Slashdot Mirror


Syllable's Kristian Van Der Vliet Interview

Andreas Louca writes "OSNews.com has a nice interview with Syllable's Project Leader, Kristian Van Der Vliet. Syllable is one of the teams that raised off the ashes of AtheOS. They talk about the future of Syllable and the current status. "

123 comments

  1. It... by BiteMeFanboy · · Score: 2, Funny
    They talk about the feature

    It only has one... somehow I don't think that's going to cut it. ;) THppppppppt.

    1. Re:It... by Surak · · Score: 1

      'whoami' has only one feature, but somehow it's managed to stay in *nix for sometime. ;)

    2. Re:It... by jared_hanson · · Score: 1

      I can think of at least two features that are a requirement for any OS that I'm going to use. If it doesn't have them, it is not going to stay on my computer very long. Programs however, I like as feature-bare as possible. There is a difference.

      --
      -- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.
    3. Re:It... by Surak · · Score: 1

      Only two? Heck, MS-DOS has at least 2 features. ;)

    4. Re:It... by yomegaman · · Score: 2, Funny

      1. Tabbed browsing
      2. Play Ogg files

      I'm right, aren't I?

      --
      ...wearing a skin-tight topless leather jumpsuit, with cutaway buttocks and transparent crotch panel.
    5. Re:It... by Surak · · Score: 1

      Most OSes can do most of those. Mozilla runs on a mind-numbing amount of platforms, and Ogg, well, if it's not on your OS, there's source code, so port it! ;)

    6. Re:It... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have always tried to give my 14 yo daughter, Surak, her privacy, at least to a point. However, recently I have become concerned because of the information I found on her computer. She has been visiting many teen sites and other sites regarding sexuality and guys. Some of the teen sites have heavy discussions about sex and have links to soft porn, or what I would call soft porn. The sexuality sites she has been visiting show images of naked guys and I also found where she and her friends have been emailing these types of pictures to each other. Other teen sites, such as slashdot, she has been to have areas where they can post pictures, alot of the pictures were of penises, many of them erect.

      I really want to come down on her about this especially the nude photos of men but I dont know how to handle it, one person I talked to at work mentioned her daughter has done similar things.

      How normal is it for Surak to be doing this? I know it is expected of young boys to look at porn but what about young girl?. Does anyone have any comments or suggetions? And would any of you be interested in tearing up her anus?

    7. Re:It... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Hi. Please tell me where the sites are, so I may determine if they are any good or not.

      Thanks --Rob 'CmdrTaco' Malda

    8. Re:It... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Excelent! Simply superb!

      Keep up the good work, and keep us informed about your daughter's anus.

    9. Re:It... by jared_hanson · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, I was thinking more along the lines of protected memory and capable of running multiple processes. Your thinking of programs again. People should really learn the distinction between an operating system and the programs that run on top of it.

      --
      -- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.
    10. Re:It... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ya know, that'd be quite amusing except what 14 year old girl would use Surak as a handle on Slashdot? None. Ya know why? Because Surak is a Vulcan male's name from Star Trek. That's why. You stupid assfucker. I hope you enjoy tearing up your daughter's anus, because as soon as you're caught, some 6'5" big black dude with a 13" cock named BUBBA is gonna be tearing your's up in the federal pen.

    11. Re:It... by powerlinekid · · Score: 1

      If thats all it takes then Syllable can ship now :). ABrowse has tabs and ColdFish plays Ogg files.

      --

      can't sleep slashdot will eat me
    12. Re:It... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right.. an operating system is a program that can view webpages, like Windows XP. Programs that run on top of it, meanwhile, are the little thingies that appear in the web site boxes, like Yahoo Games or AOL. I think they're called "Flash". Am i right?

    13. Re:It... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Because Surak is a Vulcan male's name from Star Trek."

      Thanks for proving my point. Pointing out that tidbit of information makes you look like a little girl too.

      homofag.

      cm

  2. Kristian Van Der Vliet by GMontag · · Score: 4, Funny

    With all those syllables, this sounds like a good fit.

  3. huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Syllable is one of the teams that raised off the ashes of AtheOS. "

    What does it mean to "raise off the ashes" ?

    1. Re:huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      To "raise from the ashes" ("raise off the ashes" would be an acceptable alternative way to say this, since "off" and "from" are in this contxt synonyms) is an expression meaning that one thing has died, and another thing has arisen in its void.

      The expression is a reference to the mythical Phoenix, which would periodically die and burst into flames, and a new Phoenix would be born among the ashes.

      In this case, the implication is that AtheOS died in flames, but Syllable was born among the metaphorical "ashes", and is now some kind of reincarnation or successor to AtheOS.

      "To Raise from the Ashes" is a trademark of Phoenix BIOS Technologies, incorporated. For more fun facts about the mythical Phoenix, you can visit your local library and read J.K. Rowling's excellent documentary in book form, "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix", to be released in just four days.

  4. Yeah:huh? by JohnnySkidmarks · · Score: 0

    Oh NO!!! I think they didn't make the sentence sound like you are used to hearing it!!! What are you gonna do? I sugest a crying jag followed by a long phone call to your mom. Get over it.

    --

    I went to battle MC Escher but drew a blank

  5. They used khtml before apple. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative
    1. Re:They used khtml before apple. by powerlinekid · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This isn't offtopic really. People made a big deal about Safari, but ABrowse (my current beast of a project) has been using KHTML since around 98-99. I'm currently working on the update so our render engine can be more compatible.

      --

      can't sleep slashdot will eat me
    2. Re:They used khtml before apple. by kalidasa · · Score: 1

      I think the reason people made a big deal about Safari is because it is a commercial product from an established company that used an open-source framework that they themselves didn't develop: a win for OSS, not a loss for those of you who already knew about and used KHTML.

    3. Re:They used khtml before apple. by powerlinekid · · Score: 1

      Excellent point :). However I do remember the big deal about "oh they're using KHTML and not gecko", etc. Where the topic got away from Apple and into the merits of KHTML verse Gecko. Oh well, you're probably right.

      --

      can't sleep slashdot will eat me
    4. Re:They used khtml before apple. by kalidasa · · Score: 1

      However I do remember the big deal about "oh they're using KHTML and not gecko", etc.

