Slashdot Mirror


Review of AtheOS 0.3.7

MAIC-32 writes: "OSNews features a very informative and detailed review of AtheOS, the promising 32-bit GPL Operating System. The article describes the installation process, the GUI (screenshots included), usage, internal design, developement and much more."

172 comments

  1. Too many! by Jeffv323 · · Score: 0, Troll

    There are way too many OS's out there... How many are actually used for anything?

    --
    I'm a minister!
    1. Re:Too many! by Uller-RM · · Score: 4, Informative

      Maybe it's fun to write something for the HELL of it, and not worry about it being useful. I'm sure whoever came up with linked lists back in the 60s was confronted by someone saying "they're so much slower than arrays - what's the point?"

      Who gives a rat's ass if it's not useful to you? It's useful to the author, because he's learned a lot doing it, and he doesn't owe you shit. He probably doesn't give a fuck what you think about it, either.

    2. Re:Too many! by Jeffv323 · · Score: 1

      Jeez, I think you need to remove the stick from your ass next time you reply to a comment. My question was how many OS's out there that get posted to slashdot are actually used in real-world situations. I was not implying that they aren't useful, just wondering how many are actually used.

      --
      I'm a minister!
    3. Re:Too many! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many are actually used for anything Unless I grow an extra pair of hands, the answer will always be 1. Next question.

    4. Re:Too many! by OmegaDan · · Score: 2

      good man :) first rule of art,

      create art for yourself :)

  2. AtheOS takes a Windows approach by nsample · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've always found the AtheOS approach an intriguing one, and quite reminiscent of Windows. They build and optimize for the GUI, rather than the command-line kernel with a GUI built on top (like an X11 + *NIX approach).

    It seems that one of the real growing pains for AtheOS is going to be that it's difficult to capture anything but local desktop users. It's not a good model for remote display; just like Windows.

    At the end of the day, I think it'll be a great desktop OS, but it will have the same growing pains that Windows did with remote display and cross-platfrom compatibility.

    1. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by DavidJA · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It seems that one of the real growing pains for AtheOS is going to be that it's difficult to capture anything but local desktop users. It's not a good model for remote display; just like Windows.

      I don't know about that one, I have a few Win2k servers in a rack that I manage with Terminal Services Client. It works extreamly well, there is nothing that I can not do with Terminal Services that I can do with a keyboard/mouse, even over a 56k dialup.

    2. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by nsample · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sadly, a terminal server doesn't work anything like a remote invocation where the interface is viewed via X. (FYI, I run PCA on all my Windows boxen.) Terminal servers give you a literally view of the remote screen, nothing more. This creates a transmission bottleneck, in that you have to send tonnes of data. It also prevents the wife from compiling her latest kernel release while you're trying to run Xtroids. Like I said, it's a pain that AtheOS will have to eventually outgrow, and as you've reminded us, Windows still hasn't gotten it right.

    3. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by mlinksva · · Score: 5, Informative
      The AtheOS home page says
      "The GUI is server/client like X11 but communicate through the native messaging system and the protocol is private to the server and client library and entirely hidden from the applications."
      So it may not be hard to do remote display.
    4. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by slashnik · · Score: 4, Insightful

      nsample says "They build and optimize for the GUI, rather than the command-line How many users boot Linux straight into X? Wouldn't some of these users apreciate GUI in 6 seconds from boot and browser in 1 second

      Anyone need a thin client?

      slashnik

    5. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by jonnythan · · Score: 1

      Sorry, try again.

      Check out the terminal services in XP. It's most certainly *not* what you think it is, and it rocks.

    6. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by J.+Random+Software · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Terminal services is really only good for remote admin. X's model (any app on any box can ask for a window on your display, and all windows are equal) is much cleaner. When you put an entire virtual display (with yet another window manager) in a window, there are bizzare rules about which events are interpreted as commands by which window manager, and you can't really fit apps on different machines on your real display at once because all your real estate is wasted on remote desktops. Then there are the implementation quirks, like services blocking on modal dialogs you can only dismiss (or even see) by using the main console (VNC is a big win here, though it's awfully high-bandwidth and slow from Win32).

    7. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
      Bear in mind that AtheOS is simply Kurt's project to "scratch an itch" - he isn't concerned at all about "capturing" users or "cornering a market". He's been asked before what direction he sees AtheOS going in - and people have said things along the lines of "you'll have to target a specific market instead of trying to be a one-size fits all approach", or bugged him for new drivers / features. However, he just adds what he wants. The lack of IDE driver seems crazy to most people, but as he says on the AtheOS homepage, it doesn't bother or interest him, so he spends his time on other things.


      It would be great if it did get these features, but at the end of the day, the direction that AtheOS goes in is solely the one that interests Kurt the most.

    8. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by Saint+Stephen · · Score: 3, Informative

      Term Services != PC Anywhere or that other piece of crap x-like thing that AT&T put out.

      Those things do all kinds of wierd stuff with your video drivers, and mirror the default window station on the wire, so they share the same keyboard and mouse. That's a piece of shit.

      Term Services is in a seperate window station (you can TS into the default window station on XP but that will lock the interactive console). Only Windows Server have "real" TS. It compresses on the wire, and uses the characteristics of the remote video card -- the actual video card does't matter, so sometimes the graphics will actually be better than interactive.

      You are *so* wrong.

    9. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by vscjoe · · Score: 1
      I've always found the AtheOS approach an intriguing one, and quite reminiscent of Windows. They build and optimize for the GUI, rather than the command-line kernel with a GUI built on top (like an X11 + *NIX approach).

      I don't know what you mean by "build and optimize for the GUI". UNIX has a lot of command line utilities, but so what? Windows has a lot of command line utilities as well. Both systems can be administered from the command line, from a GUI, or from a web browser. The fact that most Windows users don't know about the command line doesn't seem to reflect on the OS, but on the user community.

    10. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by Thatman311 · · Score: 0

      Actually in the WindowsXP Remote Desktop setup these dialogs are routed to the current session, whether that be a console session or a remote session. So that problem is not existant anymore.

      --
      Silly Rabbit...Sig's are for kids.
    11. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by jilles · · Score: 2

      X11 made sense in the time that client computers were expensive. These days you can have a pretty decent PC for very little money so that largely removes the need for displaying stuff remotely.

      In addition there are now alternative ways to remotely operate a computer. You could use a webserver or use some XML based messaging system (e.g. SOAP). A good example where this is applied is netware from novel. It used to depend on windows for the GUI, but the later versions have a web based GUI. No need for remote display at all.

