Syllable - The Little OS with a Big Future?

Vanders writes "Tired of endless Windows security problems? Intrigued by Linux's power but discouraged by its complexity? Tempted by Mac OS but not thrilled with the hardware cost? In an OSNews article, Michael Saunders takes a look at Syllable, the OS that picked up where AtheOS left off over two years ago. Michael takes you through Syllable and shows you what we have been doing these past few years."

Comments

Sure

[Anonymous Coward]

If it can solve the problems Linux has on the desktop, namely incredibly poor software installation and ugly graphics, it might have a chance. It seems promising, but then again, so does Linux. I've been wishing Linux on to the desktop, but it just doesn't seem like it's happening.

Question: Is there any way to use Linux device drivers with this os? How hard would it be to "port" Syllable to Linux?

Re:Sure

[Anonymous Coward]

Poor software installation ? Have you ever seen apt-get and portage ?

Re:Sure

[Vanders]

Question: Is there any way to use Linux device drivers with this os?

Almost all of the drivers are Linux drivers, originally. They have been ported to use Syllable API's, but they're not that different. If you know enough about device drivers you can port a driver from Linux in a couple of days. Some people have ported drivers in a matter of hours.

Re:Sure

[Stevyn]

Portage is the best thing since sliced bread. KDE looks beautiful, better than windows.

I think his frustrations must stem from RPM based distros like SuSE, Fedora, and Mandrake. RPMs were a good idea, but horrible in practice. Portage is still a tradeoff though. You'll get faster applications and it's easy to install them, but it can take a while to compile. I'll still go with portage any day over RPMs. I think those distros should ditch them because it's really hindering linux adoption.

Re:Sure

[MrHanky]

Software installation is Linux is a breeze. It's so simple that a Windows or Mac user will have difficulties adapting to it. Instead of Googling for a utility, download it from Fileplanet or worse (alright, not worse, but maybe from Fileplanet), double-clicking on the .exe and clicking yes and next a couple of times, unchecking all the obnoxious 'default to this application for whatever you don't want it to do' and finally pressing OK, you just simply type 'apt-cache search $whatever' to find what you need, and 'apt-get install emacs21' to install it.

Of course, you need to know that you should do that, but I've already told you now, haven't I?

As for the graphics, I'm sure Linux can handle 1600x1200 and 16M colours, just like Windows. I'm also sure that KDE looks much better than all default XP themes (but not better than Aqua).

Re:Sure

[Hatta]

To keep this on topic, the biggest obstacle to any new OS is the number and quality of applications available. It doesn't appear that they're using X, so it won't be easy to port existing applications. But since they're POSIXish, it may be possible to make an Xsyllable port much like the Xdarwin port.

Of course, that would just be bringing the problems of linux onto Syllable. You still wouldn't be able to, for instance, copy and paste non-text objects between different apps. But still, a working system with usable apps now may help generate enthusiasm for the system and bring in developers for native apps.

Re:Sure

[Hatta]

Furthermore, it shouldn't be necessary to use a CLI, ever.

I agree. I would further propose that it shouldn't be necessary to use a GUI, ever.

Re:Sure

[modge]

Im also thinking portage is a good system. I use gentoo on one of my boxen and simple and - offtern - easy to use

Re:Sure

[OmegaBlac]

"namely incredibly poor software installation"

You have to be joking right? Have you actually used a Linux distro lately or in the past 4 years? I apt-get any application I want with ease.

"ugly graphics"

Are you trying to play a computer game or use an OS? If you want eye candy that bad then go buy a Mac with OSX installed.

"I've been wishing Linux on to the desktop, but it just doesn't seem like it's happening."

Tired arguement. Linux is ready for anyones desktop that is willing to use it. Linux is on my desktop right now. 'Nuff said.

Re:Sure

[spacecowboy420]

I know for a fact that apt-get works on fedora and urpmi works great on Mandrake. Their ease of use makes me curious as to how portage is better. A packaging system that solves dependencies as it installs is the goal of all three - so again why is it better? With portage, you wait for a compile. With apt-get/urpmi the package and it's dependencies are installed rather smoothly - I have yet to see a problem (as long as your sources are good). I rarely need to actually install an rpm as long as I have the plf sources, and I never have to wait for a compile. I also believe this ease of use would encourage the adoption of linux, as opposed to waiting for the app to compile... I think either you haven't tried these distros or you are clouded by gentoo groupthink.

Re:Sure

[kristaps.kaupe]

Yes, but how does an application get in the apt repository to the first place??? When Adobe ports Photoshop to Linux how are they going to distribute it to anyone that wants to download it from their site? There is no simple, standard way to distribute an application for each version of Linux that will install. Windows DOES IT. Linux DOES NOT.