      I think that was just because folks expected them to use Gecko: Gecko seemed more mature, and they had hired one of the fellows working on Chimera, a Gecko browser for OS X. At first it seemed like an insult to Gecko, but that is in part because noone was really paying much attention to KHTML. So you still get points for using KHTML before Apple; but it doesn't seem so surprising that everyone made a big deal out of Apple using it.

  6. Second reincarnation spell? by TheConfusedOne · · Score: 0, Troll

    What does it mean to "raise off the ashes" ?

    I know in the ol' D&D if you blew a reincarnation it turned the body to ashes. Maybe that's what they mean by this? :-D

    --
    --- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
  7. Easy boys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    easy there boys, Kristian is a guy.

  8. AtheOS is dead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    No, really. I must have missed this. What happened to AtheOS? When did it die? Why? When was this?

    Wasn't AtheOS the OS that was all being done by that one guy and had the amiga-like GUI with the nice c++ API? If that's the one i'm thinking of, is this a big mark against the single-benevolent-dictator software development model that AtheOS was the shining example of, or a mark for because the project got so far before the guy wandered off for whatever reason?

    Well, at the least, this explains why I suddenly stopped hearing about AtheOS after so much noise was made about it..

    Does AtheOS's previous developer still use it on his home machine?

    -super ugly ultraman

    1. Re:AtheOS is dead? by d-Orb · · Score: 5, Informative
      Wasn't AtheOS the OS that was all being done by that one guy and had the amiga-like GUI with the nice c++ API?

      Yes, the same. The main developer stopped working on the project (at least, stopped posting to mailing-lists and the such), and after some time, people decided to fork Atheos to make syllable. It seems most of the former atheos community has moved over to Syllable. Another similar project used the Linux kernel with a BeOS like interface on top, this is Cosmoe. I am not familiar with the latter, though.

    2. Re:AtheOS is dead? by BigFootApe · · Score: 3, Informative
      I think it is/was on hiatus for a while.
      Does AtheOS's previous developer still use it on his home machine?


      As the news says, his dev box broke down and hasn't been replaced (yet) 'cuz he bought an airplane. I think the site server is run at his employer's or something.
    3. Re:AtheOS is dead? by Ilvatar · · Score: 0

      The AtheOS guy (Kurt I believe?) disappeared (or possibly lost interest in AtheOS) a fairly long time ago. We (aka Vanders and the rest of the Syllable team) picked up where he left off.

    4. Re:AtheOS is dead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " No, really. I must have missed this. What happened to AtheOS? When did it die? Why? When was this?"

      This were *exactly* my thoughts. The last time I heard from AtheOs was when it was still "developed"... *sigh* So many information to absorb, so little time...

  9. Phew by HopeUnknown · · Score: 5, Funny

    I saw the name "Kristian", and for a second there I thought they were talking about a girl! On Slashdot!

    1. Re:Phew by rifter · · Score: 1

      In other news, world-class journalistChristiane Amanpour has announced a new SourceForge project, AmanpourOS. It will include a realtime kernel, POSIX and Win32 compatability, a full suite of GNU tools, and of course a Journalling File System called CNNFS (CNNFS is Not aNother File System).

      When asked how much code she had available on her project site presently, she replied "Code? Oh, I haven't written any code, really. All I did was get a sourceforge project up and secured an OSNews interview with Eugenia Loli-Queru. But that's the power of Open Source. These geeks, for whatever reason, seem to be obsessed with me, or any girl who has anything to do with computers, really. If they will slave away for millions of man-hours for Linus, just think what motivation my leadership can provide! Why the benefits in sheer x-ray and slideshow technology alone are simply staggering!"

      SCO CEO Darl McBride, however, was clearly upset over the announcement. "What Ms. Amanpour is doing here is clearly wrong, violates contracts, SCO Intellectual Property, the USAPATRIOT Act, and any sense of human decency," McBride snarled as he slammed a playbook lent him by Hillary Rosen of the RIAA down on the table. "This blatantly contradicts prior agreements we feel we had with Ms. Amanpour as set down during dinner da - I mean meetings we may or may not have had as early as ten days before she is going to say she started this project, whenever that is."

      Mr. McBride then turned his attention to suing the Netherlands over a violation of SCO's ownership of the idea of windmills. "And we are still looking for this infamous pirate De La Mancha, aka, Don Quixote. I have important leads from an informant named Dulcinea who says he has been stalking her in on the internet for centuries. With her testimony and that of Sancho Panza, we should soon put an end to him." McBride rubbed his hands together with great zeal and droooled at the prospect as we slipped quietly into the night, never to return to the quiet Maryland Mental facility where he now resides.

  10. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A nitpick:

    This OS looks really cool, but I just want to know: years and years since LiteStep or AfterStep or Windowmaker or whatever the first attempt to make "a NextStep-like window manager", and the "open source community" still can't seem to produce a GUI that doesn't look exactly like a less-stylish version of NeXTStep.

    I guess that isn't *bad*.. it's just funny.

    Besides this, though.. I am firmly convinced that "open source" is going to go nowhere until the Community realizes that everyone except you absolutely HATES the way that Motif looks. No, saying "it has skins" is *never* an acceptable answer. If your product, out of the box, has that faux-3D, Motif/NextStep/Netscape 4 look to it *anywhere*, people will not want to use it.

    1. Re:Why? by Horny+Smurf · · Score: 1
      I happen to like the NextStep look -- it was well thought out (a 2nd revision of MacOS, more or less).


      HOWEVER, let's remember that most NeXT boxes were black and white... maybe they couldn't afford the license fees for color?


      Motif looks like a windows 3.0 knockoff, but designed by a committee.

    2. Re:Why? by RevAaron · · Score: 2, Informative

      NeXTSTEP looks quite nice to me as well. A helluva lot different than Motif.

      Plenty of newer NeXT boxes and white hardware running NeXTSTEP or OpenStep were color. Even for copies of NS/OS on b/w machines, NeXT still paid the Pantone color licenses. NeXT was a platform that did many things very well. And when your display is greyscale, you better have accurate colors when you're going to be printing. Heck, back then, a Pantone license was a good idea on a color monitor. Apple's ColorSync existed before the first NeXT cube was released, though.

      And Motif was designed with Windows 3.x in mind. I don't think it's close enough to think of Motif as a knock-off, but there are similarities that make it a bit uncomfy.

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    3. Re:Why? by Pflipp · · Score: 1

      getting away with this comment and score +2 insightful... you should run for president!

