #7193091 未加载
cromwellian超过 11 年前
Google has an internal version of this called GVC and it is hands down better than any other system I&#x27;ve used. The interface is easy and intuitive to use, and being able to screenshare&#x2F;present is as simple as visiting a URL. No installation of anything needed on the part of attendees.<p>Hangouts also allows widespread distribution, so for example, with the GWT team&#x27;s weekly meetings, we have sometimes recorded them, or broadcast them live, and even invited external participants to watch and field questions.<p>You can also do things like run Hangouts Apps (Web Version), that lets people collaborate on documents while having the meeting. We do this with design docs or spreadsheets used for planning so that everyone on the video can edit what we are all watching get presented.<p>Those complaining about the price are speaking from the standpoint of consumers. For someone running a non-trivial business, paying $1000 to get customer support is worth the trouble.<p>If Google weren&#x27;t making any margin on this, then you&#x27;d have to worry about it going away at some point. If you want a healthy assurance that it&#x27;s going to stick around, pay b2b rates.
评论 #7193975 未加载
评论 #7196451 未加载
npongratz超过 11 年前
My employer received a number of pre-release units for testing and feedback. One of my coworkers reviewed it here: <a href="http://blog.cdw.com/hands-on-with-googles-new-chromebox-for-meetings" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.cdw.com&#x2F;hands-on-with-googles-new-chromebox-for-...</a><p>Edit: HN discussion here: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7192940" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=7192940</a>
mortenjorck超过 11 年前
Serious question, given that this solution appears to be: 1) based around Google Hangouts, and 2) targeted at enterprise customers:<p>Does using it require Google Plus?
评论 #7193025 未加载
评论 #7193146 未加载
评论 #7192883 未加载
评论 #7192880 未加载
VikingCoder超过 11 年前
I don&#x27;t get why this is so expensive. What&#x27;s the $250 a year get me?<p>I&#x27;m used to Chromeboxes costing about $300, and web cams cost about $100 for an awesome one. So, $400 makes sense to me...?
评论 #7192495 未加载
评论 #7192888 未加载
评论 #7192534 未加载
评论 #7192557 未加载
评论 #7192665 未加载
评论 #7192502 未加载
radicalbyte超过 11 年前
Chromebox for meetings.. have Google hired Microsoft&#x27;s marketing department from 2005?
评论 #7192682 未加载
etler超过 11 年前
I was wondering where is all the money was going. It&#x27;s clearly the newly announced Asus Chromebox, which starts at $179[1]. I haven&#x27;t seen the high end price, but according to the spec sheet[2], the only difference is the CPU. The price difference here is $820. I couldn&#x27;t imagine the cost difference between a celeron and a mid-range i7 to be much more than $300. That same camera is $75 on amazon, and a similar looking speaker is $90, and I don&#x27;t imagine a RF remote is more than $15. That gets us to about $600, and leaves $220 for the management and support fee.<p>So the hardware cost checks out, but the question is if their support and software is worth $250 a year. They don&#x27;t do a good job explaining what goes into that though. Is the software a proprietary version of Chrome OS? Do you get to use priority servers instead of the normal hangout ones? Does that support fee cover all your chromeboxes, or is that per box? I feel a lot of the value proposition isn&#x27;t being well explained. If it&#x27;s amazing quality, and a great meeting experience, it can easily be worth it, but I&#x27;m not getting the sense of how the experience is better than if you bought the components yourself. A promo video demo would help.<p>[1]<a href="http://promos.asus.com/us/chrome-os/chromebox/" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;promos.asus.com&#x2F;us&#x2F;chrome-os&#x2F;chromebox&#x2F;</a><p>[2]<a href="http://www.asus.com/us/News/xjbJtLA1HEyUSUeo" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.asus.com&#x2F;us&#x2F;News&#x2F;xjbJtLA1HEyUSUeo</a><p>[3]<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Logitech-Webcam-Widescreen-Calling-Recording/dp/B006JH8T3S/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1391721781&amp;sr=8-1&amp;keywords=hd+camera" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Logitech-Webcam-Widescreen-Calling-Rec...</a><p>[4]<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Jabra-SPEAK-510-Bluetooth-Softphone/dp/B00AQUO5RI/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1391721826&amp;sr=8-10&amp;keywords=conference+microphone+speaker" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Jabra-SPEAK-510-Bluetooth-Softphone&#x2F;dp...</a>
评论 #7193182 未加载
akama超过 11 年前
If this is comparable to the Chromecast in terms of ease of use and simplicity while still being able to be a functional product with the features companies need, I could see this being very popular.<p>I love how simple the Chromecast is, it allows everybody to work it with no hassle. I hope this product also accomplishes that goal.
