Slashdot Mirror
AtheOS Fork Brings BeOS on Top of Linux
Eugenia writes: "Yup, Bill Hayden has forked AtheOS by using its app_server and Interface Kit (along with some other of its kits, like the filesystem layer) and ported it on top of the 2.4.x Linux kernel, without the need for X11. He already has the graphical environment working, and he also has some BeOS apps recompiled and working under Linux. Why BeOS applications? Because that was the reason of the fork. Exactly because AtheOS and BeOS have similar technical principles (highly multithreaded, truly preemptive, similar C++ API etc), by modifying AtheOS's API to match BeOS, Bill is trying to resurrect the BeOS. By doing so this way, Bill is already way ahead from the other two efforts to ressurect BeOS, OpenBeOS (dependant on the 'clean' NewOS kernel) and BlueOS (which depends on Linux and X11)."
Finally, someone else gets to do the screwing.
This sounds cool. Long live Be.
Just the thought of being rid of X and into the uber sweet arena of Be's font handling would be swell.
But what about somesort of compatibility for existing X apps? There's way to many great apps out there to just junk....
Or do we have to run X for that?
$sig=$1 if($brain =~
Now I can play MP3's and watch digital movies.
Kurt Skauren(sp?), progenitor of AtheOS, cannot be too pleased about this. I remember the first mailing list discussion where this had been announced and he replied with a sad smiley.
The AtheOS kernel has always been Kurt's baby; his goal of developing an OS targetted solely to desktop applications where the kernel remains under tight control is severely compromised with this split.
I like AtheOS and have even contributed a couple drivers to it, and it just kinda saddens me to think of Kurt's reaction.
Karma: Excellent Birds (mostly as a result of listening to Laurie Anderson)
I've met Bill Hayden. The guy is truly a genius, and a nice guy.
Way to go Bill! You deserve a place in the hacker hall of fame.
as noted here, why would Be want to hold onto an OS it doesn't want to sell? It will become as irrelevant eventually as Dr. DOS
[no troll, here, kids. Just my 2 cents.]Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain with all your metadata.
Forks happen. One of the goals of the GPL is to ensure that sofware doesn't stay under the control of the original author. If you want to write GPL'ed software, you need a thick skin.
Good because X11 is weak as hell
X11 cant do alpha channeling, scaling, or anything really, and its slow.
Its as good as Windows98 but its no OSX.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
To be.
Someone had to say it.
-Shameless Coward
That depends on how you define 'way ahead.'
People like me who really like BeOS admire the entire structure of the operating system, from top to bottom. I have zero interest in running FrankensteinBeOS, which is what this sounds like. Therefore I am content to work on the OpenBeOS project, which may be 'way behind', but should have a nicer outcome (for people who like BeOS). The project is coming together quite nicely for something so young.
(It's easier to see really far when you can stand on the shoulders of great engineers.)
"And like that
I mean for a desktop OS, you dont really NEED X.
Sure its nice if you could have it, but what you need is a nice looking gui, you dont need the x protcols esoteric features that only geeks and servers need.
Direct Frame Buffer is good, and there may be other ideas, but really, I hope linux gets rid of X, or at least the desktop linux's such as mandrake, lycoris, lindows and all of them get together and help fund directfb or berlin project or something
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Originally found on:
8 21 5112&list=2311
http://www.geocrawler.com/mail/msg.php3?msg_id=
FROM: Bill Hayden
DATE: 03/26/2002 06:59:50
SUBJECT: [Atheos-developer] Atheos Fork Announcement
Well, it was not my intent to announce this quite this soon, but given
the recent conversation on the list, I feel that it's best not to wait
any longer.
I forked Atheos about 6 months ago and have been continuously developing
it since that time. I've taken it in some very new directions. I
should warn you that some of you will absolutely love the changes, and
some of you will perhaps feel that the "dream" of Atheos has been sold out.
The new project has had a name since the beginning, but I'm going to
hold off on releasing that until I can verify that the domain names and
trademark are secure. So I'll call it "New Atheos" for the purposes of
this e-mail.