      NextStep has nothing to do with Motif has nothing to do with this. Off topic.

      --
      "We can confirm that Debian does *not* ship the version with the trojan horse. Our version predates it." [CA-2002-28]
    4. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, I was afraid that would come across unclear. I wasn't trying to link NextStep to Motif; rather, i was trying to say that everything that ever ripped off NextStep wound up looking a lot like Motif. NextStep doesn't look like Motif, but you must admit AtheOS kind of does. And you aren't claiming AtheOS isn't trying to look like NextStep, are you?

      What i meant by NextStep/Motif/Netscape 4 was not to say these were all one thing, but just kind of to refer to that general sort of 'fake cardboardy 3d with thin gray trapezoids' concept that beleaguers open source GUIs and that AtheOS buys into.

      NextStep was actually quite attractive. However, every UNIX project that ever tried to evoke NextStep just missed the point utterly and just wound up thinking they can draw "3d" gray widget borders and look like NextStep. Well, they don't, they look like Motif, and Motif is the ugliest thing on earth.

    5. Re:Why? by edwdig · · Score: 2, Informative

      Motif is older than Windows 3.x. PCGEOS was developed at the same time as Windows 3.x, and shipped around the same time. It licensed Motif for its interface, which means Motif had to have already existed before Windows 3.x.

    6. Re:Why? by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      But Windows 3.x is a polished version of the Windows 2.x/OS/2 1.1 interface. (1.2/1.3 were copies of the Windows 3.x interface)

    7. Re:Why? by Pflipp · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, I've used Atheos once long ago and it was themeable, with some default themes derived from Amiga (that's Amiga, not NextStep) and BeOS. I did find the themes to be a little bit too "fat" (compared to Amiga itself, and I never liked the BeOS look -- at least not in Atheos or Linux). So no, I guess they don't try (= intend) to look like NextStep.

      That the looks aren't all that much is another thing, though. But to just discuss taste -- I guess the users must decide here.

      --
      "We can confirm that Debian does *not* ship the version with the trojan horse. Our version predates it." [CA-2002-28]
  11. Commodity Hardware by kalidasa · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The most interesting part to the interview is where he starts talking about the difficulty in coding for modern hardware interfaces; he suggests that as easier-to-code interfaces like PS/2 and the floppy are rplaced with harder-to-code interfaces like USB, the end of the hobby OS may be at hand. As the barrier-to-entry for coding OSes for commodity hardware grows larger, doesn't that suggest that the opportunity for new robust OSes to evolve to compete with the established players (not only Windows, but OS X, the other BSDs, and Linux) may not exist in the future? Is it possible that the evolution of the OS may be choked by the evolution of the hardware?

    1. Re:Commodity Hardware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No.

    2. Re:Commodity Hardware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard in a while. Do you think that hardware interfaces haven't been increasing in complexity until USB came out?

      I'm going to let you in on a secret: Abstraction Layers. These can manifest themselves as drivers, libraries, or toolkits. They allow application programmers to ignore the complexities of the underlying hardware.

      New interfaces are always harder to code for, until standardized drivers become available. I remember when an ethernet connection was considered a hard-to-code interface. Nobody really has to worry about it now. Same with USB in the future.

    3. Re:Commodity Hardware by travail_jgd · · Score: 3, Informative

      "...he suggests that as easier-to-code interfaces like PS/2 and the floppy are rplaced with harder-to-code interfaces like USB, the end of the hobby OS may be at hand."

      Why? At the very least, developers can use freely code from the BSDs with no strings attached. If the OS developers are planning on GPLing their code, they can pull code directly from Linux.

      If using code from either of those OS's is unacceptable (say, the new OS is being written in a different language), the developers could actually read the BSD or Linux routines and use that as a starting point.

    4. Re:Commodity Hardware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The great thing about open source is variety and legacy. OSS remembers its roots and keeps archives. Projects may die out, but it is truly hard (dare I say impossible?) to loose anything of value.

      I think there are many people who believe that if the OSS community wants to make something, nothing will really stop it.

      Looking over /., there is a new, incredibly complex and even (sometimes, yes) meaningless project every other day. I personally believe we are only limited by how we limit ourselves.

      Look at the innovation and complexities OSS has already overcome. It really is amazing - we almost take it for granted. A hobby is something what you wish you could get paid for. That leaves a lot of room open for big projects.

    5. Re:Commodity Hardware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Where is the fun or learning experience in just taking code from someplace else? I think you misunderstand; a large number of hobby OS's are just that, an opurtunity for a single person to hack on the hardware at a low level and learn how their computer works. Most of them are no more than a kernel with a schedular and allocator that boots from a floppy. This is fairly easy to do because the code required to do it is managable by a single person in a sensible time frame.

      If the hardware becomes more complex, the time required to learn how to use it increases. People just wont bother. Have you even looked at the IA-64 programming manual? EPIC (VLIW) instructions sets are not designed to be written by hand, how the heck can a single person expect to write their own OS using a complex instruction set like that?

      Complexity could just be enough to make enough people not bother, and that would be a massive lose.

    6. Re:Commodity Hardware by Deusy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If it was only the hardware that was evolving, then yes this would be the case.

      This is unlikely to be the case. Should it get to the point where the hardware is too many and too complicated for everybody to program for, you'll find generic interfaces to the hardware being implemented in generic assembly languages like table assembly.

      Or perhaps firmware will develop further to ease driver creation.

      There are many areas in which layers can develop to keep developing drivers possible for mortals. The industry isn't going to make things too difficult for itself.

      Ever since the computer industry started, each extra level of complexity has seen an extra layer added to keep software creation manageable, and drivers are no exception.

      Whilst Kristian's fears have foundation, there'll be ways around them even if it's as extreme as hobby OSes having to cooperate on driver development.

      --

      Free Gamer - Free games list and commentary

    7. Re:Commodity Hardware by Bunji+X · · Score: 2, Interesting

      New interfaces are always harder to code for, until standardized drivers become available.

      Yes, but as hardware becomes increasingly complex, drivers, libraries and toolkits will be equally more difficult to write. Even more so if you don't have reference material for the hardware you are writing drivers for, as most OS projects don't have today.

      It is not like standardized drivers appear magically for an OS, except a few select ones with critical mass.