joebo超过 11 年前
As a remote worker, I could see getting something like this for our central office. I need an almost frictionless solution and this sounds pretty close &quot;walk into the room, click the remote once and you’re instantly in the meeting.&quot; My coworkers aren&#x27;t interested in walking into a conference room with their laptop and sending a hangout. It would be useful if it supported multiple cameras somehow - which might break the hangout model. I want one pointed to the table and one pointed to the whiteboard.
评论 #7193413 未加载
评论 #7193028 未加载
评论 #7192790 未加载
rayshan超过 11 年前
This is really cool, unlike other enterprise teleconference vendors, this is single fee up-front and free ongoing.<p>Can you chromecast to a chromebox? If so this can replace the crap load of Apple TVs we have at work, great for the 1&#x2F;2 of folks that&#x27;re on Thinkpads.<p>edit: missed &quot;includes first year&#x27;s $250 management &amp; support fee&quot;
评论 #7192422 未加载
评论 #7192426 未加载
评论 #7193310 未加载
评论 #7192427 未加载
russell_h超过 11 年前
This looks awesome, we use Google+ Hangouts a lot around our office because the &quot;real&quot; VC solution we have barely works.<p>Anyone know if this thing has to be logged into a Google account, or does it get its own address of some sort? Also, is it possible to have a call between two of these devices?
moskie超过 11 年前
Hopefully this price point and target audience is just the beginning (a la Tesla?).<p>I&#x27;d love for it to be simpler for me to arrange Hangouts in my living room, and for now I deal with doing it through an HTPC.... but I&#x27;m absolutely not interested in paying what they&#x27;re charging here. So I hope eventually they introduce a cheaper consumer targeted device.<p>(edit: here&#x27;s hoping the next Chromecast has a way to hook up a webcam...)
评论 #7192552 未加载
评论 #7192672 未加载
erva超过 11 年前
&gt; Need to meet with a customer who doesn’t use Chromebox for meetings? That’s easy too—all they need is a Gmail account.<p>This would be amazing, except no partner or customer our company works with has a gmail account. I have used quite a few different solutions, and while none of them wow me, the one thing all of them did was work for everyone.<p>For this to become a viable solution for this market it will need to include non-gmail users.
评论 #7193154 未加载
评论 #7192662 未加载
rch超过 11 年前
I like that it comes with an integrated camera, but I would like to be able to use an existing A&#x2F;V systems as well. I&#x27;ve been in meeting rooms that already have a camera in every corner, plus one in front on an actuated gimbal. Leveraging that existing hardware would make a lot of sense.
ebcase超过 11 年前
We&#x27;ve cobbled together a rough equivalent of this at work, using a Mac Mini + Hangouts, a Logitech video camera, a wall-mounted flatscreen, and a USB speakerphone. The pieces all work as expected, but it&#x27;s clunky and needs to be better integrated.<p>For example, someone will change the Mac&#x27;s sound IO for whatever reason, then the Hangout audio IO will change and someone else won&#x27;t realize this (e.g. sound comes out of the Mini speaker in the closet, instead of the speakerphone). So a few mins at the start of every few meetings is spent debugging these things.<p>The holy grail everyone wants is, &quot;walk into the room, and it just does the right thing.&quot; This looks like a step in that direction from our current setup.
评论 #7195193 未加载
bluedino超过 11 年前
I wonder how well this works over T1&#x27;s. We have 5 offices that this would work great for, and would be far, far less than the $10k&#x2F;site we paid for LifeSize video conference systems (excellent, by the way) at the last place I worked.
评论 #7194023 未加载
评论 #7193491 未加载
AjithAntony超过 11 年前
FWIW, The target audience may already be the types who pay for &quot;Chromebooks for Business&quot;:<p><pre><code> Management console &amp; support: $150</code></pre>
Touche超过 11 年前
Really wish Hangouts would switch to WebRTC.