New Atheos has the following major new features:
o Runs on top of the Linux kernel, not the Atheos kernel
o Atheos API has been merged with the BeOS API
o PowerPC support
o gcc 3.0.X compatiblity
o OpenTracker/Deskbar desktop manager
These features give the following benefits:
o Most BeOS programs compile and run with little or no changes
o Linux kernel means that CD-ROM, CD booting and installing, DHCP, etc.
work
o Linux kernel means that driver support is excellent
o Mac users get a piece of the action
Things I haven't even started on:
o Printing
o Media Kit
o Replicants
Existing Atheos programs will need changes to compile. I haven't found
one that took me longer than a few minutes to "convert". Where Atheos
and BeOS use different semantics, I chose the BeOS method.
I am going to hold off on a release until I can successfully compile and
run OpenTracker and Deskbar. They use just about every obsolete and
goofy BeOS construct that exists. I'm most of the way there, though,
especially for Deskbar. Kurt wasn't lying when he said it would be a
nightmare to port them. Of course, I'm doing an "anti-port". When some
BeOS program won't compile, I change the API to match it instead of
changing the program itself.
The first BeOS program that successfully came up was Pulse, and there
was no small amoung of satisfaction to see good ole' Pulse running on my
new system. Nostalgic BeOS users can perhaps understand.
I'm writing in a hurry, so hopefully I haven't forgotten something
important. And no, I can't give a release date yet. I hope to have a
CVS server up at the time of release.
Thanks,
Bill Hayden
Wasn't one of the touted features of BeOS its low latency, single-user kernel optimized for multimedia stuff? Demos had multiple video players all playing smoothly, while 3-D animations occured in other windows.
How well can the Linux kernel deliver such performance?
There's 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
it's done.
Forget about linux on the desktop, my votes going to BeOS.
They got rid of X, bold but great move
I hope the Hurd GNU OS doesnt get stuck using X
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
that's GnuBe/Linux to you sir....
Seems to me it would be more appropriate to call it BtheOS.
But, hey, it's his fork, he can call it Fred if he wants to.
If Linux is called Linux just because it runs on top of the Linux kernel, how do we call this beast that runs on top of the same kernel?
A long time ago, I wrote an article called "The Rise and Fall of OS Empires". It concluded on how with free software, the software lives on beyond its environment. Underlying the article, though very subtle, was an argument against the BeOS operating system. I've always been critical of any proprietary operating system since the control of the software always rests with the developer.
Now first, a minor argument before I continue on. Names are like symbols in that they stand for something. So when people think of BeOS they think of a great many things, mostly good. But with software, these kinds of symbols aren't very useful and often serve to confuse things. To say that BeOS has come back from the dead is a definite misconception.
Any software is a mix of algorithms and technologies--each which are more general than the code itself. So to reintroduce these things in another piece of software can be said to in a sense recreate that software.
This new AtheOS, from my perspective, is welcome. Hopefully this software will provide interesting technologies which can be implemented in other software.
Hopefully BeOS users and developers are more aware of the risks present in proprietary software. I'd hate to see the same mistake being made a again.
Kudos.
The "fork" is just a new GUI and API for Linux based on AtheOS code and inspired by BeOS?
Right?
Regardless, tell me where I can download the
AtheLinux iso's.
Please, no "GNU/" os name prefix. Thank you.
... all those people working on OpenBeOS or AtheOS can comfortably do so within an environment that more closely resembles their ultimate goal.
This means that 'FrankensteinBeOS' has a viable and useful reason for its existence - even if as nothing more than a stop-gap until that desired "nicer outcome" you mentioned is more stable for real-world use.
Sounds cool to me. All those AtheOS and OpenBeOS developers can soon use FrankensteinBeOS as their development platform.
Why should anyone be upset over that?
This has the potential to be the X replacement tons of people have wanted. If we port Gtk(there was an initial BeOS port before) and Qt to the new GUI we get our apps. I for one would love it. I would also like to look into getting a VNC server working on it so I could have some cross platform network transparency. But I'm getting ahead of myself. Let's see what this looks like when it's released.