      --
      ---
      The combined human population is enough to feed every living tiger for app. 28000 years.
    8. Re:Commodity Hardware by kalidasa · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard in a while. Do you think that hardware interfaces haven't been increasing in complexity until USB came out?

      RTFA. He's talking about writing operating systems from scratch. Who do you think writes the abstraction layers?

      The point is that as each new hardware interface is developed, it is significantly more complex than the preceding one, and it becomes harder and harder for a hobbyist programmer to comprehend it.

    9. Re:Commodity Hardware by renoX · · Score: 1

      I've looked at the EPIC instruction set and I didn't find it more complicated than the ugly x68 instruction set.

      And as for coding in VLIW assembly language complicated enough to code an OS: an OS usually is mostly coded in C, so it isn't really a problem.

      And if the assembly language is too complicated, and C too rigid for some parts, nothing prevents the use of some kind of "in-between" language: a C extended with all the operation offered by the CPU for example.

  12. Sounds cool, but... by the+morgawr · · Score: 5, Insightful
    So we have yet another hobby OS with some very good ideas that will never end up going mainstream. After checking the site out, nothing they're doing couldn't be done on top of a BSD or Linux based kernel (with modification ofcourse). This would have solved their hardware problems, and given them a fully working OS to start from, progams and all.

    For Open Source and Free Software to succeed people need to stop making "yet another peice of software written from scratch". The strength of having the source is that you can modify it for your own use (like syllable is doing with the GNU tool chain) and not have to re-invent the wheel. The argument of "what's out there isn't good enough" doesn't fly either. You have the source to fix it and make it better!

    While this seems like a cool project, it is taking away developers who could be adding the same great features and abilities to our current systems. Then again, maybe I don't understand what they are trying to do.

    --
    The policy of the United States is worse than bad---it is insane. -- Ludwig von Mises, Economic Policy(1959)
    1. Re:Sounds cool, but... by jabbadabbadoo · · Score: 3, Insightful
      "So we have yet another hobby OS with some very good ideas that will never end up going mainstream. After checking the site out, nothing they're doing couldn't be done on top of a BSD or Linux based kernel (with modification ofcourse). This would have solved their hardware problems, and given them a fully working OS to start from, progams and all."

      What's the fun in that?

    2. Re:Sounds cool, but... by kalidasa · · Score: 5, Insightful

      For Open Source and Free Software to succeed people need to stop making "yet another peice of software written from scratch". The strength of having the source is that you can modify it for your own use (like syllable is doing with the GNU tool chain) and not have to re-invent the wheel.

      So in other words, Linus working on his own operating system kernel was just taking good developers away from HURD, right?

      If we follow your logic, we'll be stuck with Linux and BSD forever. Not that Linux and BSD aren't great, but they are not perfect, and at some point "making them better" won't be enough anymore. You need to have constant experimentation with OSes or you'll never know what's possible (and you'll never replace all those OS programmers with a new generation).

    3. Re:Sounds cool, but... by banzai51 · · Score: 1

      First off, there is always the experience from coding from the group up. Second, Linux isn't a hotbed of good GUI. Most new GUIs worth looking at are comming from outside the Linux relm.

    4. Re:Sounds cool, but... by Horny+Smurf · · Score: 1
      According to your logic, there shouldn't be a linux, because Linus should have worked on *BSD, or Hurd, or patches for minix, right?

      Just because they "could" be working on linux doesn't mean they "would" be, if not for Syllable.

    5. Re:Sounds cool, but... by powerlinekid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Fair enough.
      Well I am one of the developers from Syllable (Syllable-Net team leader to be exact) so maybe I can answer your question.

      The argument of "what's out there isn't good enough" doesn't fly either. You have the source to fix it and make it better!

      Have you ever played with the linux internals? Or hacked on X or KDE? If you have, you know its a mess. Syllable is a consistent system built on modern ideas. We don't have 20 years of cruft to fight with everytime we need to make a change or add a feature. This alone is worth the effort.

      Now most importantly: Our main developers code on Syllable because its fun. I have a blast throwing ideas back and forth between Vanders, Rick, Kaj, and all the others. If someone has a problem with some specific widget (recently the tab issue in our terminal), we work together to fix it. I don't think any of us are working on this to get rich. For the most part its also the whole "scratch an itch" philosophy. Just because we work on this OS, doesn't mean we'd work on another one. Thats like saying that just because I pirated a copy of Windows that I cost MS $200 because I would of bought it anyway. The world doesn't work like that.

      We have a great community, a great project manager in Vanders and great developers. All of us keep our eyes on the user's needs, not on what we as developers want. As time goes on and more infrastructure is laid down, you'll see Syllable become more mature. Simple things that can be a hassle on Linux (gui consistancy, simple application notification through a central Registra, etc) will be in place.

      Anyway, don't give up on Syllable yet. In the future it will be much different from Linux, BSD, Windows or anything else. Remember we're not even a year old yet (although AtheOS has been around for a while).

      --

      can't sleep slashdot will eat me
    6. Re:Sounds cool, but... by syle · · Score: 3, Insightful
      While this seems like a cool project, it is taking away developers who could be adding the same great features and abilities to our current systems.
      I hate this type of arrogant mentality. The whole point of the open source community is that everyone should be able to work on whatever they want, NOT that everyone should be working on Linux.

      Yeah, I know Linux and BSD are great and all, but who the hell are you to judge what these guys should or shouldn't be spending their time on? Maybe you've read too many articles about the RIAA/MPAA, "For every CD copied, we lose a sale," -- "For every developer working on non-Linux systems, we lose a Linux developer." I'm afraid it doesn't work like that.

      I'm not going to bother arguing whether your assertation that they could use a Linux kernel is valid or not, because it's completely irrelevant. If the developers wanted to use Linux, they would. They chose not to. Do you imagine the thought just never crossed their mind?

      We may all be a team in the sense that most open source developers have similar goals, but not in the sense that you can refer to "our current systems" in any meaningful context.

      --

      /syle

    7. Re:Sounds cool, but... by sc00p18 · · Score: 1

      I understand your point, but people are going to code what they want to code. Lots of people don't care about "going mainstream" or "succeeding." A lot of coders are just having fun, and want to have something he/she created entirely from scratch.