You can always create your own installation shell script so user will only need to download .tar.gz (or .tar.bz) and run install.sh. For example, Opera is distributed in three flavours - rpm (RedHat), dep (Debian) and tar.gz (all).

Furthermore, it shouldn't be necessary to use a CLI, ever. It's fine if you want to use it for more control, but people should be able to start out in pure GUI.

Yes, GUI is a good thing, but I will never use an OS that can't run without GUI.

Re:Sure

[Cocoronixx]

http://porthole.sourceforge.net/

Re:Sure

[MrHanky]

Yes, but how does an application get in the apt repository to the first place??? When Adobe ports Photoshop to Linux how are they going to distribute it to anyone that wants to download it from their site? There is no simple, standard way to distribute an application for each version of Linux that will install. Windows DOES IT. Linux DOES NOT.

I think OOo's and Loki's graphical installers work well in those cases. There's nothing wrong with creating a folder under /usr/local/ and symlink the application executable to /usr/local/bin/. That's probably how Adobe would do it too (but the debianized package of Acrobat Reader places the app in /usr/lib/Acrobat5/bin/ and a shellscript in /usr/bin/).

And get this: This has nothing to do with Linux, and nothing to do with distributions. It's application specific. Just like it is for Windows and Mac. Although there are some installers that are more common than others, you have plenty of choice for all OSes. Windows is by far the one that has most problems with cruft from programs you cannot easily remove.

Furthermore, it shouldn't be necessary to use a CLI, ever. It's fine if you want to use it for more control, but people should be able to start out in pure GUI. I've been using the CLI for many many years, but my mother's never going to do it, ever.

Why this obsession with mothers? Do mothers create mindshare or develop software? Does Linux need mothers?

Oh, and of course: It's not necessary to use a CLI to install software in most Linux distributions. It's just the simplest way to do it. Why complicate things with a GUI when text is the best medium? Most people who need to use a computer are able to read and write. I bet your mother is too. Don't underestimate her. If you do, how will she learn how to use a computer efficiently?

I have no problem admitting that Linux has its problems on the desktop, but those you mentioned (assuming you are the same AC as the one starting this thread) just don't apply. The One True Hideous Problem for Linux is XFree86 and its lack of auto-configuration. It gets even worse if you need a non-US keyboard mapping, not to mention on a Mac! I think if we ever get a decent X11 implementation, Linux will be close to ready for mainstream desktop use. Most of the other problems are just minor quirks.

Re:Sure

[secondsun]

Portage is better than urpmi because anyone can make an ebuild that works with the tree which requires no though for what the person has on their system. For example, if I want to use the video preview of KDE in a portage system I pass it a flag when I install. If I want to use a rpm based distro I woul dhave to grab the tar balls, grab the xine-dev rpm for my version of linux, futz with the makefiles so everything points in the right direction, then compile.

Re:Sure

[moonbender]

Anyone can install a tarball and with great scripts like CompileProgram anyone can install it with one command.

No. You can do that, and I can probably figure it out easily enough, but no, most people can not install a program from source. Although I'm sure they could be enabled to do it - portage is a start, an easy to use graphical portage would be even more of a start.

Re:Sure

[Tony Hoyle]

I gave up on portage simply because the simplicity you describe is its greatest weakness.

Sure, you can pass flags when you first install, but it doesn't save them for each app, so when you do an upgrade of your system all the recompiles take the default settings - *and* the default dependencies. That sucks.

I really wanted a copy of lynx that didn't require X (like, you know, every other frikkin distro ships by default). This worked fine for about 10 minutes until I accidentally unmasked a later version when doing a system upgrade. It pulled in the whole of X, about a zillion fonts and produced a lynx binary that was useless to me.

Re:Sure

[Stevyn]

I used both and I got so fed up with urpmi I switched distros. The database gets outdated so fast and it has a lot less packages than the portage system. I ended up having to manually compile a lot of tarballs because I couldn't find rpms for new programs. I was stuck using kde 3.2 for a while. I love portage because I don't have to wait 3 months to get a new package, or not get it at all. Search through the portage database and see how many outdated packages you have. And for most programs, the compile time isn't that long. I wasted so much time hunting down depencies because mandrake didn't have current versions of libraries.

Hey, if you like it then god bless you. I just found it to be too limiting for my needs and gentoo works better for me. All I can say is that I tried both and I find portage to be a lot better.