评论 #7192852 未加载
评论 #7192571 未加载
skywhopper超过 11 年前
While this sounds interesting, it seems like a major branding error. Why mix &quot;Chrome&quot; with a meeting-room appliance? Extending the Chrome brand to a browser-UI-based OS makes sense, since your interaction with the OS is basically using the browser. But this...
评论 #7196437 未加载
skyjedi超过 11 年前
Just the next step. First Google offers a cheaper Office solution. Schools, Government, and Businesses fall over themselves to switch. A cheaper, more feature filled, Video Conference solution is just the natural progression.
m0dest超过 11 年前
The remote looks an awful lot like the Boxee remote (RF).<p>Chromebox for meetings: <a href="http://blog.cdw.com/wp-content/uploads/IMG_3940_copy-markup-1024x596.jpg" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.cdw.com&#x2F;wp-content&#x2F;uploads&#x2F;IMG_3940_copy-markup-...</a><p>Boxee remote: <a href="http://www.everythingusb.com/images/list/dlink_boxee_dsm_22_remote_news.jpg" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.everythingusb.com&#x2F;images&#x2F;list&#x2F;dlink_boxee_dsm_22_...</a>
rubiquity超过 11 年前
So regular computers just can&#x27;t cut the mustard at streaming video? I don&#x27;t see the value in a custom hardware product for this and I can&#x27;t quite justify the price tag. It&#x27;s not often that Google creates a product where you say to yourself &quot;Oh, I guess this just wasn&#x27;t created for me&quot; but I think this is one of those rare occasions.<p>Disclaimer: I&#x27;m not a megacorp with millions to spend.
评论 #7192975 未加载
评论 #7192604 未加载
评论 #7193002 未加载
评论 #7192592 未加载
moca超过 11 年前
For those people who complain about $250 annual fee, just think about how much a plain old phone line would cost.<p>Regarding the $750 hardware cost, if you build 15-way video conference system and sell it with $200 operating margin and one year hardware warranty, good luck if you can hit $750 price point. The price will surely go down over time, but it is way cheaper than anything else on the market.
eitally超过 11 年前
For a lot of companies, the biggest benefit here will be having a cheap computer <i>already in</i> the meeting rooms that facilitates wireless screen sharing for any users with any kind of device that can use Hangouts. Compare that to traditional hardware-based VC and the amount of friction this eliminates, especially for non-technical users, is enormous.
wil421超过 11 年前
What would convince an organization to switch for something like Cisco&#x27;s webex?<p>$999 seems like a lot when I can just use my current laptop with a VGA&#x2F;HDMI cable plugged into the TV and then share over webex. And I am not really sure about using hangouts.<p>For video conferencing the price is probably a steal over what the cisco telepresence costs.
评论 #7193470 未加载
pinaceae超过 11 年前
haha.<p><a href="http://h20435.www2.hp.com/t5/The-Next-Bench-Blog/HP-Chromebox-Chrome-simplicity-tiny-desktop/ba-p/87295#.UvQs2V4d3Jg" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;h20435.www2.hp.com&#x2F;t5&#x2F;The-Next-Bench-Blog&#x2F;HP-Chromebo...</a><p>HP just released a Chrome OS device, the HP Chromebox.<p>I wonder who will now change the naming...
评论 #7194272 未加载
higherpurpose超过 11 年前
Does that thing really need a Core i7 processor? (which probably represents half of the component costs)
评论 #7194651 未加载
blcArmadillo超过 11 年前
Anyone else notice that the remote for this thing is almost identical to the boxee box remote?
评论 #7193053 未加载
kasperset超过 11 年前
How does it compare to Blue Jeans? <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Jeans_Network" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Blue_Jeans_Network</a>
fizzbar超过 11 年前
Huh. Can anyone think of why this <i>isn&#x27;t</i> going to totally dominate the videoconference space in a few years? Cheaper + works better == huge win, no?
hrjet超过 11 年前
If something is very cheap and provided by a company focused on advertisements based on user data, I am going to be skeptical. What&#x27;s in it for Google?
dangerboysteve超过 11 年前
Tell you what google, why don&#x27;t you the service for few years before I sign up to make sure you want to keep the offering.
