Slashdot Mirror

U forgot freedows (formerly @ freedows.com). Try again.
U could try reactOS 2.
HAND

This reminds me of the Freedows project. It's odd that, after years of hype for Freedows (an os that would run MacOS, *nix, Windows, other) programs, parallel to each other and at the same time, using one microkernel, their website has now become a pr0n gateway. Original concept here.

Silly girl, there's a reason why Berlin will never succeed.

It's the same reason why other Open Source projects like the HURD, GGI, and Freedows are going nowhere fast: Too much design, not enough code.

Too often, non-programmers (or worse random C newbies) will propose some absurdly difficult endevour ("Just imagine: an Open Source version of Microsoft Office 2000! On my PalmPilot!"). Usually, this will be followed by the registration of a .org domain name, a SourceForge page, and a "0.01" announcement on Freshmeat. Occasionally, one of these ideas will be taken too seriously. Web pages will be written and re-written. Mailing lists will be created. White papers will be written. Developer hierarchies will emerge. Often, one sub-groups ego will be bruised, and they will splinter off to form some equally vaporous project.

But what never happens is code being written. APIs might be formalized, but that is worthless without working code. The most succesful projects (such as GNU, the Linux kernel, the BSDs, KDE, and GNOME) were founded on the "shut up and code" model. The authors spent time hacking rather than writing press releases or yet another web site revision, or the checking the latest PDF copy of the Offical Project X Standard for Widget Frobbing into a CVS mirror. And who gives us results?

Berlin is a pipe dream. A nice dream, perhaps, but so are many others.

I've been interested in stuff like this since I first heard about The Freedows Project sometime in 1998. I just think this kind of stuff is fascinating. I used to wonder if it would be possible to simulate the entire hardware platform, instead of just the operating system. Then VMware came out and answered me.

Now we've got a free-software version. Go, GNU, Go!

We've already been over this:

Freedows: www.freedows.org
Alliance OS: www.allos.org
(Alliance OS broke off from Freedows because of lack of progress and dissatisfaction with the "management"; see the Slashdot article above).
ReactOS (an NT clone): www.reactos.com

Or, Freedows? Or, for a completely different argument, haven't they ever heard of OpenWindows, Sun Microsystems' implementation of X11 (also, Sun's name for their OPEN LOOK desktop environment/session-manager)? Sun might consider this an abuse of their trademark (even though they're trying to sink the OPEN LOOK ship and embrace bletcherous CDE and Motif, instead).

Two things to say:

1. The FreeDOWS project was started a while back to do the same thing. As far as I know, the FreeDOWS project died, but I could be wrong.

2. (1) The name choice was not the best in the world, Sun Microsystems created "OpenWindows" for their SunOS operating system. They may want to change it.

-David

The fine people of Freedows are already trying something along this line. The project seems to be stalled, though..

I'm so glad that Palm decided to add more memory by increasing RAM from 2 to 8 megabytes. Now it's on the same level as my '95 x486/DX laptop which runs FreeDows, a much inferiour OS to what Palm uses. Great. my 1200 dollar (in Jan, 95) system is kicked by a 500-odd dollar overclocked BookMan(R)!

Freedows I once heard that they would get something out, at least an alpha in 1998, then 1999, then 2000. The Cache Kernel idea is a good one.

If only IBM, Dell, Gateway, Compaq, or some other computer company would help out, it might be a decent OS.

With the Application Kernels it was supposed to run DOS (FreeDOS actually), Linux, C64, TRS-80 COCO, Macintosh, and Windows 3.X with the possibility of 32 bit Windows code. If this puppy ever sees market and gets ported to the X86, PowerMac, 68K, CHRP/POP etc platforms, it could give Microsoft a run for its money.

I'm sure this question will be asked more than once... But here I go.

We have all been long waiting for the HURD kernel. Some of us have read a bit about it, and -no doubt- it sounds very, very good. Now, HURD has been in pre-beta stages for several years already. Do you think that Linux has acted as a negative effect for the HURD development? Many developers, in my opinion, prefer adding features or polishing existing ones in an already-working and very popular system than hacking the most obscure bits of a system which may never see the light.

On the other hand, being the HURD as modular as I understand it is (and please don't flame me, I am not very much into the guts of operating systems, and what follows may be nonsense), do you think it will be possible to port some modules from the Linux kernel to the HURD?

And, as a last point, about other free OS efforts... What future do you see in them? I'm not talking about the classic Linux/*BSD systems, but about another radical attempts at something undone, such as Freedows.

Heheh...I remember back in 96 or so, they advertised it as Freedows98 (Not just a snack anymore), because they thought that they'd have complete emulation by 1998. But not just of Windows. No, no with the Stanford Cache Kernel, they'd be able to emulate every operating system known to man, in just a few years.

What do they have to show for it? Well http://www.freedows.org/ is a pretty spiffy web site. Translated to a whole buncha languages. But there's no code. There's not even any specifications. And of course, years ago a group broke of from them to form ReactOS, which is supposed to be compatible with NT. Right now, all they have is a small kernel and the beginnings of a command shell. There's also Alliance OS, which like Freedows, is based on the Caching Kernel idea. It also has a nice web site, but very little code.

Seems like that's how most ambitious projects end up. Moral of the story? No matter what they say, most 14 year olds can't code worth a damn, let alone write an operating system. The Freedows team wasted their time doing stupid stuff like writing a C library from scratch. And still, after so many years, they have nothing. That's what I call pathetic.

Support your local Freedows maintainers! I have never used the product, but I certainly understand and respect the motive behind the idea, as it falls into the same category as FreeDOS and DR-DOS as being (viable?) alternatives to commercial OS's such as Windows.

Also, some backing for open source word programs would be extremely useful. =)

EraseMe

The plan is for the first release to support Linux and part of Windows. In later releases, they want to add more Windows support, and MacOS. Also, there doesn't seem to be anything about it on their new site, but the old site listed the C64 and several consoles, among others as other possible emulation modes.

Finally, they plan to port GCC, so you'll be able to write native programs, too.

That comparison of emacs to Word was pretty bizarre, but I give him bonus points for being willing to point out that NT and Linux are examples of hopelessly obsolete technology, but with the Freedows project making no visible progress, we don't seem to have any real alternatives.