Re:Sure

[Curunir_wolf]

Then you did it wrong. Don't just pass flags in when you install unless you want them temporarily. Instead, add them to make.config like you're supposed to, and they'll be there when up upgrade.

And why did you do a

emerge lynx

without doing a

emerge -p lynx

first. And how the hell do you "accidentally" unmask a package?

You must be purposefully trying to spread FUD about Gentoo to make that kind of complaint about portage.

Re:Sure

[ajs]

Define ugly graphics.

There are about 2000 themes for various desktop systems (from Gnome to KDE to WindowMaker) and of those there are probably about 20-30 that are solid enough that I would consider them full default-theme replacements.

Are you refering to all of those, or did you just install some random distribution and declare it "ugly" (by your standards)? Are you refering to the lack of 3D acceleration on the desktop (e.g. what MacOS/X gets from having written their desktop on top of an Open/GL layer)? If so, that's a valid concern, but starting with the work x.org has done and implementing the rest would certainly have been easier than writing from scratch.

Question: Is there any way to use Linux device drivers with this os?

Probably not, and even if this OS were able to take advantage of Linux drivers, I doubt that it could take advantage of the larger subsystems like filesystems, networking stacks, cryptography, etc.

What I'd really like to see is some of these (obviously massively talented) people who go off and do their own thing, actually starting with a working system like BSD or Linux, but building something of their own, not just a distribution.

For example, these folks seem to want a system designed for the end-user with lots of media features... ok, so why wouldn't you start with a Linux kernel that supports just about every graphics and sound board on the planet... then layer on pieces as needed. Perhaps a modified X server would help, perhaps not... use it if you need it. Perhaps the filesystems aren't quite up to what you want, but you can always modify existing code. Maybe gstreamer is a good support library for what you're doing, perhaps not.

Well, you get the idea.

When Linus started off, he wanted something that didn't exist. BSD wasn't actually available for x86 yet, and down-porting it from Suns and VAXen was more work than he could afford. Meanwhile, Minix was too limited to even work as a good starting point. That's no longer the case, and efforts like this one seem to me much like Linus having decided that he wanted to write his little terminal server by first designing his own system bus.

Still, I wish them all the luck in the world. I hope it works out well for them... it's just that I can't help thinking about how much more they could do with a good starting point.

Re:Sure

[Vanders]

..so why wouldn't you start with a Linux kernel that supports just about every graphics and sound board on the planet...

Not to be too crude, but it is because the Linux driver model sucks large Dyson Spheres through capilary tubing. It has an extremely high Lovelace value. Anyway, the Linux and Syllable kernel APIs (I'm talking about the driver->kernel API, not the API's that define how a driver is managed) are very similiar, so much so that most drivers are ported from Linux in about a week or two. The SiS 900 NIC driver was ported by Michael Krugger in half a day. I ported the Ymfpci OSS driver in about a week of a few hours a day. Syllable has the advantage of being able to draw on a large driver codebase while at the same time totally avoiding what many of us see has the total sucktitude of Linux driver management in general.

Maybe gstreamer is a good support library for what you're doing, perhaps not.

Actually, ffmpeg drives almost all of the media codecs currently available.

Syllable did not spring into life from a total vacum. It was forked from AtheOS, when AtheOS was already at quite an advanced stage. Kurt wrote AtheOS for fun. I and many other developers thought AtheOS was very cool, and I created Syllable to keep it alive and keep it cool. If I were to sit down today, and AtheOS and Syllable did not exist, I would probably do exactly as you describe and start with Linux. I don't think it would be half as well designed as Syllable is.

Re:Sure

[Creedo]

to find what you need, and 'apt-get install emacs21' to install it.

I can't decide if this is a joke or not.

Re:Sure

[Hognoxious]

Why this obsession with mothers? Do mothers create mindshare or develop software? Does Linux need mothers?

I am Frank Zappa[1] you insensitive clod!!!!!!

No, wait. They're the stereotypical non-tech-savvy user. Remember a lot of mothers work as secretaries, accounts clerks & jobs like that. These people do matter if linux (or anything else) wants to break the corporate world.

[1] This is a lie. I did date a Moon Unit lookalike though.

Re:Sure

[runderwo]

The One True Hideous Problem for Linux is XFree86 and its lack of auto-configuration.

So use a system that auto-configures it. Knoppix comes to mind.

Re:Sure

[Anonymous Coward]

Try man portage.

There is a new overlay in /etc/portage that can contain a bunch of files:

package.unmask
package.keywords
package.use
a nd many others

These files apply the USE flags and keywords to only the specific package every time you emerge.