Daniel
I can find absolutely no evidence that LMBench was even ported to BeOS, let alone that it shew that it was slower.
Look for yourself
.I'd rather have FrankensteinBeOS than deadBeOS R5 that can't run on my new hardware. Perhaps you should help him rather than just bitch about it being a patchwork of different projects
A "Like OSNews except slower on the uptake" department?
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
thank you for keeping FP in the realm of the ACs!
That depends on how you define 'way ahead.'
People like me who really like BeOS admire the entire structure of the operating system, from top to bottom. I have zero interest in running FrankensteinBeOS, which is what this sounds like. Therefore I am content to work on the OpenBeOS project, which may be 'way behind', but should have a nicer outcome (for people who like BeOS). The project is coming together quite nicely for something so young.
Yes, but there's something to be said for taking the middle road, too. It may be true BeOS was a radical departure as opposed to Linux's adherence to legacy POSIX. But I suspect this new fusion may have more success as a desktop OS than either Linux or BeOS had alone. While not as radical a departure as Be, it is still a very significant departure for Unix/Linux. As nice as Be was, commercialy it went over like a lead balloon. Perhaps a more incremental approach to innovation will have more success.
This is the beauty of open source - you can mix and match as you please, and the cream rises to the top. And now that one of the nicest desktops has migrated over to one of the most advanced (and popular) kernels, I expect to see some interesting developments going forward.
Microsoft forks its "Windows XP" OS line to the MacOS platform, noting the incredible similarities and common GUI-like system.
(The story of a demented bread boffer)
:)
(Cucumber pud annexed to a fine whole-wheat loaf)
Sheik Yerbouti has to be one of my favourite Zappa Albums
What were the skies like when you were young?
My neighborhood is having a block sale this weekend. In my garage there is 10 pentium PC's with memory ranging from 24-64 megs and the processors from 60mhz to 233mhz. I was going to just toss them in a landfill to make some space.
I thought of trying to sell them, but windows is way overbloated to run effectively on any of these beasts. I happened across a BE cd that I bought last year and thought I would try it. To my amazement these machines run REALLY nice!
I haven't tried AtheO/S yet, but I plan to give it a spin tonight.
i think getting rid of x is a good an logical step. There is no reason for a normal desktop user to have all the features that X provides.
it would result in a serious performance infrease. i think Apple got it right when they implemented OSX without the X windows part. Linux shoudl follow that model.
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
This isnt GNU Linux, this is Beos Linux, its therefore not the same OS anymore, because the official Linux OS ia vastly diffrent and they arent compatible.
This is like saying GNU HURD is the same as GNU Linux.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
BeOS was POSIX, too, man.
The desktop users dont care about network transparency. DESKTOP Linux = Mandrake, Lycoris, etc etc, the Linux for people like you, Debian Linux, Redhat Linux, Slackware.
Face it, most ordinary users, in fact i'd say most linux users currently, dont care about that stuff, the corperate users and hackers are the only ones wo care.
Theres more mandrake users than theres debian and slackware users combined.
Redhat outnumbers everyone but redhats not a desktop linux.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Out in the general populace, "programmer network admin things" might be something no-one cares about.
But this is the Linux community. Honestly, how much of the Linux user community doesn't fit the "programmer/network admin" description? 1-2%, maybe?
Every single Linux user at my school is a heavy user of X's network transparency features, and I doubt my school is all that abnormal.
Getting rid of X, no. Fork of the whole system (X version, noX version), maybe. Redesign of X to include both directfb and network transparency? great idea!
