Slashdot Mirror
Be-Alike: BlueOS Uses Linux For Its Kernel
OSBlue writes "A few days ago, news emerged regarding the OpenBeOS project, while now there is more information regarding the other effort to 'save' BeOS, BlueOS. BlueOS uses the Linux kernel 2.4.12 and Xfree as as the base of their OS. For now, they are building a BeOS look-alike Interface Kit and BeOS app_server on top of XFree, so it is not just a simple window manager, but a whole new API and environment. In future versions, the BlueOS team will completely bypass XFree and have a stand alone BeOS compatible app_server which will only use some of the XFree's system calls to be able to use its 2D/3D drivers. Guillaume Mailard, team leader in the BlueOS project gives more information in an interview to OSNews."
BeOS was great because it was smooth, quick, responsive, and different from other OSes.
Now these developers have opted for (surprise surprise) a Linux based system.
How many OSes need to be based off Linux? It seems these days someone gets an amazing idea for a new OS, and instead of working from the ground up to realize it, they just decide to make another incantation of Linux.
Seems there are all these projects going on now for new "alternative" OSes. I can't think of them as an alternative when it's still based off Linux. So much for being creative or original.
Why not just help finish the DirectFB [directfb.org] and then keep everything native on linux.
*cough*
Not to get all flamey, but this project gives me somewhat of a bad taste in my mouth. I understand that Linux is the main driving force in the open-source world today, and that many current open-source projects are being actively developed by Linux users for Linux users. I am very thankful that many of these folks choose to make their works of art (software) portable to other Unix systems.
However, Unless DirectFB can be emulated somehow on non-Linux systems, the amount of Linux-centric software which will not be portable to other Unix platforms may begin to grow (depending on the popularity of DirectFB).
Right now, I'm very happy with portable X-based tools such as LyX, Gaim, and Mozilla - to only name a few. Without Linux, I beleive these projects would not be as popular as they are right now. As soon as projects like these that provide such useful functionality come to depend on DirectFB, I will be very disappointed if I am unable to run them on my choice of OS - which very often does not end up being Linux.
So anyhow, after this extensive rant, I hope I am not the only one that is a bit weary of DirectFB becoming the de-facto standard of newcoming Linux graphical application developers.
Yeah, but if they replaced X, they would have to write new graphics drivers (or extract the code from those X drivers that are Open Source). This would be a much bigger task... maybe something for the future. Wrapping around X seems a sensible first step to me.
The real main strength of BeOS is its very good kernel, excellent multi-processing ability, its Filesystem and multimedia ability. I think that if someone really wants to save BeOS, save the Be Filesystem first.