Portage's greatest secret. If only because it didn't exist when people were looking for it :-/

Re:Sure

[mabinogi]

> And why did you do a
> emerge lynx
> without doing a
> emerge -p lynx

probably because he believed all the rabid Gentoo zealots that said that it's always as easy as emerge <application name>

But now we see that it's not that simple afterall.

what the hell does -p do, and why should someone know to do that before hand?

>You must be purposefully trying to spread FUD about Gentoo to make that kind of complaint about portage.

No, Gentoo is not perfect, portage is not perfect. Neither is Apt, neither is URMPI. Nothing is perfect, Gentoo included. People will have problems with it, and people will not like it. It is not the answer to every question. Deal with it.

Re:Sure

[ttldkns]

-p does pretend and shows a list of all the packages portage woud install if the command really executed.

really you should do emerge -pv [package name] to see the options for it and set the appropriate use flags. Its all fun and produces proper packages but not for general use. But then gentoo is a fringe geek's os, an os for "us" if linux becomes mainstream and we need something more complicated than the rest fo the world to remain geeky

Re:Sure

[ajs]

Sounds reasonable. This is clearly one of those cases where a little information (especially information filtered through Slashdot and a casual perusal of a screenshot-heavy site ;-) can be a dangerous thing.

Thanks for the info on the origins, and like I say: good luck!

Re:Sure

[MrHanky]

It's a joke.

Although Emacs certainly can do almost everything you need it to do, so among all the 15000 packages in Debian's repository, it's most likely the one you need. I'm normally a vim fan, but after I started using Emacs and Auctex for LaTeX editing, I'm not looking back. It beats all the free/OSS software for LaTeX editing on OS X and Linux. Vim just isn't that good for LaTeX, and IDEs like Kile are just obnoxious. Texmacs is broken, and LyX is what I started with and grew out of. But apart from Auctex, I consider Emacs something for specialists -- not for me. But now I need to cleanse myself: All hail vim! All hail vim!

Re:Sure

[MrHanky]

I am Frank Zappa[1] you insensitive cold!!!!!!

You're going on my friends list. (No, you're not, but you would if you were.)

No, wait. They're the stereotypical non-tech-savvy user. Remember a lot of mothers work as secretaries, accounts clerks & jobs like that. These people do matter if linux (or anything else) wants to break the corporate world.

That may be true, but a secretary or accounts clerk or other non-technical user won't need to install applications on her computer. In fact, it's a big bonus if she can't do that in the corporate world: No viruses, no spy- ad- or nag-ware. That's why her computer will be properly locked down anyway, even if the computer runs Windows 2000.

So any computer administrator tasks like installing software or configuring networking are non-issues in the corporate world.

Re:Sure

[martinde]

> If it can solve the problems Linux has on the desktop, namely incredibly poor software installation and ugly graphics, it might have a chance.

Pick some random bit of hardware out of your junk drawer, and some random desktop machine. Wipe the disk. Try to install windows. Can't find the driver floppy or CD for the hardware? Go to the website and see if there are drivers for the version of windows you have.

If you're lucky you'll find it. If you're not - let's say you have a Voodoo 3 card - you're SOL. There is no "modprobe " and no chance for it. You don't even have the opportunity to write your own or pay someone too.

Re:Sure

[be-fan]

When Adobe ports Photoshop to Linux how are they going to distribute it to anyone that wants to download it from their site?
Set up an APT repository for it :) If there isn't already one, it would be pretty easy to create a program that would open "repository files" and automatically add them to your sources.list.

There is no simple, standard way to distribute an application for each version of Linux that will install. Windows DOES IT. Linux DOES NOT.
Linux isn't an OS. Debian is an OS. There is a simple, standard way to distribute an application for Debian, just as in Windows.

Furthermore, it shouldn't be necessary to use a CLI, ever.
It's really not necessary to use the CLI to do package installation. It's just easier to describe on the web. A GUI like Synaptic let's you do everything from finding packages to installing them, all from one interface. Much easier than doing the same thing under Windows.

Re:Sure

[Nasarius]

echo net-www/links -X >> /etc/portage/package.use

Portage has had this feature for many months now. BTW, I assumed you're actually talking about links, because lynx has no X USE flag.

Re:Sure

[magefile]

In reply to everyone who's responded to the parent AC, I agree with the second paragraph, even if the first is FUD ... sort of. While I think my mother could certainly click the terminal icon, type "$PACKAGE-MANAGER install photoshop" or whatever, she won't. If it says to in the manual, even if that's the only step, she'll take one look at the command line and decide that Linux is "hard". Ingrained fear - due in part to geeky arrogance of the sort that all of us here practice.