      So seen in this light, it is a correct design decision not to build network transparency into the GUI since that introduces complexity and performance problems. For legacy X based apps you can always install an X server that runs on top of the GUI.

      --

      Jilles
    12. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by zulux · · Score: 2

      there is nothing that I can not do with Terminal Services that I can do with a keyboard/mouse, even over a 56k dialup.



      How do you send over the Ctrl-Alt-Del when you server does the daily BSOD. Do you have a trained monkey that randomly hits the reset button every hour or so?

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    13. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by Hast · · Score: 1

      Eh? I would hardly call SOAP/XML an alternative to logging onto a remote computer typing "export display:local_ip:0" and then running programs as if I was running them on my own computer. (I have a fat pipe, so I don't notice the lag much.)

      For some things a WWW interface is sufficient, but try eg editing a file that way.

    14. Re: AtheOS takes a Windows approach by Inthewire · · Score: 1

      It compresses on the wire

      Scared me for a second!

      --


      Writers imply. Readers infer.
    15. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by RupertJ · · Score: 1

      Daily reboot? On Windows 2000? I take it that you don't use Windows 2000. I've only ever seen it STOP once. And that was when I was screwing around with the disk drivers. IMHO, it is actually a good operating system. I've been stuck using NT4 at my last workplace and that was a nightmare. If I ever get into any trouble, fire up Compaq Remote Management and away you go. Reboot from there. Easy. Dell and the others offer similar things - Some remote support and management features do not have to be supplied by the O/S.

    16. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by DavidJA · · Score: 1

      How do you send over the Ctrl-Alt-Del when you server does the daily BSOD. Do you have a trained monkey that randomly hits the reset button every hour or so?

      I know I shouldn't feed the trolls but anyway...

      In answer to your question, Ctrl-Alt-Home sends Ctrl-Alt-Delete to the remote machine

      "Daily BSOD?" - Strange, I've got 5 Win2k servers here and not one has BSODed on me since they were originaly setup (some were setup on RC2, then UGed to the production code)

      If your Win2k boxes are BSODing every day, then can I suggest that one of the following are going on:


      1.You are using really cheap, shitty hardware, with faulty RAM.
      2.You have written your own software for it and you are not much of a programmer
      3.You are a really bad at your job as a systems adamin.

      There are an execelent range of books for people just like you, its called the 'For Dummies' collection.

    17. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by Sentry21 · · Score: 2

      You set up the system to dump memory to a tempfile and then reboot automatically. My last NT4 Server install did this out of the box, I assume that W2K Server does this as well. If not, it should be configured to do so.

      --Dan

    18. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you ever use Window2000's terminal client?
      It really fast!

    19. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by zulux · · Score: 2

      I take it that you don't use Windows 2000.


      Well no actually, not for servers. I got sick and tired of the IIS exploit of the week, and made the switch more robust operating systems. It's a good desktop though, a shame they reiened the good design of 3.51 and started cramming the drivers into kernal space for the speed.

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    20. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      .You have written your own software for it and you are not much of a programmer

      Userspace code that can panic an OS? Wow! What a well designed operating system!

    21. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by memyselfandmyhand · · Score: 0

      while it is pretty nice, (It's a bit like a cross between X and VNC. While you still have to use the whole desktop... (AFAIK), it renders windows and widgets on the local machine (or seems to anyway)) But it still has nothing on a X11.

    22. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by hawk · · Score: 2
      >I've only ever seen it STOP once.


      Same here. The other nine times I used it to display powerpoint in a 75 minute class, it did just fine . . .


      no :), i'm serious this time. But it still beat my first experience with NT. "uh, oh, it hung" they told me. When I asked why they didn't kill the offending task, as I'd heard NT could do, they explained that *that* was the one that hung . . .


      hawk

    23. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by J.+Random+Software · · Score: 1

      I'm glad they've worked on it, but I have to wonder which session is "current" for a service none of them started, and whether every service will have a security token that grants access to every session.

    24. Re:AtheOS takes a Windows approach by serial+frame · · Score: 1
      Score: 4, Offtopic

      Since when did a forum like Slashdot make us talk ONLY about the things mentioned in the story? Threads deviate just like everyday conversation. One small thing is mentioned, and then entire conversations spawn on top of them. Just like threads.

      I guess you'll have to mod me down.

      But, hey, to add something on topic, the guys at QSSL (the ones responsible for QNX) do a fine job at this with Photon. Excuse me for pointing out the obvious, but all it would take would be an intermediate layer between the client and server that would proxy info sent back and forth...via TCP/IP.

      --

      -
      And the Angel said unto me, "These are the cries of the carrots! The cries of the carrots!"
  3. What's the point? by Have+Blue · · Score: 0, Redundant

    A new OS is only interesting when it does something that has never been done before. There is no reason to choose AtheOS over any other OS right now.

    1. Re:What's the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey Angst Nazi! Mod this down.

    2. Re:What's the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then neither Linux, the BSD's or Windows are interesting - still all have suceeded.

    3. Re:What's the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AtheOS is the first POSIX compliance OS with a n integrated GUI (ie GUI threads in kernel).

    4. Re:What's the point? by Vanders · · Score: 4, Informative
      Well, lets look at the things AtheOS currently does that are different?

      • AFS (AtheOS File System) is 64bit & journalled. It also supports file attributes, meta data can be attached to your file as an attribute.
      • It has a client/server GUI model, similiar to X, but without the X overhead. The appserver is tightly integrated to the kernel (As apposed to X being loosly integrated to the Unix system)
      • Highlevel IPC is achieved through a flexible message system
      • An integrated, consistent GUI. No multiple toolkits.
      • A C++ API for GUI coding. GUI's & OO go together like bread & butter. Better (IMHO) than GTK+'s "C with objects" approach.
      • Extremly quick. Built from scratch with SMP & multi-threading in mind, and does them well.
      • A sensible kernel architecture. Not purely monolithic, nor anally microkernel. Drivers communicate with the kernel through a well defined API, rather than "becoming" part of the kernel as with Linux. New drivers can be installed & removed at run time just by copying them into a directory, or deleting them.

      I could probably go on, but I won't. There is more on it's way too, specifically the desktop re-write will see some of the sexier features put to good use, and the media framework should rock. Anything specific you want to see first though?
    5. Re:What's the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >A sensible kernel architecture.

      This is much better than Linux but still not as sexy as QNX. They have modular device drivers that can be either memory protected or in kernel space.
      http://www.qnx.com/demodisk/how.html

      --
      kramasitrafiken @ hôtmail.com

  4. Slashdot, the catalyst by clambert · · Score: 1

    AtheOS has had little to no coverage in the past, so it'll be interesting to see how much development increases over the coming weeks. Its nice to see its came so far with so little, but I have a feeling we'll be seeing a lot more of this OS in the future.