    8. Re:Sounds cool, but... by the+morgawr · · Score: 2, Interesting
      It seems a lot of people misunderstood what I was saying (and like I said I could be wrong): Syllable needs to have a terminal emulator, a text editor, a web browser, etc. and a bunch of other generic apps which are basically the same as the stuff that's out there with any given linux distro or a BSD. For their kernel they have to have a scheduler, a VM system, drivers, file systems, etc. 99% of this code could be take from something already out there - leaving the developers to focus on what they seem to what to do: making something more useable then the horrible, inconsistant UIs that plauge open source today. It seems from the website that most of this code was rewritten. This wastes effort because instead of improving on a current VM system or driver, they wrote their own. They can use someone else's code and still have their own project, still have fun, and get more work done.

      That said, the goal of the project seems to be to make a more useable system. Unless I misunderstand the plan of attack, I see no reason they couldn't make a UI (and other extenstions) that works with existing OSes instead of reinventing the wheel on everything else. A compleate OS is a huge undertaking, and I wish them the best of luck, but I don't understand why you need a new OS to have a better UI.

      --
      The policy of the United States is worse than bad---it is insane. -- Ludwig von Mises, Economic Policy(1959)
    9. Re:Sounds cool, but... by Vanders · · Score: 3, Informative

      Ah. Your perception of Syllable is incorrect I'm glad to report.

      While a large part of the kernel has been written from scratch, there is nothing wrong with that. For the effort Kurt put into writing it, we have a kernel with a kernel space ELF loader and runtime linker, written with SMP support from day one, with an efficient micro kernel IPC mechanism. At the same time, he used code from Linux were it was beneficial. The allocator is essentially from Linux for example.

      The terminal emulator (ATerm) was written by the author of AtheOS as well. It is not a lot of code and can be maintained by one person. The AEdit text editor was my very first application for Syllable, so that was hardly a huge time sink. The Web Browser uses Khtml as its rendering engine; way before Apple started on Safari!

      A large majority of drivers come from Linux and X, along with some BSD and even Be Sample Code.

      The appserver, GUI API and associated support applications are all written from scratch, yes. A lot of the lower level stuff is GNU or GPL'd software, we use a version of Glibc and the entire GNU toolchain for development, run Bash as the shell and offer the same basic toolset as Linux (E.g. GNU fileutils, textutils, shellutils, Perl, Python etc.)

      So a large amount of stuff is reused. We only re-write were it makes sense to do so :)

    10. Re:Sounds cool, but... by Feztaa · · Score: 1

      Have you ever played with the linux internals? Or hacked on X or KDE? If you have, you know its a mess. Syllable is a consistent system built on modern ideas. We don't have 20 years of cruft to fight with everytime we need to make a change or add a feature. This alone is worth the effort.

      Wasn't that the whole point of BeOS? To make a unix-like system that was great for multimedia and not full of cruft from the last 30 years of unix development.

      If you're starting your own project just because you reject linux's cruft, why not just work on BeOS then?

    11. Re:Sounds cool, but... by the+morgawr · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Fair enough, I hope you guys are having fun and do well. I've got some question's if you'd bother to answer them.

      Linux internals are very messy. BSD is a lot cleaner, clean enough that researchers chop it up for use in experimental OSes. Why not start from something that works and has solid hardware support? Was it just more fun to do it from scratch or was there a design reson why reworking an existing system or just using large chunks of code wasn't an option?

      I'm no UI expert but the code for X, KDE, and GNOME isn't pretty (and from a user's stand point, the UI isn't friendly). I'm sure that you guys can do a better job. Most people won't get to enjoy the results of your labor though, because your OS isn't compatible with the vast pool of Free and Open software out there. Asking people to take such a huge jump is hard (but not imposible). Why not make a UI to work on top of what's already there? What do current systems not support or do, that you felt compelled to rewrite? What advantages does your design offer over current systems? Can you still display remotely?

      --
      The policy of the United States is worse than bad---it is insane. -- Ludwig von Mises, Economic Policy(1959)
    12. Re:Sounds cool, but... by the+morgawr · · Score: 1

      Thanks for filling me in. Are there any docs on your site that descibe in more detail the design of the system? I was unable to find any.

      --
      The policy of the United States is worse than bad---it is insane. -- Ludwig von Mises, Economic Policy(1959)
    13. Re:Sounds cool, but... by Vanders · · Score: 1

      Kurt started developing AtheOS before the first BeBoxes shipped. AtheOS was already a lively project before OpenBeOS (& B.E.O.S and all the other BeOS clones) started. Syllable is simply a continution of AtheOS.

      So its the other way around I'm afraid :)

    14. Re:Sounds cool, but... by Vanders · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sadly not. The best I can offer are the Doxygen docs of the GUI API That, the code itself and asking questions on the Syllable-Developer mailing list is the best way to find out how it works.

    15. Re:Sounds cool, but... by powerlinekid · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well its not really from scratch. We already had AtheOS which most of us were already part of. I didn't do too much back then, more of just a lurker.
      However, once Kurt abandoned AtheOS it seemed a shame to waste such a promising system.

      From my own experience, I'm the manager of ABrowse our web browser. ABrowse is based off of KHTML which is a nightmare. I'm currently thinking of some drastic changes because I can't keep up with porting the new versions. I don't want to write a html render engine from scratch, but I am seriously thinking of stripping just about all the none render code out of it. So yeah, there is a point where sometimes it is better to start from scratch.

      Well we don't have remote displays yet. However it is rather trivial to add that. As for right now, there are no great advantages over Linux or any of the BSDs. The the other hand, all of our developers listen to the users so any input is appreciated and noted.
      We support just about everything that is posix compliant, so that pretty much covers the GNU tools.
      As for building a system on top of already existant kernel, well thats what cosmoe is. Its the atheos api tuned to run beos apps, running on a linux kernel. Its kind of a kludge if you ask me. Our kernel while rather immature has some nice features. Its SMP friendly and is completely pre-emptive, the former not done by *BSD until recently and the latter being something Linux doesn't truly have.

      --

      can't sleep slashdot will eat me
    16. Re:Sounds cool, but... by PetiePooo · · Score: 1

      The argument of "what's out there isn't good enough" doesn't fly either. You have the source to fix it and make it better!

      Quick show of hands please: How many people have tried to "fix" the X Window System?

      Many people feel that X11 is a bloated, unmaintainable hack. It is absolutely full of cruft.