I appreciate what this guy is doing, but seriously folks, why the hell is everybody so intent on making some sort of BE/Linux hybrid? I support OpenBeos for the following very good reasons:
1) Has over 100 developers now
2) Intent on rewriting original Be api so that compile and eventual binary compatibility is attained
3) Uses an alternate liscense to GPL so that open source is maintained without frightening away commercial developers due to fear of *GPL Contamination*
4) Already has contacts with commercial developers and distributors (albeit kept well under wrap right now)
5) Misc. Beos fans don't want to touch Gnome/KDE with a ten foot pole, and I know it would be way too tempting to port them for application compatibility purposes. Beos booted on my PII400 in 15 seconds, and was fast as hell. Would a BE/Linux combo keep Beos' vastly ease of use and configuration, or would it inherit Linux's most dreaded characteristics?
I'm rambling like a rabbit with the flu. But these are some valid concerns. Check out OpenBeos right now and sign up if you have the time and skills.
Seems like time better spent on projects that are a lot more mature and "important". There are a hell of a lot of things missong from Linux still. Hello?
BeOS was not fully POSIX. It did not support mmap() for example, or had real fd() sockets.
Comparatively, AtheOS is more POSIX than BeOS ever was. But even AtheOS is not 100% Posix.
Unless you can actually spell "phoenix", you fucking moron.
Microsoft Corp added that after the court decision to remove IE from MS Windows OS, starting with "LB" all OS from MS will use Mozilla Gecko XPCOm engine embedded to the Linux kernel.
All OS versions pror "LB" will support only non-Intel platforms.
X11 is alike C-language for GUI toolkits, while GNOME/KDE is alike Java.
Forgot to mention: Mac OS X failed to open similar amount of similar applications simultaniously. In linux/PPC (YDL) I keep most of such applications for several days all together - I love Linux's swaping/paging :)
I know you are a troll, but I'll bite.
On My Bro-in-law's 300mhz K6-2, KDE2 and GNOME 1.4 ran fine. Win2k was a bit of a bear though. On my 366 Celery Notebook, MDK 8.2 runs like the wind. Win98 was a dog on the same notebook. The only problem with the notebook is the slow 6gig HDD.
How is X the problem, when it runs fine on my Agenda VR3? This is a 66mhz MIPS, 16mb Flash, 8mb RAM machine. If there is acceptable performance for a PDA, X is not the bottleneck for faster machines.
Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
And, of course, Berlin [berlin-consortium.org], which happens to rock hard.
Yes, but it's comming along so painfully slowly - I think it only has a handful of regular contributors.
Of course, if it makes some significant progress, it might be a good candidate for a merger with this AtheOS/Linux beast.
;-)
This topic got me back into BeOS in a big way. Sadly I only have R4.5 and the personal edition of 5. Does anyone know where I can register to get a Pro copy of 5 seein as how Be is bust? I forgot how much I love that lil dog tracker, and pulse is hella sweet w/ the dual pentiums. Kinda like back in the days of the BeBox w/ front panel LED's that displayed processor usage. Thanks in advance. J.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
A machine of that class serves as my mp3 jukebox/cablemodem firewall (I know...I know...but all of this stuff is in my living room and two pcs next to the desk is quite geeky enough......so I'll just have to do without a proper DMZ). For that matter, the guts from some of them could be reworked into a nice audio component for your stereo system. One could transparently handle mp3, ogg, various tracker modules, midi whatever. A cheap video card with TV out and and IR transciever would even give proper stereo component control over the device...with visualization going to the TV even.
Configure them properly and give em away if you have to. Mine had a home once I accumulated enough spare parts to put it together. The point is these machines aren't trash by any means. Oh well, I'm glad you found a use for them after all.
X runs fine on my Agenda VR3. If it gives decent performance on a 8meg, 66mhz PDA, then do you really think it is slowing down your Desktop? If properly supported Video cards (Rage128 or Nvidia's) give equal or better fps in Linux over Windows.
I copy cd's, download large files via ftp, play mp3's, and play games at the same time on my Linux box. I don't see latency as a big thing on Linux.
Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
final scratch runs on beos if im not mistaken... so now can we run it on linux? How bout a mac os x port for the real playaz :)
Funny, I thought Newbie/Linux was called Mandrake :)
Well, this Mandrake user has been using Linux since SLS, kernel version 0.99pl12. I've decided I'd rather use my goddamned computer to get some work done instead of spending half my life compiling kernels. If that's what floats your boat, you can have it.