    --
    mailto:<?=implode("@", array("chris", implode(".", array("php", "net"))))?>
    1. Re:Slashdot, the catalyst by armb · · Score: 3, Informative

      > it'll be interesting to see how much development increases

      On the core OS, not much.
      http://www.atheos.cx/contribute.php

      "I don't accept changes or patches to the core OS but I will happily accept patches to existing device drivers, new device drivers, utilities, applications and plugins of most types.

      I want to keep the development of the kernel, native FS, GUI, desktop manager, and maybe a few other system components to my self"

      --
      rant
  5. Probably by nervlord1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Probably the best part about Atheos is that he ported Khtml (the konqueror rendering engine) to his OS for me atleast, and i imagine many others, a good browser is my number uno priority. Its good to see he ported such a sweet engine to his OS i can imagnie technically it would have been reasonably difficult Can we also stop with the "why another operating system?" comments? I bet linus heard all of the same drivel when he wrote linux, it didnt apply then, it doesnt apply now As far as im concerned, ill never critize anything i cant do better (its a stupid policy.. but thats me) and this guy has done alot better than most

    --
    Microsoft IIS is to webserving as KFC is to healthy eating
    1. Re:Probably by clambert · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The weird part is his port is a hell of a lot faster than Konqueror on Linux, which should say a lot about the rest of his code in the OS.

      --
      mailto:<?=implode("@", array("chris", implode(".", array("php", "net"))))?>
    2. Re:Probably by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, that only says a lot about XFree86.

    3. Re:Probably by Lars+T. · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Or X in general.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    4. Re:Probably by be-fan · · Score: 2

      Or maybe just about his linker? (I don't think he uses the standard Linux ld).

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  6. This looks a lot like AmigaOS by /Wegge · · Score: 5, Informative
    Given the immediately accessible amount of API documentation available, to me it looks like this OS has captured the same spirit that AmigaOS was built upon: A lightweight microkernel, with device drivers as a separate entity.


    I'll be very tempted to make the switch from Linux just to be reminded of the good old days of the Amiga.

    --
    //Wegge
    1. Re:This looks a lot like AmigaOS by locohijo · · Score: 1

      A lightweight microkernel, with device drivers as a separate entity.
      Atheos is not entirely microkernel based, it is somehow a mixture of monolithic and microkernel design.
      "I often ask myself that question to :) The kernel is very modular and the it have a well defined interface between the kernel and it's device-drivers and file-systems. So given that each component communicate through a thin well defined interface, and don't know much else about each other, it ressembles a micro-kernel. I am not sure if this is the right term though, since all kernel-components lives in kernel-space and is not protected from each other, this is all properties from a monolitic-kernel. I am a bit confused :) -- atheos FAQ"

  7. YAY FOR LINUX!!! by Linux_Fag · · Score: 0, Troll

    YAY for LINUX!!!!

    1. Re:YAY FOR LINUX!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You, sir, are a genius.

  8. Re:The author of the review is a foreigner. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    She's french - like BeOS.

  9. C++ Considered Harmful by J.+Random+Software · · Score: 1

    GNU and BSD are so huge it's difficult to contribute to them, so it's reassuring to see that it's still possible for one person to write a credible kernel. But with all the recent progress in CORBA, JVM, and CLR (the pseudo-JVM for .NET), it's a worrisome trend to see new interfaces that can be used from C++ but not from more robust languages (Eiffel, Python, Perl, Ruby, Ada...). And pressure on the GCC team against improving their ABI (because of all the underspecified interfaces that'll break) can't be good.

    1. Re:C++ Considered Harmful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A more robust language than C++?

      I love perl, but it isn't more "robust" than C++.
      When I see the term "robust" used to describe software, I think "able to handle anything, or, at least able to 'catch' errors/exceptions."

      C++ has an extremely easy way to handle errors.
      Look up try, throw and catch. Also, why would you want to write a kernel (or kernel components/modules) in a language like perl, python, or anything else that's interpreted? Mircrosoft's C# has some nice features, but it has a number of drawbacks too, and the CLR is a main drawback. I guess you see it differently, but I want a system that is responsive, not sluggish. Why be *forced* to use a Athlon XP 1900+ when a pIII 500 should be just fine?

    2. Re:C++ Considered Harmful by Ayende+Rahien · · Score: 3, Informative

      Who the *hell* is talking about writing a kernel using Perl?
      As for C#, as a matter of fact, there *are* people trying to build a kernel using C#.

      And for more robust than C++, that isn't very hard.
      To mention *the* one language that I think should be used for kernel programming, Ada.
      It's *way* more stable than C++, has the same plexibility, and if you are satisfied with the stability of your code, you can supress any/all of the checks that you want.

      --

      --
      Two witches watched two watches.
      Which witch watched which watch?
    3. Re:C++ Considered Harmful by iBod · · Score: 1
      It's *way* more stable than C++

      In what way is Ada more 'stable' than C++, or any other language?

      Do you mean the C++ compiler generates different object code depending on the day of the week, ambient air temperature or orientation of the processor relative to Magnetic North? :)

      Kidding aside, what do you mean by 'stable' in this context?

      Also, do you know of any kernals written in Ada (not bashing Ada, just curious to know)?

    4. Re:C++ Considered Harmful by brunes69 · · Score: 3

      I don't think anyone has even read this guy's page. He does not want, and will not accept contributions to AtheOS. It's a hobby project for him, for fun. He doesn't want it to be the next great OS, he just wants to learn.

    5. Re:C++ Considered Harmful by dark_panda · · Score: 1

      Isn't stability the responsibility of the coder? It's not going to matter what language you use if you can't code for shit. Take a someone who knows C++ inside and out and you'll get code that's just as "stable" as something similar done in Ada or any other language for that matter. Languages aren't "stable", it's the person using them and how they code. (Of course, some languages may make this easier by supplying garbage collection and what not, but in the end, it's still about the user...)

      J

    6. Re:C++ Considered Harmful by Ayende+Rahien · · Score: 2

      Ada catches way more errors at compile time than most other languages.
      It also has quite a bit of runtime checks to make sure that nothing nasty happens.
      In that, it's much like Java.
      However, usually, if an Ada program compiles, the only bugs it has are logical ones.
      I would say that Ada programs are more stable than C++ programs because of this.
      And yes, great programmers can create C++ programs that are just as stable as the average Ada program.
      The difference IMO is that an *average* Ada programmer can create programs much more stable than another programmer of the same level, that is working with C++.