      My hope is that this effort gains enough of a foothold that it attracts developers that can put a WINE-like layer on it to translate KDE or QT calls. Then, as people migrate from lower-level toolkit libraries (Athena Widgets, TCL/TK, etc.) to higher-level libraries, it becomes simple to port their apps to an O/S like Syllable that doesn't have all the cruft that comes with an underlying X11 layer. Now, I realize that's a bit far fetched, but it is a step in what I feel is the right direction.

      Yes, it is extra work to develop a new O/S, but the GNU/Linux crowd is inextricably tied to X11. If it takes a new O/S to see the benefits of a simpler graphical subsystem, then I say its worth it. DirectFB could be the answer for Linux, but doesn't get the attention or support I feel it should. (Hey, Trolltech, how about a QT port?) For those of you with your favorite X11 apps that don't have a port yet, DirectFB even has a rootless X-server.

      FWIW, I use X11, but I don't program with it. Everyone I know of that does program with it complains about it. They say its bloated, difficult to program at the lower levels, and generally complain about its cruftiness. Use of higher level libraries are making these types more and more scarce, which I think is a good thing.

    17. Re:Sounds cool, but... by Arandir · · Score: 1

      I'm no UI expert but the code for X, KDE, and GNOME isn't pretty (and from a user's stand point, the UI isn't friendly). I'm sure that you guys can do a better job.

      I hope these guys can to a better job, but I am not at all "sure" of it. The people who work on X, KDE and GNOME aren't newbies who just learned C yesterday. They are excellent developers. I've looked at the code for all three projects, and it is all of high quality.

      There is of course, some cruft in all three of those projects. But that cruft comes from the environment. X has to work with any random UNIX thrown at it, with no luxury of changing the OS to make things easier. This is good because I can use X on all of my systems without having to learn a new API, command set or application set. GNOME and KDE have to work with X, without the luxury of the authority to change X. But this is a good thing because I can use GNOME and KDE on any X system.

      Most people think X/KDE/GNOME are slow, bloated, crufty, etc., because they are comparing it to the Windows desktop. In case you haven't noticed, you can only use the Windows desktop under Windows. If you look really close, you'll see that the Windows desktop has only a tenth the functionality of KDE or GNOME. What's amazing to me is that the FreeBSD/XFree86/KDE environment on my workstation is *faster* than the Windows2K environment on the very same machine!

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
    18. Re:Sounds cool, but... by cpeterso · · Score: 2, Informative


      he used code from Linux were it was beneficial. The allocator is essentially from Linux for example.


      and the design for Linux's slab allocator ripped off Solaris (see "UNIX Internals: The New Frontiers" by Uresh Vahalia).

    19. Re:Sounds cool, but... by moebius_4d · · Score: 1

      Well, Linus himself says that if he had known about the BSDs then that's what he would have worked on. So I guess, yes, there shouldn't be a Linux. I personally am happy that there is, because I think the GPL is a good device to ensure that business' relationship with free software isn't a one-way street. But that's my opinion, not Linus'.

    20. Re:Sounds cool, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh come on. get real.

      managing khtml embedding
      is a piss take compared to writing
      it yourself. keep up with the work
      on porting and get some portablity
      patches into kde cvs its not like
      other people don't need it anyways,
      a native win32 port will be attempted
      at some point and safari already has
      it ported.

      Alex

    21. Re:Sounds cool, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      as a kde devel i can honestly tell you
      that kde, gnome, other oss desktop
      projects kick ass code quality wise
      compared to a lot of other stuff out there.

      Alex

    22. Re:Sounds cool, but... by jorleif · · Score: 1

      Not really replying to you, but your comment just clears one point very well.

      I'm currently thinking of some drastic changes because I can't keep up with porting the new versions.

      I think this is exactly the thing which most of the people saying "why didn't you use the code from project Y?" don't understand. If you use someone elses code you have to maintain a fork of that code. That means syncing with new versions to fix bugs etc. Now this will not be trivial since it is someone elses code, and probably you won't know it as well as if it were your own. So often the maintenance hassles from using someone else's code can be a very big factor against its use.

  13. Testing, testing, testing by jabbadabbadoo · · Score: 2, Funny
    "What we excel at though is that we are always designing Syllable with an eye towards the end user. "

    Why, then, is Syllable an ugly looking, instable OS?

    Oh, he explains that later on:

    "We are very poor at testing before we release things, [...]"

    So good luck with your OS, Mr. Van Der Vliet.

    1. Re:Testing, testing, testing by Vanders · · Score: 4, Informative

      Why, then, is Syllable an ugly looking, instable OS?

      Because Syllable is a development, alpha version. Ugly can and will be fixed in time. We inherited the GUI from AtheOS and thats how it looks. Why spend time and effort changing the look of the GUI when the GUI isn't complete?

      Instability is inherent in the development process. Yes, we are very poor at testing before release, but that is because it is alpha quality. I don't have a release schedule, and there certainly are not enough users to form a FreeBSD style release team.

      Release testing generally consists of me trying out common actions for about half an hour after a build. As we finalise and stablise API's we can build automated test harnesses and formalise a testing plan for new releases.

    2. Re:Testing, testing, testing by jabbadabbadoo · · Score: 1

      Sure, but... my posting was meant as a joke. I don't question your competence. Really. Good luck.

  14. Screenshots by ceswiedler · · Score: 1

    Judging from the screenshots (isn't that the way we all review an OS?) this offers nothing new.

    50% troll,
    50% insightful.

    Honestly...if an OS looks THAT similar to the Linux, OSX, and Windows, can it really offer enough to justify its existence to anyone other than its developers?

    Give me something really new...Plan9 new...for a desktop OS, and I'll pay attention.

    1. Re:Screenshots by Ilvatar · · Score: 0

      You know it wouldn't hurt if you tried it sometimes before pounding it into the ground. Who cares about the looks? They can always be changed when the OS is stable enough. It takes 10 seconds to modify a layout. How is it similar to Linux, OSX and Windows? Just because it's decently (well 90% or so) POSIX compliant? Because it has a BASH implementation and uses Grub? Other from that it isn't similar at all (except driver ports and such but that's not at all what you mean). Linux and Windows and (*insert favourite ancient OS here*) are all prehistoric code with a fancy layout on top. Or in Linux' case, with no layout on top. Syllable doesn't have to go through all the utter crap of installing x and picking a favourite desktop manager and then coming to the conclusion that this particular desktop manager doesn't run this particular application. Syllable has a console, but the console resides within the GUI, and not the other way around.