评论 #7194007 未加载
cnaut超过 11 年前
Google is eating Microsoft&#x27;s lunch
fidotron超过 11 年前
Great, but any company big enough to be in the market for this should probably not be using Hangouts to hold meetings in.
评论 #7192434 未加载
评论 #7192413 未加载
rocky5超过 11 年前
Is it available only in U.S ?
perlpimp超过 11 年前
if this is google hangouts implementation, I sure hope they have fixed the problem with autogain.when we used hangouts volume always crept up until feedback loop appeared, there is no way to turn it off in the settings. we switched to skype that handles this sort of thing well.
评论 #7192608 未加载
Zenst超过 11 年前
I read this and remember back in the late 90&#x27;s when Videoconferenceing was moving away from expensive ISDN lines into the internet and thoughts of H.320 and respective document sharing (slides as this does) add-ons and extensions gave a usable platform albeit not cheap. That changes, video compression and codec onto chips came to market and got cheaper and cheaper.<p>Now some 15 years later after many flavours, Google now offer the option but not just a feature push, but on a slow, methodical gradual feature addition which has seen the progress from VOIP&#x2F;IM chat into video, into group video into a public contact phone book (aka Google+) of today. Then into a rebrand and now just polishing to the lowest common denominator of user in userbility (I personaly prefered ealier Gmail and chat clients, but that&#x27;s me and other quirky geeks I suspect).<p>So why is this big or important more too the point. Well If you view ChromeOS and its features to a modern revamp of the `dumb` terminal (that were not that dumb and could do Various terminal standards and on mainframes even form validation for numeric and alpha feilds and size of input back in the 80&#x27;s.<p>Now duringt he 80&#x27;s a company called SInclair released there next ZX Spectrum replacement which ICL modified and released the OPD (One Per Desk). This was featurewise in mahy respects what a user today wants in a terminal, even had phone built in, though no video back in the 300baud data days.<p>So too me I see ChromeOS and the slow but sure feature set grow, as the new terminal for the cloud - aka cluster&#x2F;distributed mainframes we use thesedays. After all everything goes in circles, even technology approach. I know people can and do view webbrowsers as the terminal of our times and yes, many would be right, but if you step back a level you would want something with a little more, though not much more and a good interface and mobiles have opened up the whole touch-screen interfacing (was around in the 80&#x27;s, just not as cheap and usable) and for many tasks, work very well. But bigger screens always will help upto a point and a real keyboard (although still stuck in a layout that seems like forcing some backwards outdated layout onto new people and children even today, think keyboard-religion). It is with that all in mind for me that make ChromeOS seems like the `dumb` terminal of our times and remember `dumb` terminals are never dumb.<p>Now when you can add via a MCU&#x2F;bridge external VC setups and studios into a hangout is when Google will be truely and finaly solidifying a technology that serves our times and needs and if anything else. Least help stop the UN and other World leaders flying around the World to lecture us mear peons why the climate is in a mess and how we should do our part about carbon emisions, whilst they then fly to the poles for photo shoots to add onto there stories of why climate change is happening.<p>That is what Videoconferencing can truely offer and can, but its main issue has always been taking it serious compared to a jolly&#x2F;plane flight&#x2F;travel for so many mentality wise, again think the same mentalities that give us QWERTY keyboard-religions.<p>One day, but after over 15 years I hope this keeps the momentum and slow but sure approach google has taken so far into Videoconferencing&#x2F;VOIP. Until then we will always have `dumb` terminals and mainframes be they touchscreen clients or clustered machines called a cloud.
pearjuice超过 11 年前
Got to love the ash tray on the table in that picture. Ironic, isn&#x27;t it?<p><a href="https://lh3.ggpht.com/-uD5BuNqI4DA/UvOpyapQheI/AAAAAAAAAOs/NZmVWWW-HDM/s1600/lifestyle_chromemeeting_wireless_CBadd.png" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;lh3.ggpht.com&#x2F;-uD5BuNqI4DA&#x2F;UvOpyapQheI&#x2F;AAAAAAAAAOs&#x2F;N...</a>
评论 #7193381 未加载