      And yes, there is a kernel in Ada, it's called AdaOS (http://www.adaos.org/)

      --

      --
      Two witches watched two watches.
      Which witch watched which watch?
    7. Re:C++ Considered Harmful by Ayende+Rahien · · Score: 2

      But if you take some guy who *doesn't* know the C++ inside and out (and that *is* the most common case), and what kind of a program would he write?
      The same programmer would create a much more stable program in Ada.
      Ada allows you nearly all the freedom of C++, with a lot more cool stuff beside, without you having to worry about many things that you will have to in C++.

      Ada saves you a lot of the trouble that C++ programs suffer from.

      Oh, and BTW, the only Ada implementation that has a garbage collection (AFAIK) is the JVM one.

      --

      --
      Two witches watched two watches.
      Which witch watched which watch?
    8. Re:C++ Considered Harmful by dark_panda · · Score: 1

      I wasn't really refering specifically to Ada when I mentioned GC, just languages in general that have such features, i.e. Java, etc.

      J

    9. Re:C++ Considered Harmful by J.+Random+Software · · Score: 1

      An OS written in C++ is okay with me (though I think the efficiency advantages of allowing "undefined behavior" are overblown). What worries me is that more people are going to think it's reasonable to make system interfaces (like the AtheOS GUI) that are only usable by C++ applications, making life harder for less hidebound hackers.

    10. Re:C++ Considered Harmful by Spyffe · · Score: 1

      In defense of C++
      C++ is not inherently more unstable than any other language. Modern C++ compilers produce good code, and library functions are not fatally flawed.
      While it may be true that other languages are more careful about type-checking, that is a choice they make which makes doing things like writing kernels more difficult.
      While C++ is far from the perfect language, so is every other programming language.

      --
      Sigmentation fault - core dumped
    11. Re:C++ Considered Harmful by David+Greene · · Score: 1
      though I think the efficiency advantages of allowing "undefined behavior" are overblown

      [Note: I think you mean "implementation-defined" rather than "undefined."]

      It depends on how you define "overblown." Such advantages will never outperform an algorithmic improvement, but then no compiler transformation will do so. Implementation-defined behavior is critical for transformations like expression reassociation, partial redundancy elimination, instruction scheduling and many others. The order of expression evaluation, for example, has to be implementation-defined to allow all of these transformations or at least to improve their efficiency.

      The ABI also has to be implementation-defined because each platform has its own calling convention, linker limitations and a host of other niggly details you really don't want to have to worry about. Trust me. :)

      --

  10. Looks alarmingly familiar by gazbo · · Score: 1

    Am I the only one who noticed just how much the file browser (the picture showing how the screen looks if the correct font is installed) looks like X-Tree Pro for DOS?

    I mean, I used to love it 10 years ago, but surely we've move on by now.

    1. Re:Looks alarmingly familiar by Vanders · · Score: 1

      Am I the only one who noticed just how much the file browser (the picture showing how the screen looks if the correct font is installed) looks like X-Tree Pro for DOS?

      That would be a port of Tree which Eugenia ported herself, in fact.

  11. Urgent need by mirko · · Score: 0

    I think Slashdo editors should create a dedicated icon for AtheOS as it has now become more than a simple coding-exploit for sure.

    At least an Os which looks like BeOS without implying dealing with a closed structure.

    --
    Trolling using another account since 2005.
    1. Re:Urgent need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Celui qui m'a classé ce poste "Overrated" est un fils de pute !

  12. enough of a difference? by mj6798 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Well, a kernel and GUI that is written from the ground up in C++ could be heaven or it could be hell. Properly used, C++ can help a lot with data abstraction and safety with no loss of efficiency, but poorly used, it can make things a lot worse than plain C and give you performance problems in addition. On multi-programmer problems, C++ seems to turn into hell rather than heaven more often than not.

    Altogether, I wonder whether AtheOS is sufficiently different from Linux/X11 to attract much interest. If kernel, driver, and application development for it were orders of magnitude easier, I could see switching. But given that it seems to be built using fairly traditional software technologies, why would it be all that much better?

    Time will tell, but I won't be an early adopter of this one...

    1. Re:enough of a difference? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ...but poorly used, it can make things a lot worse...

      Well...everything gets a lot worse when it's used poorly and everything turns into hell if they're multi-programmer problems that aren't managed very well or just can't code. Why do ppl always complain about C++ by assuming that it's poorly used nearly all the time?

    2. Re:enough of a difference? by goatman.cx · · Score: 1

      The AtheOS kernel is written with C and some x86 assembler optimizations, not C++

      --


      ---------
      Fuck you, motherfucker. Fuck yous to: Rob "Taco-Snotter" Malda, Homos, Kowboi Kneel, and RMS.
    3. Re:enough of a difference? by be-fan · · Score: 2

      Actually, there are several places where C++, properly used, can be much nicer than C. Take, for example, the standard Linux linked list code. When moving from entry to entry, the code uses the offsetof() macro to explicitly find the location of the "next" and "prev" pointers within an object. Templates could be used instead to make the code nicer. Actually, templates are great of generic data structures of all kinds. Instead of using callbacks (for comparison functions, for example) one can use an expression template and allow the compiler to adapt each instance to the data structure being used. This is not only more maintainable, but *faster*, since the comparison function can be inlined into the instance. Then there are all of the places (like the VFS) where a table of function pointers is explicitly initialized with callbacks. Instead, you could simply use an abstract base class for the interface and put the callbacks into the implementation.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    4. Re:enough of a difference? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It's much easier for people to produce poor C++ than to produce poor C. That's not an assumption, that's based on real-world experience.

      Why do "ppl" always assume that an observation about one aspect of a programming language is a condemnation of the whole thing? Come on, get over it.

    5. Re:enough of a difference? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Actually, there are several places where C++, properly used, can be much nicer than C.

      Hello? Forgot to switch on the brain, Binky? That's what the posting you are responding to was saying.

  13. The point is fun - for the author. by barneyfoo · · Score: 4, Informative

    The author doesn't want you to just use his OS. He's building it for himself, not for you or anyone else. He wont accept code (except bug fixes) into the main OS. He will only accept driver submissions.

  14. Re:OMG! by monksp · · Score: 1

    Actually, 'Atheos' is Greek, roughly analagous to the word 'atheist'. IIRC, AtheOS's author didn't realize that, and the name wasn't designed to reflect anything, but the corrolation is there, nevertheless.

    --
    -- My work here is done. If you need me again, just admit to yourself that you're screwed, and die.
  15. Re:OSNews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First off VA/OSDN post their news to newsforge.
    Secondly OSNEWS is for ALL OS related news and info - VA only works with Linux.