Re:Sure

[magefile]

So ... security by obscurity, then? I thought that was a bad thing?

Re:Sure

[MrHanky]

Don't be ridiculous. This has nothing to do with obscurity. The secretary will not have root on her computer, so whether installation of software is 'obscure' or not is irrelevant.

Re:Sure

[Hatta]

I'm curious, what's so great about emacs for editing LaTeX? I've been using vim, and haven't been inspired yet to look hard at the latex features of vim. I just type it all in, and use the usual features of vim to edit it. The syntax highlighting is a big plus, but I imagine emacs does the same. A simple Makefile will compile and/or display. What more could one want? I don't want to start a flamewar :), just interested in an example.

Re:Sure

[Red Alastor]

On fedora, don't forget to try yum too.

The basic commands are :

yum update
yum install

The first command update everything, the second install the package you asked.

No need to sync or update the database.

Replace the /etc/yum.conf with the version found on this page : http://www.fedorafaq.org/

Re:Sure

[JAD lifter]

So ... security by obscurity, then? I thought that was a bad thing?

Security by obscurity can be a good thing as long as it is not your only line of defense.

Re:Sure

[JAD lifter]

There is no simple, standard way to distribute an application for each version of Linux that will install. Windows DOES IT. Linux DOES NOT.

Actually Windows DOES NOT. I have a windows 98 box sitting in the corner because there is plenty of software that I use (mostly games) that installs fine on Win98 but refuses to install on Win2k/XP.

Re:Sure

[MrHanky]

It's just the collection of macros. C-c C-f C-e gives you \emph{} with your cursor in the right position. C-RET gives you any macro, just type it in, usually it works with TAB-completion. C-s gives you section, chapter and so on. The indentation is nice as well, paragraphs between \begin{} and \end{} are indented, colour coded...

And you can run pdflatex or whatever you use from within the editor, with the output in a frame. The best part was that it's quite easy to learn. But this is with Auctex, not the default Emacs Tex-mode.

Re:Sure

[Curunir_wolf]

Normally I would agree with you. However the original poster metioned that he was passing flags to the emerge command to compile things the way he wanted it, and forced a "masked" package to install.

In portage, some packages are masked because they are development versions, and not ready for prime time. So, the guy was already using some advanced (and obscure) techniques, not recommended for "newbies", then complaining because things got screwed up.

If he had been using emerge the "easy" way, those problems would not have happened.

Re:Sure

[Ben Hutchings]

Voodoo 3, you say?

Re:Sure

[kundor]

It would be trivial to set it up so that double-clicking a tar ball in kde or gnome would launch an installer script that would take care of everything, and I'd be surprised if some distro hasn't already done so. You can even set up mime types so that clicking the download link for a tar ball on a web page will install it.

Re:Sure

[pseudochaotic]

I believe porthole was mentioned here a few days ago. Link

Re:Sure

[martinde]

Tried them on WinXP? I don't recall where I got the driver when I last tried, but the driver I used claimed to be for XP and did not work well for me at all. All kinds of garbage and artifacts showed up when using it for several 3d games.

Luckily I found a good deal on a PCI Radeon and I was back in business. (The Voodoo 3 continues to serve me just fine in XFree as they continue to support, since they can.)

Re:Sure

[fitten]

KDE looks beautiful, better than windows.

Completely subjective. I think KDE looks fairly asstastic, but it is better than Gnome and there's not much more choice for a reasonably featured GUI out of the box.

As far as GUIs go, I had KDE hang my machine 5 times today to the point where I had to power cycle. I haven't hung or crashed my Windows boxes in months/years.

Re:Sure

[Ben Hutchings]

I don't even own the card. I was really just pointing out that there are unofficial routes to get hold of drivers.

Re:Sure

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, moderators, how is this insightful? What the poster says makes sense, BUT NOT in the context of an OS that aims to assuage the fear of those "Intrigued by Linux's power but discouraged by its complexity".

LS

Re:Sure

[Brandybuck]

I've actually found it easier to install FreeBSD on my new laptop than Windows. Lose your hardware vendor CDs, and Windows becomes impossible to install.

Re:Sure

[andreyw]

Congratulations on Slashdot finally taking notice of Syllable. I am a Linux user, but I find the Syllable concept refreshing and intriguing. And... so much more tinkering value :-).

Re:Sure

[Jack9]

Unfortunately the world is governed by the GUI of sight+physics. We adapt to CLI or logical abstractions when we are blinded (braille) but ultimately it is an abstraction for the GUI of physical reality. Just a thought.