...since the biggest weakness in Linux as a desktop is X and its window managers. (KDE has made the situation much better, but.)
An open BeOS in top of the Linux kernel sounds terrific.
and I've used Windows, BeOS, and MacOS (9 & 10), as well as various Linuxes and Unixes.
X is fine for when you need it. I seldom need it, and I could run it as a separate app (inside a real windowing system) when I do. Anyhow, these days everything is migrating to the browser. X's approach is obsolete.
I'd rather fragment and have something better. Sorry, I've been using X for years. I still think it sucks.
At least the arguments wouldn't become a religious war...
Just had to add that... ;-)
Can we call it Finux?
As a former Be fanatic (and to the dismay of many who know me, still fairly insistant about it...), I can safely say that it will be great to welcome many of the comforts of BeOS to Linux. But at the same time, it will still be Linux. Though this has been touched upon in this general thread, no one is recognizing poigiantly that this is not the BeOS replacement we are all hoping for. Both this, as well as BlueOS, are truly Linux at their heart. Only OpenBeoS (or OBOS, as it appears it will eventually be called), is going to be a true replacement for BeOS.
OBOS will support mmap() and have real fd() sockets, FWIW...
"And like that
Visit www.gobe.comandorder a copy.
...Obi Wan GnuBe.
Find funky gifts
Saying that AtheOS on the Linux kernel would just be another Linux distribution is insane. AtheOS has a very different approach than Linux in all its distributions. AtheOS was built from the example of BeOS. That a computer OS could be easy and efficient. Apple seems focused on easy while ignoring efficiency, *BSDs seem focused on engineering efficeincy while ignoring ease, Windows seems like a watered version of everybody elses idea, and Linux seems to be about open source* above everything else. Providing an alternative to the now defunct BeOS by following the original example seems the most logical route.
All Linux distributions are pretty much the same. They all for the most part have the same software. Yes they have different ways of putting the software together and various distribution specific different tools, (with suprising little carry over) but for the most part they all have the same code underneath. AtheOS even on the Linux kernel would still be about ease and efficiency through its own and BeOSs applications
Linux's user land software does not have any real unifying goal or design philosophy beyond open source. This seems to stem from a following of Linus' philosophy of hacking for the fun of it. Working to make a project better without real relation to other projects. AtheOS is also about hacking for fun but with the idea that the end result fits like a puzzle piece, intuitively and easily, fits into the greater project. Thier is no reason why a kernel that allows more higher level functionality and code would comprimise this dream.
Seeing as how "New AtheOS" seeks to be a clone of BeOS what would
hold back the project from some friendly stealing of the results of the BlueOS project. As both are on the Linux kernel.
It looks like a good idea to the benifit of the Linux kernel and the AtheOS project.
*read open source as not only gpl and similar licenses but also allowing anybody who wants to code to code. Quality will be looked at only after some type of critical mass is reached.
----
I gaze - the sun doesn't shine -
Rainbows and waterfalls run through my mind
. . .
A present from you - Strawberry letter 22
The music plays, I sit in for a few
This should be a great way for most of the non-MS community to bond together. BeOS and AtheOS already are similar enough that only minor source changes are needed to compile for either OS. GNU/Linux without X, running apps that only need recompiling with or without a few source changes to run on an original BeOS, OpenBeOS, BlueOS or even an AtheOS box and vice versa. If this can be done with the GNU/Linux kernel, why not another *nix variant's kernel too. This idea could be the unity that the non-MS community needs to finally overthrow the beast! Chose your kernel to suit your specific needs. Modify and recompile the apps you need to get the job done. File compatibility would not be (i think anyway) the issue it is today. I personally can't wait for OpenBeOS to mature, and am very enthusiastic about all of the different projects and forks related to it. What is your opinion?
Listen to BeOSRadio
www.beosradio.com
Its also BeOS Radio week btw.