  16. Re:Perhaps you should ask....A NINJA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The circle of trolling is complete. Our work here is done. Soon, the sky will boil away, as the stars wink out, one by one. As existence comes to an end, yes, we will chant, yes, our work here is done...

  17. Re:OSNews by jeriqo · · Score: 0

    >VA only works with Linux.

    So why did they change their name from "VA Linux" to "VA" ?

    --
    Alexis 'jeriqo' BRET
  18. Re:Perhaps you should ask....A NINJA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    I have prepared a haiku for the pancake eating ninja:

    I am a NINJA
    I love the taste of PANCAKES
    Covered with syrup.

    - Yet Another Pancake Eating Ninja

  19. We should all hate this new OS... by wadetemp · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Remember the reasoning behind only having one candidate from each political "party" run for an office? If you have 3 candidates, two with agenda A, and one with agenda B, even if there are a larger number of people who vote A, there is the distinct possibility that the candiate who's for B will get elected.

    I think it's better to support one candidate in the open source OS world and not several. Yes, this new OS *is* open and might have great features that could/should make thier way into Linux, but throwing support directly at the OS eventually will make the OS a contender for developers and more importantly users that Linux would garner otherwise. Which leads to that overwhelming market share thing Microsoft has going. :)

    1. Re:We should all hate this new OS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, what an amazingly moronic comment. I hope you're trolling, because if you're not, you might want to come off the drugs kid.

      Rather than bother with your piss poor excuse for a coherent attempt at bashing AtheOS for being different, I think I'll take the piss out of your belief that having more than two political candidates is bad in some way. This sort of amazing "thinking" (For want of a better word. I figure the ideas these idiots come up with must come from somewhere) is the sort of thing that has continually held back American politics for over a century, and given you two polical parties who are almost exactly the fucking same. I get the impression that you must be a college kid (Looking at your .sig seems to confirm this), so I would suggest you grow up and spend some time in the big bad world, where the grownups play, before you open your stupid mouth about topics you appear to have absolutly no coherent understanding of.

      Clear enough for you, or do you want me to explain some of the big words?

    2. Re:We should all hate this new OS... by wadetemp · · Score: 1

      a coherent attempt at bashing AtheOS for being different

      I wouldn't bash things for being different. I actually prefer MacOS, which is just as lacking in market share relative to Windows as anything else. I personally think AtheOS is pretty cool. You jump to conclusions. What I was trying to point out are the errors in the groupthink that is inevitable on this story... to give people something to think about other than "Oh, this is the coolest thing!" And the metaphor is based in real life politics, regardless of how narrow minded you may be.

      You've pointed out that the two candiates in the 2000 election are virtually the same. And the results of the election showed that people thought that too... split vote. Now, what if 3 candidates from the two main parties had run... 2 from one, and 1 from the other? Say, two Democrats and George Bush. In such a case, Bush would have won by a large margin. In fact, this did happen to a smaller (but influential) degree in the 2000 election... remember Nader's slice of votes? Which way would the scale have tilted had he not run? Most likely to the Democrat side rather than the Republican side. This was quoted in MANY articles and reports on the elections. In effect, more people voted "Democrat" than "Republican", and look who won?

      Yes, you should try college. Now that I've graduated from it I find that alot of the stuff I learned was pretty useful in the "big world." What I have in my sig has nothing to do with that.

    3. Re:We should all hate this new OS... by Anonymous+DWord · · Score: 2

      I think that's just about the stupidest thing I've ever read. Which open source candidate would you prefer we support, Mr. .Net luser? Linux running KDE? We'll get right on that.

      Consider this: 17 candidates, one with position A, two with B, 1 with C, 3 with D... vote FOR something, not against it. Choose an OS based on how much you like it, not whether it's the poster-child for Open Source or not.

      Even for a troll, that was pretty weak.

      --
      "If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
    4. Re:We should all hate this new OS... by Anonymous+DWord · · Score: 2

      The problem with your little political analogy is that there's no one winner in the OS "wars." We're not looking to decide the fate of the nation. There's plenty of room for many different systems.

      Besides, the rest of the world laughs at the American political process, which has no representation for half your population. 51% of 50%- excellent way to choose your government for four years.

      --
      "If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
    5. Re:We should all hate this new OS... by wadetemp · · Score: 1

      Choose an OS based on how much you like it, not whether it's the poster-child for Open Source or not.

      Agreed. I prefer MacOS over both Windows AND Linux. I am not making this point for me. I am just trying to get Slashdotters to run some ideas through thier heads for once. It's an open forum... I like to keep people open to ideas. You've rather just rehashed what most people ALWAYS say about OSes... but it's contrary to the "downfall of MS" think that prevades Slashdot.

      Just doing my job to keep people sane... :)

    6. Re:We should all hate this new OS... by wadetemp · · Score: 1

      The problem with your little political analogy is that there's no one winner in the OS "wars."

      I'm glad that you've said this... I think you're getting closer to seeing my point than you'd like to admit. :)

    7. Re:We should all hate this new OS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the metaphor is based in real life politics, regardless of how narrow minded you may be.

      No, your extremly poor analogy is based on North American politics, which is one of the worst examples of "Democracy" you could ever hope to find. The idea behind Democracy is to vote for the person whom you think has the best policies, not to vote for someone else because "He's the lesser of two evils, and I don't want that other guy to get in!" Almost every other country in the world does fine with more than two polical parties, and are all the better for it. Look at Germany for a good example, they currently have a coalition government made up of the Green Party and a Christian Coalition (IIRC), and it represents the majority view. They have a strong oposition as well, with different views on many subjects. This is how you make a strong democracy. Your anaolgy with Operating Systems is still incredibly poor.

      As for college, I'm not living in the US, and I tried college. I hated it, they taught me nothing about CS I didn't already know, and I droped out and got a real job. In the amount of time my peers have spent so-say "learning" in College and University, I'm now earning £20,000 P.A in the real world, which is more than a new graduate could earn after four years of University. Experience counts in this market place, not rote learning.

    8. Re:We should all hate this new OS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd get back onto your dealer, it seems you got a bad batch of Acid.

      There is no such thing as Slashdot Groupthink, it's a myth that you seem to have latched onto.

      In fact, AtheOS fits very nicely into the "downfall of MS" thing anyway, but you're not looking at the big picture at all. Its not "Linux V's Microsoft" it's "Open Source V's Closed Source". Linux & Microsoft just happen to be the biggest two on each side of the fence.

      Get it yet, or are the giant doughnuts chasing you around the room still?

    9. Re:We should all hate this new OS... by Anonymous+DWord · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No. I don't see your point at all.

      I think it's better to support one candidate in the open source OS world and not several.

