I don't have any firsthand experience either, bowser. I can only comment on what I know about the concept of chromebooks.

As I understand it, they're basically hardware-based Web browsers. They don't run programs themselves, but rely on Web servers to run the applications; for example, a chromebook would work well with the Google Office suite that mimics the functions of Microsoft Office, but delivered through a Web browser. Your documents and data, in almost all cases, would be stored out on Web servers and not on the chromebook. The hardware is usually state-of-the-art, except for storage, which means you can plug in webcams and microphones and other accessories to get a pretty rich experience.

There are obvious downsides, like the loss of control of your data. The plus sides are relatively low cost, and that vaunted 8-second startup time. They seem to be catching on in education, perhaps in part because the dependency on a Web server lets the educational institution control what the kiddies can do with it.

I'll admit that my purchase of a tablet earlier in the year, and my undiminished enthusiasm for it, biases me toward this argument: The chromebooks were an experiment in a direction similar to a tablet, as an inexpensive and portable computing device. For a while the chromebooks offered features well ahead of tablets...a couple of years back. But rapid development in the tablet field, goosed by Apple, has closed the gap and I'm of the opinion that a tablet now beats a chromebook hands down. A tablet offers the same small package, the capable hardware with expansion ports, the Internet connection, the Web browser, and the ability to run your own applications and store gobs of data right there on your device (typically 32 gigs of SD card memory, but also USB Flash drives). I can't imagine why I'd pay about the same to get less.

That's my theoretical opinion of the concept, without having any personal experience using a chromebook. Take it well-salted with caveats.