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."
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.
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
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.
I'll be very tempted to make the switch from Linux just to be reminded of the good old days of the Amiga.
//Wegge
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
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...
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).
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.
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?
Syllable : It's an Operating System
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
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.
> 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
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.
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?
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.
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