      Why should that be limited? Who gives a fuck if Linux (BSD/Amiga/AtheOS/...) doesn't have 100% market share? Or 10%? Or losing users left and right to each other? Once they're GPL'd (or BSD'd/Artistic Licensed/...), they can never die. What benefit is there to having only one open source OS, other than having all the best developers? If you didn't like it, you'd be stuck with Windows anyway. Choice is good. I tend to doubt most sane people are going to try AtheOS, not like it, and say "oh, well, that was an open-source OS, boy did it suck, guess I'm going back to Windows." Chances are they'll like parts of it, dislike others, and get curious about what else is available.

      --
      "If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
    10. Re:We should all hate this new OS... by wadetemp · · Score: 1

      Who gives a fuck if Linux (BSD/Amiga/AtheOS/...) doesn't have 100% market share?

      EXACTLY! I was pointing out the fatal flaw in that thinking. So you DO get my point.

    11. Re:We should all hate this new OS... by Saint+Stephen · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Yeah, that's why we're such a fucked up country with no money or power, and nobody pays attention to anything we ever say or do.

    12. Re:We should all hate this new OS... by wadetemp · · Score: 1

      I have time for just one more question. :) But you're falling right into my analogy while you're trying to argue against it. Gore and Bush were the biggest two on each side of the fence too... it only took a small push (Nader) to tip the result. In the "Open Source V. Closed Source" ideal (since you don't seem to agree with the word "groupthink"), Open Source doesn't even HAVE an equal on its side of the fence. Linux is the biggest, but not an equal. And things like AtheOS are more than pebbles.

      Keep in mind, idealists, that Nader fit very nicely into the downfall of the party system, but it only got us a Republican president we didn't want over a Democrat... regardless of the similarity of the two main parties. :)

    13. Re:We should all hate this new OS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh? t only got us a Republican president we didn't want over a Democrat

      Who didn't want a Republican? The majority did, which is why he is your president. The other voters wanted either Gore, or Nader. You consistently fail to understand the concept of Democracy here, so you consistenly fail to understand why your analogy and your arguments are complete rubbish.

      I never said Linux was an equal to Windows. I said it was the biggest of the Open Source OS's, and Windows is the biggest of the Closed Source OS's. Whats so hard to grasp here?

    14. Re:We should all hate this new OS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut your fucking piehole. Linux rules for servers, but sux for desktops. It's a fact. Everybody should stop using Linux in their desktops and start pushing a real desktop OS.

      Whoever mods me down will be murdered within a year.

    15. Re:We should all hate this new OS... by monksp · · Score: 1

      Wow. Honestly, dude, I didn't think that was your point at all. Up until this post, you seemed to be contending that we shouldn't be working on multiple OS projects because that would split the developer pool.

      While I understand that you never said anything to the effect that Linux should have 100% market/mindshare, that seemed to be what you were driving at. ``We must band together and make Linux better or Microsoft will always have dominion over us!'' seemed to be the gist of it.

      I think a lot of us get your point, but most of us just didn't know that -that- was what your point was.

      --
      -- My work here is done. If you need me again, just admit to yourself that you're screwed, and die.
    16. Re:We should all hate this new OS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apart from your rude way of putting it, I kind of agree.

    17. Re:We should all hate this new OS... by wadetemp · · Score: 1

      I'm just going to have to learn to end my comments with "I'm being cynical and/or sarcastic here. Think about it people." I guess I'm just not good at making that obvious otherwise. In this case the only thing I was being cynical in was the subject of the original message.

      So I'll wrap it up and make my point again if anyone can see this message: New OSes are great. There's nothing any different about this one... it's got some good things going. Being written from the ground up is one of them. But increasing the number of open source OSes, while beneficial in generating new ideas and code that evolve ALL OSes, causes a vote-splitting effect. Too many good things, not enough people to use them or add to them... and they all founder and sink. That doesn't mean you shouldn't choose the one you like... but choosing one that is "secondary" in the Open Source world as the number of Open Source OSes continue to increase could actually cause them ALL to founder and sink.. because they're not THAT different.

      Please, comments if anyone can actually see this post. :)

    18. Re:We should all hate this new OS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, sure, i guess our all or nothing sucks. it so much worse than a coalition government including members of the radical right or left wing in this country in government, and if they don't want to play ball, the government collapses and we're forced to have another election in 3 months.

      Imagine Pat Buchanan or Jesse Jackson in our house of representatives or Senate. Capable of voting or bringing down the government because without their little party, the government can't work.

  20. "GPL Operating System"? by thallgren · · Score: 1

    General Public License Operating System; Perhaps the author meant "An Operating System licensed under the GNU GPL"?

    Regards, Tommy

    1. Re:"GPL Operating System"? by efgbr · · Score: 1

      Or even "General Public Licensed Operating System".

    2. Re:"GPL Operating System"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet you're a million laughs at parties.

  21. silly rabbit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Ah, it's nothing more than another attempt for a nerd to get laid; it's meant for chicks. From the atheos.cx page: "I belive this consistency is important so the user doesn't have to start from scratch each time she learns a new program to know."

  22. Re:OMG! by brinkster · · Score: 2, Informative
    From AtheOS FAQ:

    Q: Where does the name come from? Are you aware that atheos means "without god" in Greek?

    A: The name is short for Athena (the Greek goddess of wisdom) and OS and have nothing to do with atheism. I was not aware that "atheos" indeed was a word in any language when I named the OS but figured that out later. Just think of it as a name. It is not supposed to mean anything.

  23. Re:syllogism by Artichoke · · Score: 2, Funny


    If we take your premise:
    Can we also stop with the "why another operating system?" comments?

    and add your premise:
    [...] ill never critize anything i cant do better

    We reach the conclusion: you can do better "why another operating system?" comments than these?

    Go on then, prove it :)

    --
    __
    Arse
  24. AtheOS is cool by xtremex · · Score: 1

    I tried AtheOS about 6 months ago, and I was impressed. True, the install was very raw, but it was quick as a whip. I was amazed that this guy wrote the entire thing from scratch! He definitely has bragging rights for this puppy. I have tested practically every OS out there. I use Linux as my primary OS, I love Beos and QNX, and Atheos is truly impressive. It took 1,000 developers to fsck up windows, and ONE guy to make the amazing AtheOS Operating system. Evryone should at least try it out and show your friends!

    --
    If you're not a Liberal in your 20's, then you have no heart.If you're still a Liberal in your 30's you have no brain.
    1. Re:AtheOS is cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well. Another poster says he is using GPL/BSD code in his project? Makes sense to me. No way in hell can you get up to that kind of speed from 1996. I do think he wants more than he admits. He just doesn't want others to get credit for what he says he is doing. I'm sure 100's if not 1000's have touched the code base he is building upon.