Re:Sure

[andreyw]

How the #@$@ is this offtopic? Parent asked whats so great aout LateXing stuff up under Emacs. I replied. Get a fucking clue.

Re:Sure

[steffl]

"I've been wishing Linux on to the desktop, but it just doesn't seem like it's happening."

eye of the hurricane seems so calm...

erik

Re:Sure

[Jedi Alec]

and in 99% of the cases the only reason this happens is because some d*ck decided to check whether someone tried to install it on NT4 and halt the installer if that were the case. MS went out of their way with this whole compatibility mode thing to account for the majority of this sillyness, but some games just refuse to work...

Re:Sure

[Jedi Alec]

just because it's efficient doesn't mean it's good for Joe Schmoe. Joe wants a file with a pretty icon that he can download, double-click and install. Mozilla does this. Any windows user can download and install mozilla under linux with practically the same ease as under windows. Face it, double-clickety on the pretty icony thingie is as far as a lot of users are willing to go. Of course you could try and make the command line look like an IM program, in which case people might actually go so far as to type stuff...

Re:Sure

[javax]

Damn, we need a distro which uses QT on DirectFB - the X11 part is the one that just sucks on the Linux desktop;

Re:Sure

[jrockway]

KDE does look better than Windows if you do it right. But Windows looks like shit. GNOME is at least consistient... it's my favorite desktop along with XFCE.

But today I got my Powerbook and all I could say was DAMN. It's really hard to go back to GNOME after that. Not to mention that apt-get install tetex actually installed latex onto my mac.

MacOS is becoming a real platform these days :) I'm sorry I've been missing out for so long...

(This isn't to say that Linux is bad, it's great. I'm still going to use it every day... but, in terms of prettiness and usability, macos wins. Hell even the X11 apps respond to Expose' and _update their content while they're shrunk_. very very very very very cool :)

Re:Sure

[Proc6]

The problem with Linux software installation is this... Linux

• Apt-Get
• Redcarpet
• Porthole
• Ximan Whatever
• Tarballs
• the list goes on...

Windows

• Setup.exe
• Setup.exe
• Setup.exe
• Setup.exe
• Setup.exe
• Setup.exe

Re:Sure

[mikkom]

I tried to write setup.exe on my command prompt and nothing happened. What's wrong? Where do I define what program I want to install? With my debian it is given after apt-get as parameter.

Oh.. I actually have to FIND the files on the web before install, (buy and) DOWNLOAD them, UNZIP them and then run the setup.exe?? Fair enough.. So what command do I run if I want to upgrade the program I just installed?

Really?!? I have to find the site where I downloaded the program (again), find the download page (again) download it (again) unzip it (again) and Install the program with setup.exe (again)?!?

Sorry, Never again.

Re:Sure

[sTavvy]

bah,
step over to Slackware. it's much more fun..
If u want a good package management tool for it,
just try swaret.
I moved over from Debian, and found Swaret to be well easy to grasp.
swaret --install pr0n
mm yummy

Re:Sure

[martinde]

> I was really just pointing out that there are unofficial routes to get hold of drivers.

Right. My point is that since 3dfx went out of business, noone seems to be maintaining those drivers or updating them for new versions of Windows. My experience with "unofficial" drivers for the card pretty much demonstrated this to me - hopefully others are more successful than I was.

XFree, on the other hand, does continue to support 3dfx's cards and most likely will as long as there is demand. The reason they can is because the source code for the driver is available, (presumably) unlike that of the Windows driver.

Re:Sure

[Ed Avis]

No, if you use an rpm-based distribution you type 'apt-get install foo' or 'yum install foo' or 'urpmi install foo'. Of course this requires that someone has taken the time to package foo and upload it to the repository, but that's true for Portage too.

Re:Sure

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sorry, but posts like this basically proove that linux is not ready for the desktop.

Obscure "flags," adding them to text config files, strange command line commands with various parameters, jargon like "unmasking."

And all of it is considered necessary knowledge, and you're a dumbass if you don't know it.

Re:Sure

[Shulai]

My Windows experience says:

* \Setup.exe
* \Install.exe
* \xxx\Setup.exe
* \Oemsetup.exe

And even you find more than one of these in the same bundle.

Please don't picture the scenario better than it really is.

Re:Sure

[Technonotice_Dom]

portage is a start, an easy to use graphical portage would be even more of a start. I believe there's a graphical front end to Portage, was reading about it recently. Also for Debian's packaging, Synaptic is a very good GUI to the system.

