Chrome OS is completely browser-centric & cloud-centric. While Android is a small device OS oriented to phones. Android also supports installing 3rd party applications, which my guess is Chrome doesn't.
I assume that Chrome OS will completely sync with Chrome on the desktop. This means that if you're working on your web-based apps on your computer, you'll be able to pick up your Chrome tablet and seamlessly continue the work and then switch back again.
Why couldn't that be done approximately as well on, say, Android, though? I don't see any particular reason why I'd pick a device based around Chrome OS when that device could run Android instead which seems able to do everything that Chrome OS can do and more.
In other words: what do Chrome OS's limitations add to the experience? It's interesting from a technical standpoint to build a fully-functioning system with Chrome OS's limitations, but how does it make a better product?
Android also supports installing 3rd party applications, which my guess is Chrome doesn't.
If that is true, then Chrome will certainly be violating the spirit if not the letter of software - "free software" that only allows you to do things on server controlled by someone else...
It's not so much that it solves a problem as much as that it presents an experience that some people want.
It is _exactly_ what I've wanted since netbooks came into existence, and I've put a lot of hours into setting up stripper Arch setups that do this.
Is it better than anything else on paper? No, but on paper isn't the only way to measure things (to the chagrin of us engineers). Sometimes less is more.