The X extentions are so damn complicated that no ones using them, KDE isnt using Xrender, Gnome isnt using Xrender, hell even Enlightenment isnt using Xrender, the only people who seem to be able to make Xrender work, are the programmers working on it.
This only goes to advertise to the world exactly how little you know about X and how little attention should be paid to your misinformed rants about it.
NO where else have I seen alpha channeling in linux than from keith packard the creator of the Xrender extention.
Open your eyes then. It's everywhere, certainly all over my desktop anyway. If you want to live in the past, feel free. If you want to ignore it, feel free. Spreading misinformed, baseless FUD about one of the most significant modernizations to have happened to X in its entire lifespan isn't appreciated however.
What good is an overly complicated undocumented hard to use API on top of a bloated badly designed implementation of X?
The Render extension is a sensible, well-thought out solution to many of X's previous shortcomings. It's not perfect, but then - it's not finished yet. As for documentation, what do you need exactly? The wire protocol for Render is pretty comprehensively documented, and if you're merely trying to use it in an Xlib program, well, there's always the source code to look at. Yes, that's not perfect, but Render is the work of just Keith, and XFree86 is short-staffed enough as it is. Again - it's not finished yet! In any case, it seems that's enough for Trolltech and the GTK+ developers...
I'm also going to argue here that XFree86 isn't bloated and neither is it badly designed. What it is is massively short of good developers, especially those that are interested in working on the internals of the X server as opposed to just getting the latest and greatest features of their new graphics card working. It's an engineering project as big as the Linux kernel or KDE or GNOME, but with only about 5 people working on the core parts. Is it any wonder it develops more slowly?
Of course, if you were that concerned about X, I'd suggest you go and start hacking code for it, because that's the only way it's going to get better. Except, you're not a graphics programmer are you? Because if you were, you wouldn't have made such baseless allegations about X, and certainly wouldn't have made such basic factual errors as you did in your post.
Install their OS on one of your better machines (not those ten), network them all together as X terminals, and open an internet cafe.
Put identity in the browser.
Wasn't Bill the one who came up with that Windows XP thing?
Ohh, Bill Hayden you say.
OK, so remember this: the next time someone asks you about the benefits of OSS, you'll have another great example. Especially as this project is said to work better already than some of the Be emulation projects that mostly wrote everything by hand. Stuff like this couldn't be done in a closed source environment.
Having said that, it may not really sound like news to you, but I believe that this is a very good example of this benefit of OSS.
"We can confirm that Debian does *not* ship the version with the trojan horse. Our version predates it." [CA-2002-28]
People shouldn't be toying around with useless crufty stuff like Atheos when there's much better alternatives like LainOS to work with.
BeFS and fast, consistent GUI. I miss BeFS live queries the most. The simple, yet effective API (Simple even though it was all in C++). Rest in piece...
This link shows you how to install Be Personal Edition on its own partition.
http://www.betips.net/chunga.php?ID=495
Orange
Does that "BeOS on Linux" or whatever it should be called run as good as the real BeOS/AtheOS?
Do apps run just as smoothly?
Well, if I have to run my apps inside a browser or some terminal window,then it's not network transparency. I want all of my apps to look, feel and act the same, wether they are local or remote (speed will of cause differ between local and remote, so I can't get total transparency). The only apps where I think any difference is justified is games and video, networks supporting that remote (not sending the video then decoding it, decoding and then sending it) are still somewhat out of my pricerange. And even in that area I hope we will get more transparency.
If this BeOS GUI on the Linux kernel turns out to be all it's cracked up to be (at the least a better-looking, easier-to-code-for windowing system) then perhaps it may become more attractive to both GUI app developers and "mainstream" users alike.
I know from talking to friends and family who've tried Linux, part of their reluctance to change is due to the way X behaves and how it works (or doesn't work) with video and applications such as Netscape or RealPlayer.
Another advantage is the ability to port many of the nice-looking/functioning BeOS programs to run in Linux.