Re:Sure

[AxelBoldt]

#apt-get install apt-file

#apt-file update

#apt-file search smbmount

Re:Sure

[Sepper]

It would be trivial to set it up so that double-clicking a tar ball in kde or gnome would launch an installer script

Something like Kconfigure might do the trick...

Of course, it's not as easy as InstallShield(tm) but it's still kinda cool :)

Re:Sure

[Sepper]

Tried them on WinXP?

I WOULD be typping this from a computer running on a Voodoo3 2000 if I wasn't stuck at work... It works fine on WinXP... really... you just have to spend some time tweaking

Granted your point is still valid as I had to use a 3rd paty driver (fan made) to run UT, Homeworld and the like...

And it was automagicaly working in Mandrake 10 :)

Re:Sure

[Hatta]

I have to disagree. Humans are good at language. The CLI gains its power from emulating a language. Programs are verbs, files are nouns, and options are adverbs. It's just a matter of learning the grammar.

Now a GUI may be more convenient at times when you don't know the underlying language. Much like if you were to draw a picture to communicate with a local if you were to visit another country. But ultimately verbal communication with both people and computers is more powerful.

Re:Sure

[Jack9]

Humans are good at many things. Programmers specialize in learning computer (logical) grammer as our? profession. Spatial relationships are more powerful as nature has demonstrated over time (if you're into evolution). Perhaps one day we'll all have matrix-vision.

Most of humanity spends a large portion of their life learning their native language (abstraction). This does not necessarily mean humans are particularly adept at it. When you mention something casually like "just a matter of learning the grammar" you've highlighted the weakness of the CLI. A signifigant barrier to useage, like learning a new syntax, cannot be trivialized because it's trivial for those who are paid to do so time and time again. Adding another language, in the case of CLI, is completely unnecessary to most users. I believe an operating system does not need to have a CLI in a perfect world. In reality the CLI might be best hidden or buried rather than a casual tool.

My views lead to a dichotomy where developer machines use an OS or have a customized OS that's altogether different from worker-bee machines...but that's always been the reality.

Re:Sure

[be-fan]

Heh. "Unified windows OS" is a very funny concept. Let's review, shall we?

1) How many installers are there on Windows? MSI installers have only been standard since Win2k, there are still tons of InstallShield and Wise installers out there, not to mention custom nut-jobs like Sierra's. How many Windows apps have you seen that don't uninstall properly? (*cough* Sierra *cough*).

2) How many toolkits are there on Windows? You've got the XP common controls, used by IE. You've got the MS Office toolkit, used by Office. You've got the .NET toolkit, used by Visual Studio. Visio appears to have it's own toolkit (it's butt-ugly and looks totally different than the above three applications). I don't know if Encarta still has it's own toolkit, but it used to. There are a couple of Qt-based apps (Adobe Picture Album), as well as miscellaneous ones like Swing, etc. When Longhorn comes out, you'll just get to add WinFX on top of all that.

3) How many APIs are there on Windows? You've got straight Win32, MFC, WTL, .NET 1.1, OWL (Borland), among others, all of which are in common use.

So the whole concept of a "unified Windows OS" is positively silly!

Re:Sure

[drsquare]

That's great, for Debian. I'm sure the newbies who are not very computer literate are going to love using command line utilities that work some of the time, and a distribution that is nowhere near aimed for newbies. You can't just pick and choose the features from each distro you want when you're showing yhow great Linux is. The conversation often goes like this:

"I don't like command lines"
"Then use Mandrake"
"OK, now the software is a bitch to install"
"Then use Debian"
"OK, how the hardware is a bitch to install"
"Then use Mandrake" ...and so on.

Also OT: can someone at slashdot please fix the bug where the post editing window is wider than the screen on firefox? Thanks.

Re:Sure

[Hatta]

You have some good points, and I won't argue that a visual metaphor is useful for many tasks and many people. The first languages used pictograms even. I don't think that a GUI can ever completely replace a CLI though. I've never seen a turing complete GUI for instance. :) Granted, programability is not needed by all users, but even if the GUI does 99% of what you need, that 1% is going to be a big pain in the ass. So, I guess I'm not sure why you think a CLI and GUI cannot exist peacefully on one system.

As an aside, I'm no programmer or sysadmin. Just an aspiring biochemist who prefers the language metaphor to the visual metaphor.

Re:Sure

[kristaps.kaupe]

Do you own a mobile phone? If so, then you lied, just then.

Well, I mean OS on my PC of course. GUI-only OS will be good on my cell phone, PDA, TV and similar stuff. (but it would be nice if I could have some shell too)

Re:Sure

[evilviper]

Portage is the best thing since sliced bread.

Only if sliced-bread was invented a few days before portage...