    2. Re:Screenshots by DrWhizBang · · Score: 1

      Judging from the screenshots (isn't that the way we all review an OS?)...

      Umm, no, that's not how we review an os. Maybe if we're on crack.

      The "look" is themeable (like everyone else). But if we use your conclusion, then Windows with litestep is THE SAME as linux.

      Sheesh.

      --
      Schrodinger's cat is either dead or really pissed off...
    3. Re:Screenshots by Pflipp · · Score: 1

      The "Sheesh" is unnecessary, because the guy has a reasonable point here.

      If an OS behaves the same as e.g. Linux but is different internally, then yes, it IS "the same" as Linux. Look & feel is a big part of this. The internal differences only start to be interesting if you're a developer, or sometimes (when the API is the same) even only if you are into a specialized markted, like embedded or real-time software.

      For some of us, an ideal OS is one with an ideal user interaction. And sometimes when I have my Interaction Design hat on, this also counts for me.

      --
      "We can confirm that Debian does *not* ship the version with the trojan horse. Our version predates it." [CA-2002-28]
    4. Re:Screenshots by Deusy · · Score: 1

      Judging from the way you look (isn't that the way we all review other people?) you offer nothing new.

      50% boring,
      50% interesting.

      Honestly... if you look THAT similar to lots of other people, can you really offer enough to justify your existence to anyone other than your parents?

      Give me something really new... Ossie Osbourne new... for a maturing person, and I'll pay attention.

      --

      Free Gamer - Free games list and commentary

    5. Re:Screenshots by DrWhizBang · · Score: 1

      Screenshot reveal that this OS:

      a) has buttons
      b) has windows
      c) can draw them on a screen.

      Syllable offers a lot more than this, but the first poster's point was that nobody cares. That is very frustrating from a developer's standpoint, since you put a lot of effort into a kernel, display server, or filesystem, but cannot expect people to read the article and find out about this since there are pictures that look a lot like linux, or windows, or foo-os.

      I maintain my sheesh.

      --
      Schrodinger's cat is either dead or really pissed off...
  15. Hmm. by teamhasnoi · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Forgive me for asking, but what does Syllable deliver (or propose to) that some other os doesn't? (say linux, openBeos, QNX or *gasp*, windows?)

    I would love it if all the 'hobby' oses, combined forces and worked on one thing, like openBeos (soon to be renamed ;)

    I am not biased, either.

    OpenBeos High School Football RULEZ!!!

    1. Re:Hmm. by DrWhizBang · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Syllables featureset is not express in terms of what it can do, but what it will do ;-)

      Syllable does not use X or the linux kernel - it uses it's own SMP and fully preemptable kernel, it's own 64 bit filesyste (with attributes). and it's own alpha-channal-aware display server. It uses a C++ API that is similar to beos. And it is completely free.

      In the end, we expect syllable to be a os that is nice to work with - easy to use, easy to program. Since it does not use X as a display server, It provides its own toolkit. This will help applications maintain one look and feel. Although most posix apps can be ported (a la ./configure, make, make install), Syllable will be most powerful when native apps are written using the fs api's to store/index data, etc. It should compare more to beos and macos x than linux or qnx.

      There are other hobby OSes. Syllable just happens to be reasonably far along (thanks to Kurt Skauen) and seems to have a lot of momentum (thanks to Vanders.)

      --
      Schrodinger's cat is either dead or really pissed off...
    2. Re:Hmm. by Vanders · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Syllable API (And of course, the AtheOS API before that) was often compared to the BeOS API. It is not a clone and there are no plans to turn it into one, but it is certainly similiar. An application is built by deriving from a toolkit of C++ classes, which in turn talk to an application server.

      So it is a lot like OpenBeOS in that respect, except that Syllable has much more development behind it and works now. We are also not trying to clone BeOS API by API; if it suits our purpose we can and will use something completely different (For example, BeOS had a user-space TCP stack. AtheOS and Syllable have always had a modular kernel space stack)

      Syllable is also mostly under the [L]GPL, whereas OpenBeOS is MIT. Apart from the various idological reasons that don't interest me, Syllable can also draw on a large base of drivers available in E.g. Linux. Which is nice.

  16. Whatever... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    long ago, they said the same thing about Linux.

  17. it wasn't THAT long ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People don't give new OSes a shot anymore. I wonder, if Linux were begun today, if the slashdot crowd would even notice.

  18. Shutdown and Restart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would having shutdown and restart buttons on the desktop constitute a feature? This is a Bad Thing(TM) isn't it.

    At least EvilOS has a two-to-three click combo to shut it down.

    Anyone else notice that?

    AC

    1. Re:Shutdown and Restart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They pop alerts that ask you if you're quite sure you really wanted to do that?

  19. How do you maintain order and good design? by Nicolai+Haehnle · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've been lurking on the AtheOS/Syllable mailing lists for a long time now. For a time I had the feeling that, given enough time, Syllable could really become a great operating system, because people were thinking in terms of clean design, looking at the big picture.

    In the last few days, there has been an explosion of activity on the mailing list, and maybe it's just my pessimistic self, but I think the focus has shifted away from clean design to features. If this trend continues, and Syllable falls victim to featuritis and coding without the big picture in mind, it'll simply end up as yet another operating system.

    Do you agree that this is a problem? If so, do you think it will be possible to keep this trend in check or even reverse it?

    1. Re:How do you maintain order and good design? by Ilvatar · · Score: 0

      Actually if you were REALLY paying attention to the mailing list you would notice that the current focus is not on features but on BUG FIXES. Maybe you're having trouble reading or something, or maybe you don't read the mailing list at all. But please do shut up when you don't know what you're talking about. Then again, had you read the interview you would've noticed that the 0.4.5 release will be the bugfix release. Guess you didn't read that either huh.

    2. Re:How do you maintain order and good design? by oojah · · Score: 1

      I don't follow Syllable development. I have looked at AtheOS before, but wasn't aware that it had been abandoned. I had similar feelings to you - AtheOS was worth watching as it offered a lot more potential that other homebrew OSs seen on slashdot.

      The key point in my mind that it was under the control of a single developer. Since it was his creation he had ultimate control. Even though a fork could be created it would be unlikely as the fork would be competing against the official code.