  25. Re:syllogism by beable · · Score: 1

    Ooh, hoist on his own petard. You'll notice that he's not "critizing" anybody's spelling, however.

    --
    ...
  26. Re:syllogism by nervlord1 · · Score: 1

    yer i cant spell sue me moron

    --
    Microsoft IIS is to webserving as KFC is to healthy eating
  27. Re:The author of the review is a foreigner. by AndrewHowe · · Score: 2

    No, Eugenia is Greek... See her web page!

  28. hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What amuses me is that the Atheos crowd go out of their way to say "no, it's not like an amiga, it's just the default widget set looks like an amiga", then I go look at the API and libraries, and it's basically AmigaOS-in-C++, just as BeOS is...

  29. "Looks" the operative word by ZigMonty · · Score: 3, Informative
    It's only the looks.

    Kurt Skauen started the project with the intent of making an Amiga clone. He says in the FAQ, however, that there isn't much resemblance these days besides the window borders. The article did call him an ex-Amiga coder, he must like the look.

    This is one of those things that I keep meaning to check out. Maybe now I will.

    1. Re:"Looks" the operative word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey may _say_ it's not Amiga-like, but he's lying, for some reason. Both BeOS and AtheOS are basically AmigaOS-style OS design (message passing pseudo-microkernel with rich filesystem, integrated GUI and CLI, etc), but in C++.

      All his APIs are reminiscent of the old Amiga equivalents - maybe he doesn't want to admit it to himself, but a lot of what he does is obviously inspired by AmigaOS, and at its core, not just the GUI widget set...

    2. Re:"Looks" the operative word by memyselfandmyhand · · Score: 0

      Ahh.... Amiga. those were the days. Booted up almost instantly, fast, no bloat, no crashes, powerfull hardware, powerfull OS, Workbench was perty, mmmmmmm *sighs*

  30. Re:The author of the review is a foreigner. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps you should learn Greek before complaining.

  31. VMWare Enabled? by Corrado · · Score: 1

    Does anyone know if you can install AtheOS under VMWare on Windows? I have a VMWare machine at work that I am constantly "experimenting" with alternate things like this. I think if would be cool to play with, but I can't dedicate a whole machine to it.

    --
    KangarooBox - We make IT simple!
    1. Re:VMWare Enabled? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it's possible. Read the FAQ for details, because there's a special setting for GRUP under VMWare.
      - KAMiKAZOW

    2. Re:VMWare Enabled? by byolinux · · Score: 1

      You can indeed... go here http://www.fprintf.net/atheos/vmware.html for disk images/info.

  32. Re:Ok, ok. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ouch. Ufff. One little crack and I'm down in troll-land. sheesh. Hey d00dz! Hows the weather down here? Ya doin' alright? Hey, someones taco-snotter-script get into a loop on this article?

  33. GUIs are evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    I like what this guy says. It's a hobbyist OS and he has no intent to compete with Windows for popularity, etc. IOW if AtheOS is missing a feature and he doesn't want to add it, it ain't going in. Cool! It's about time people stopped giving a crap about what others want.

    I for one, though, think GUIs are evil, and I am releasing my own Linux distribution to address this issue. It's called Luddite Linux. Here are the features:
    * No GUI
    * No mouse driver
    * No menu-driven apps
    * The first distro will be released on CD-ROM but future releases will be released on punch cards.

    * No mail apps. Only a weak minded fool uses a mail app. Telnet to your POP server at port 110 and learn the commands to read your email that way!
    * No FTP apps. Why can't you just telnet to port 21 and download it? rz and sz are debatable so I put 'em in just because I like to err on the user convenience side :)

    * No emacs. Has drop down menus. Use vi!
    * I did include an assembler but no compiler. C is for script weeneez. Machine language is where it's at, baby

    My new OS will be out Any Time Now[tm]

    Thanks :)

    1. Re:GUIs are evil by |_uke · · Score: 1

      * No mail apps. Only a weak minded fool uses a mail app. Telnet to your POP server at port 110 and learn the commands to read your email that way!

      The funny thing is... I have actually done this many times :P Usually when I do not actually have a direct way to get at the mail machine... and I have to route through many other boxen to actually GET there...

      (The pains of company firewalls :)

      --
      Luke
    2. Re:GUIs are evil by pne · · Score: 2

      * No FTP apps. Why can't you just telnet to port 21 and download it?

      Why not? Because FTP does not only use port 21; that's just the control port. You also need a data port if you want to transfer files -- or even get a directory listing! So to speak FTP over telnet, you need at least two clients if you want to do more than just change directories.

      (Compare with HTTP which mixes control messages and data on the same port -- but which doesn't really do sessions, unless you count Keep-Alive.)

      Cheers,
      Philip.

      --
      Esli epei etot cumprenan, shris soa Sfaha.
  34. What is truly harmful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    CORBA, a crude RPC hack for objects, has set back distributed communications for 5 years. It barely interoperates between various products from different vendors, and has no standard security in real life (ignoring whitepapers and proprietary vendor-specific security hacks). CORBA's name service is a also complete joke and poorly designed. Also, adding, removing or reordering data members in CORBA structs will render the existing CORBA servers/clients incompatable without recompilation. This is in stark contrast to XML/SOAP which will process the information at hand without recompilation or deployment. If the CORBA consortium spent less time bashing COM and SOAP and spent more time redesigning their APIs to be more reliable, interoperable and easier to use - then maybe they might be taken seriously.

  35. Why no textmode? by ForceOfWill · · Score: 1

    most operations under AtheOS will involve the command line (however, been a modern OS, AtheOS is GUI-only, it does not offer a fullscreen text mode)

    "been" a modern OS is no excuse for *not* including something! If anything it should include *more* things. There are some people who like those full-text-screens. I don't think they are too hard to code.

    And to those of you saying that the author isn't doing this for anyone but himself, I agree, that's a good reason for doing things however he wants, but please don't say it doesn't have a text-console because it's a modern OS.

    --

    --
    Seeing is believing; You wouldn't have seen it if you didn't believe it.
    1. Re:Why no textmode? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With no full-screen text-mode you can ruin your eyesight trying to look at a tiny little terminal.
      I have tried every font a every resolution and there are no really pleasant-looking fonts for running a terminal.
      Can anyone suggest any?

      I wonder if you could simply hack the graphic driver to work full-screen, since it would be somewhat easy since it is a microkernel.