Someone mentioned it before, but take MacOSX as an example - they did it right: Use a powerful backend (BSD) and slap a much prettier interface on top. Joe Sixpack doesn't care or need to know what OS is actually running in the background as long as the interface is easy-to-use and clean (enough). As a developer new in the world of OS programming, it seems like Linux is a good choice for open source driver support and overall popularity of the operating system among open source developers.
Give me a good OS or give me WindowsXP! (read: death)
...and that's the way the cookie crumbles.
Personally, as someone who has never used Be, I find this an interesting test.
... 16? 64? more? There are major problems with inter-process scheduling and communication which cause real scaling problems. Perhaps one architecture will be a lot better than another.
Some people have been saying that X Window needed to be replaced, and this will be a replacement. It will be quite interesting to see what difference it makes in performance. Also in compatibility (which X Window seems to be quite good at).
It's always important to occasionally go back to the basics and redo them from a different perspective. That's one reason that the Hurd is important. I suspect that there will turn out to be major differences between how Linux and the Hurd scale to multiprocessor systems, as n increases beyond 4 to
Similarly, as full motion 3-D becomes important there may be major differences between X Window and BeWindows (whatever it's called... I said I wasn't a Be user). Perhaps both will have advantages in slightly differing areas. In that case it will be very nice to have them both sitting on top of the same base layer. With enough RAM (and an additional monitor? [OK, I'm oversimplifying. I want to have shared disk files between the systems.]) you might have one session of each running at the same time. This would slow things down of course, but depending on what the difference in advantages turned out to be it might still be worthwhile. Or not.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
However, with this AtheOS fork, there is right now a working OS that runs the Be API. This means that updating Be-native programs is not totally in vain, and it also means that some people might even write new apps for the Be API. This wouldn't happen if the only hope to keep that API alive was the promise of OpenBeOS somewhere down the road. This is not to slight OpenBeOS; it's just a very ambitious project that will not produce well-functioning results for a while. By the time it does, it can count itself lucky when Ahte-Linux-BeOS apps will run on it after only a recompile.
As I have just posted to OSNews:d =852& offset=90&rows=97#12860
http://www.osnews.com/comment.php?news_i
I've been spending the past hour reading this thread on OSNews. After all that listening I feel the need to respond with my 2cents. Waiver: I am not a 'real' geek, merely a hobbyist with some experience coding in Perl and now Ruby.
Overall I think the fork/linux merge is an excellent and realistic choice. As I see it the two main obstacles for a new OS are not technologically-related, but rather human-related:
1) Will enough people get to play with it?
and 2) Will enough people develop for it?
The answer to the first question ties closely with the issue of device drivers. Reading this discussion thread it appears the current state of having software relate to all the diverging types of hardware is a real mess to say the least.
If Mr.Hayden (aka Bill) feels the best way around this hurdle at this point is to go with Linux, then I say "great!" I do hope, however, that this gives us serious pause for dreaming up new models whereby hardware and software interact that is somewhat more elegant than the current state of affairs.
The answer to the second question, I feel, ties closely with the issue of a standardized API. It appears that Bill has chosen to go with the BeOS API which I feel is an excellent choice as well. I admit I don't know how much this means software developers can sit back and say 'OK, we have a standard API, so regardless of the underlying kernel, file system, etc, we can happily develop apps.' I'm hoping it means at least there will be only minimal changes to apps to get them working properly.
All in all, in the short term we at least have a linux distro (in the works) that's finally free of X (yeeee haaaaaa!) In the slightly longer term, I hope the open source community will take another serious look at the above 2 human-related points that bear addressing.t the above 2 human-related points that bear addressing.
I know it isn't exactly BeOS, but does it have the same horrible hardware compatability? I like what I see in (what was) BeOS, but I never seem to have hardware that let's me really open her up. I thought about migrating to BeOS, but I didn't feel like upgrading my box just to switch to a different OS. While on this topic do any of the other flavors of BeOS have improved hardware support?
Heroscape, it's like legos combined with anachronistic wargames.