      With the official codebase abandoned, everyone feels that they have the right to be part of the fork (which I am not disputing) but this could lead to mixed ideas about direction and also a general change of attitude.

      AtheOS/Syllable is kind of cool - its always had a good reception on slashdot as I remember. It is relatively new (Syllable being approximately a year old) so it would be a lot easier to make your name developing for it than for Linux, for instance. This might attract people interested in becoming famous geeks rather than those interested in writing a nice OS. Maybe.

      The last paragraph of the interview is quite telling though. The statement that 0.4.5 is a "fix things" release tends to indicate to me that normally fixing doesn't happen as much as it could (which was already alluded to when Kristian mentioned that they don't do much testing). This gives some indication of the developers' attitudes (especially the "spend a few hours" fixing part).

      Also, despite being a "fix things" release, 0.4.5 appears to be accepting more "nice new features" from people outside the main developers. Perhaps I'm wrong, but surely a nice new features (implying reasonable complexity) and fixing don't mix well.

      The idea that new features will just be accepted (which I am just guessing, I have no idea of the process by which code can be contributed), certainly ties in with your accusation of featuritis and lack of design clarity - if there is no strong overall leader who can reject contributions then poor code will creep in at some point and Syllable will suffer.

      That would be my suggestion for keeping things in check - Kristian should follow the benevolant dictator route, providing of course he doesn't already!

      I would certainly be interested to see what happened if Kurt Skauen (the original AtheOS author) restarted development on AtheOS or even just contributed to Syllable.

      Cheers and apologies for the discontinuity of my thoughts,

      Roger

      --
      Do you have any better hostages?
    3. Re:How do you maintain order and good design? by Vanders · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I understand what you're saying. Yes, over the last few releases bugs have crept in and have been left unfixed. This is partly because the codebase has grown, partly because we've all been very busing trying to fill in the gaps and partly because we're all limited in the amount of time we have to code. So now its time we started to focus on quality a little more, and that begins with making what we have stable. Most of these bugs are only an hour or so's work to fix, but they mount up! Syllable will be a much nicer place to be with the release of 0.4.5 :)

      Syllable is however in development, so new features are still being added. I don't see a problem with fixing old bugs while we add new features :) If we had declared the system stable and then started adding features, then I would agree with you. As it is, these features we hope to have in 0.4.5 have been planed for some time, and are required for the core functionality of the OS. The Registrar is one of these, for example.

      So yeah, while we do not have a definite feature list for Syllable 1.0 yet, we do have a good idea of what is clearly going to be needed now. I've exercised my bonevelent dictatorship and picked the ones that best suit our goals, and I shall be more than happy to accept them into the codebase for Syllable 0.4.5.

      We shall also have a proper roadmap and featureset for 1.0 before we start on the 0.5.x versions.

  20. Re:What does Syllable offer that Linux doesn't? by Betcour · · Score: 0, Troll

    You can change all your IP config thru a GUI. Most (all?) Linux distros still require you to drop to a command line to do that...

  21. In a word: by torpor · · Score: 1

    Nope.

    In another word: POSIX.

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
    1. Re:In a word: by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      What's in a word? What does POSIX have to do with this? POSIX is a set of functions with set behavior which can be called from programs, mostly C programs, though there are various ways to call POSIX functions from other languages.

      So what the hell does that have to do with supporting supposedly more difficult to support devices like USB? (Okay, yes, it's harder to support by far, because you can't just do IN and OUT. But as others have said, you can "steal" code from BSD.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  22. Amazing that Eugenia's dual Celeron box ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .. has not been mentioned!

    1. Re:Amazing that Eugenia's dual Celeron box ... by Marco+Rossi · · Score: 1

      Very weird.
      Do you want her?

      --
      - Marco
  23. Re:What does Syllable offer that Linux doesn't? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And what's wrong with doing the job from a command line? May I ask why it's necessary to have a GUI just to change the friggin' IP address?

  24. Re:What does Syllable offer that Linux doesn't? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ask your mom to change her IP address and get back to us. Actually, just ask your mom what her IP address is and get back to us.

  25. Syllable overview by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you are interested in Syllable, here is an overview of Syllable 0.4.4.

  26. Re:What does Syllable offer that Linux doesn't? by smurf975 · · Score: 1

    I disagree. GUI's are not easier to learn its just easier to move from one GUI OS to another. So you can go to from OSX to WinXP with little hassle. However going from MS-DOS to BASH(or whatever shell) takes more effort.

    --
    -- I don't buy it, I grow it.
  27. Re:What does Syllable offer that Linux doesn't? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you don't learn gui's anyway. they either
    suck and you're forced to use them (win32),
    or they are not quite good enough and you
    at least have an alternative (linux/vim)

  28. Re:What does Syllable offer that Linux doesn't? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's 10.0.0.1, and I didn't have to ask mum because she's on a dialup and I setup the damned thing myself.

  29. "Losses" in the cornfield by poptones · · Score: 1
    I wish someone would craft a better desktop system for linux, but I can't do it because the project would be way over my head and I just don't want it bad enough to learn all the ins and outs of writing a UI shell.

    Now, here's someone who is motivated to learn how to write a "better" OS. And it's his time (and the others corresponding on the project) so how does this "take away" anything?

    Consider: the entertainment industry "loses" Billions of dollars each year to people who don't buy music and don't visit theatres to see movies they "found" elsewhere. Buw we all know they lose nothing at all, right? fact is, the industry makes tens of Billions worldwide in profits each year... so where is the loss?

    It's in the same place as all those programmers "lost" to duplicate projects. Yeah, it's stupid how many text editors there are out there - but it's a project every programming student has to tackle in their first year of classes; everyone has to learn, and they have to learn somewhere.

    Whose to say where the next great desktop is gonna come from? Do you really expect it to come from Redmond? If so then you got nothing to complain about, because they got all the programmers they need and have no trouble finding more.

    And, if you think otherwise, then you still got nothing to complain about - because all that "duplicated effort" is creating a mountain of source for some ingenious twelfth grader to hack together into the next neXt... just as soon as she learns how it all goes together...

  30. Re:What does Syllable offer that Linux doesn't? by Marco+Rossi · · Score: 2

    I'll tell you what's wrong.
    It's you. Because you're writing under AC and I hate it very much! It's kinda lifeless, too.
    So please take care of the problem. OKAY??????

    BYE!

    --
    - Marco