  36. Horseshit - most of code is GNU or Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, AtheOS is a very good accomplishment but is far from what you make it out to be. Take time to look at the source files - over half are lifted from other operating systems, notably Linux. All the libraries are GNU libraries. To my mind what we are seeing with Atheos is a stripped down kernel for desktop use with drivers lifted and slightly modified from BSD and Linux.

  37. I can't see it becoming that big. by mark-t · · Score: 1

    Sorry, I'm not trying to ridicule the authors work here - it's quite an accomplishment, but AtheOS is unlikely to draw people who area already very Unix-centric, because of its GUI-based design rather than CLI-based system. I'm not saying that a GUI system is inferior, just that it's unlikely to draw people who already happen to have a preference for something different. It is also unlikely to draw the average desktop computer user because he or she will either have never heard of it, or wouldn't perceive any personal need for it. The people that AtheOS are _MOST_ likely to draw into using it are those that are curious about different OS's and eager to always try new things. Unfortunately, this is a substantially smaller group than even the Unix-centric crowd that was originally drawn to Linux and FreeBSD. I suppose AtheOS's ability to draw people into it depends on the ability of this small group of people to convince other people that this OS's paradigm is superior.

  38. Remember Freedows? by GodWasAnAlien · · Score: 1

    What is a likely result of a new OS project?

    Look at:

    http://www.freedows.org

  39. It's all in the license son.. by Pengo · · Score: 2

    QNX can be taken back as quickly as it was given. i would much rather give my mind share to something thats free speach than beer. And these days, the beer tap is running dry and could be taken back at any time. I still don't understand why QNX is giving away their os, is there business sense in it.. will it last?

  40. Re:It's Taco SPAM!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A truly excellent and very humourous troll indeed!
    However...

    To complete this perverted orgy, fellow geeks Michael, Timothy, and Jamie often join in, dressed in black Gestapo uniforms, jack boots, and leather gloves.

    Black GeStaPo uniforms? The GeStaPo (Geheime Staatspolizei - Secret State Police) wore civilian clothes (although there are reports on them occasionally using Allgemeine SS uniforms in occupied territories).

    I seriously doubt that perverted individuals like CmdrTaco et al would have the good taste to ever wear the outstandingly beautiful black Waffen SS uniforms! Please update the FAQ accordingly.

  41. Re:Perhaps you should ask....A NINJA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    -5, Nigger

  42. Smart boy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    "Kurt does not accept code submissions for the crucial parts of AtheOS. AtheOS is solely his project,and the fact that it is licensed under the GPL does not make it immediately a 'community' project."

    Kurt is probably also smart enough to realize that someday he may want to sell off stuff to make money, and will need clear ownership of the copyright to do so. Bravo, Kurt.

  43. atheos gui on linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    for those who want to try out atheos but can't for some reason (unsupported hardware, no free partitions, etc.) there is a port of the gui to linux here.

  44. BUT WHY DO YOU WANT TO DO THAT AT ALL? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What possible advantage does it offer over running the application locally?

    1. Re:BUT WHY DO YOU WANT TO DO THAT AT ALL? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remotely administer boxes about 3hrs drive away. I like that I can do this as it means I don't have to drive. I like that this is built-in so applications don't need to provide this feature. Thanks for asking.

  45. Re:Perhaps you should ask....A NINJA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    -5 Cracker

  46. Mirrors? by Alakaboo · · Score: 1

    Are there any mirrors of the AtheOS downloads? Every time I make to install it from an @home connection, the files download halfway then bork. Anybody with similar experience?

    And why do the AtheOS parrots look disturbingly like the ViewSonic parrots?

    1. Re:Mirrors? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, this is a known problem.
      Try using the mirror on Sourceforge or email Kurt.

  47. Re:OMG! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I rather like the dual interpretation possible:

  48. Re:OSNews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    They dont have to obey your freakin' rule man! They're a free spirit!

    Do the dew!

  49. Re:It's Taco SPAM!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, it appears you are both wrong!! Ah ha!! I think our boy WIPO was thinking of the Allgemeine SS uniforms. Waffen SS were grey.

  50. RUN AWAY! by Oswald · · Score: 1

    If you're viewing posts 'newest first', count your blessings--you have received this warning in time. Click off this fucking discussion right now before you scroll down to the argument between the fucking idiot who wants to use a political analogy to tell us why AtheOS is bad for OS and the fucking idiot who wants to use that as an excuse to tell us why the U.S. political system is fucked up. This thread is dangerous to your mental health. It is stupid, banal, boring, whiny, and insufficiently down-moderated. Leave while you can!

    1. Re:RUN AWAY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My, what an asshole you are. Did your mother drop you as a child? Were you abused as a teenager? Are you just an asshole from choice?

      What sort of idiot would sort their comments "Newest First" anyway?

      P.S: The guy is right. The US Politcal system is fucked up. Deal with it, cracker Jack.

    2. Re:RUN AWAY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fuck fuck fuckity fuckfuck

      Is that all, you can say -- "fuck"?

  51. Re:Netmeeting... by memyselfandmyhand · · Score: 0

    If I recall correctly, netmeeting in windows allowed a single application to be shared (viewed and/or controlled) as if it was running localy. It probaly was still just a bitmap copy, but at least its better than the whole desktop.

  52. Re:Konqueror != web browser by memyselfandmyhand · · Score: 0

    Konqueror is slow because it has a lot more overhead. It is not actually a web browser. KHTML is. Konqueror is basicly just a DCOP server that allows components to be added, such as KHTML, a File Browser, KOffice Viewer, Aktion!, Ghostview, etc.

    If you want a pure and simple web browser using KHTML, there are a couple going round... cant remember what they are called. look on sourceforge if your interested.

  53. I thought this was a joke by hawk · · Score: 2
    until I found this line . . .


    > * No emacs. Has drop down menus. Use vi!


    IOW, the parent should have been mdded up as insightfl, rather than funny . . .


    hawk

  54. Be nice, people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've read several of the comments posted so far and I have to say, there is a wry tone to many of the posts, sometimes sarcastic and witty, but bordering on meanness.

    Yet, I've gone to the atheos website and read its inventor's words, and he has a bit of an attitude problem to be sure. He's a feisty little bugger.

    So what to say? At the end of the day, it will be said of atheos, it was never quite Linux, it was never quote AmigaOS either. Actually it reminds me a lot of Windows CE, but that's just me...

  55. Contributions (was Re:C++ Considered Harmful) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    He does not want, and will not accept contributions to AtheOS.


    That doesn't mean you can't write new apps and device drivers for it.

  56. Re:It's Taco SPAM!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Naturally I'm talking about the black uniforms of the Panzertruppen of the Waffen-SS.