Portage is an imitation of the BSD's ports systems, that tries to be more something, but it falls well short. The only thing it's got over ports is that it's more complex, more failure-prone, more of a mess, requires more work and fiddling by the user, and is just more likely to break.

Now, if you don't think ports qualifies because it's not for Linux, well there's always Slackware, which has a very simple binary package system, which lets the use handle dependencies (which makes things infinitely simpler) and ALWAYS comes with -dev headers/libs.

Re:Sure

[Hognoxious]

If I remember correctly (which I might not), the thread wasn't about software installation, it was about changing the settings to make it usable, or indeed making the default settings sensible (i.e. not some loony file browser). You shouldn't need to be 733t to do that.

Re:Sure

[MrHanky]

Nah, it started with this +5, insightful claim: "If it can solve the problems Linux has on the desktop, namely incredibly poor software installation and ugly graphics, it might have a chance." It was an obvious troll, but when the moderators are hitting the ol' pipe too hard, someone must bite.

I agree with you that getting sensible default settings, and user interfaces for changing settings, are much bigger problems for Linux. Emulating proprietary operating systems' software installation will only make Linux worse, though.

Re:Sure

[runderwo]

Well, maybe you'd best try Knoppix and lay those fears to rest. It's not your fault that Red Hat doesn't produce working code, but it makes for an unconvincing argument when you generalize based on a single experience.

Re:Sure

[joeljkp]

Actually, LSB exists specifically for this purpose. The answer is that Adobe would package Photoshop into an RPM with all of its dependencies (besides standard ones like gtk and glibc) and distribute it that way. Many distributions are LSB-compliant, and most that aren't still distribute RPM. Both Debian and Gentoo do.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

The question is...

[Anonymous Coward]

Is their web site powered by Syllable? And can it withstand the /.?

Re:The question is...

[DrWhizBang]

Is their web site powered by Syllable?

No, it's hosted by sourceforge (another osdn site)

Does this mean that slashdot has just slashdotted itself?

Finally!

[Daneurysm]

the OS that picked up where AtheOS left off over two years ago

Finally!

I've been severely missing an Os that excells in lack of support, lack of compatibility and an unsurpassed vapor-are factor.

I'm in...

Re:Finally!

[Scrab]

I take it you don't use windows then.... ;)

Re:Finally!

[DarkHelmet]

I prefer dead operating systems over unborn Operating Systems thank you very much.

Re:Finally!

[LnxAddct]

Well gosh you could have had that since before Linux, I suggest you walk over to GNU.org and download yourself the Hurd!
Regards,
Steve

Re:Finally!

[Hognoxious]

I've been severely missing an Os that excells in lack of support, lack of compatibility and an unsurpassed vapor-are factor.

Not me, but then I pwn a Psion.

Re:Finally!

[DMUTPeregrine]

Try Windows sometime. Bonus points for using ME and living.

Re:Finally!

[UnixRevolution]

Finally!

I've been severely missing an Os that excells in lack of support, lack of compatibility and an unsurpassed vapor-are factor.

Looks like you haven't been using BeOS or Zeta.

Looks interesting.

[Short Circuit]

I never used AtheOS, but I might install this on one of my older machines. (As in 200MHz as opposed to 750MHz) Apparently it'll work. :)

Re:Looks interesting.

[TheRealMindChild]

Not likely. First big crippling hurdle is the fact that you need a VESA 2.0 capable video card to even START the installation. You might THINK this is no big deal, but out of the 8 or so PCI video cards I have from that era, none were compliant.

Re:Looks interesting.

[Short Circuit]

I haven't run that machine in a while, but I think it's got a Trio64V+. A quick googling didn't say if it supported VESA 2.0.

Funny thing about that card...I had two of them. When the first died, I shutdown, swapped out the card, and powered back up. Since I didn't have to reconfigure X, that had to have been the easiest Linux video card installation I've ever done. :)

Re:Looks interesting.

[TheRealMindChild]

Vesa 1.2

Re:Looks interesting.

[Vanders]

First big crippling hurdle is the fact that you need a VESA 2.0 capable video card to even START the installation.

Not really. Syllable 0.5.3 supports the following video chipsets:

• nVidia TNT/GeForce
• nVidida GeForce FX
• ATi Mach64
• ATi Radeon
• SiS 3xx
• Matrox Millenium/Gx00
• Savage IX/MX
• Trident VLB/PCI
• S3 Virge GX/DX

The next release of Syllable will also support Voodoo 1,2 & 3 cards.

The older releases of AtheOS pretty much required a VESA 2.0 card for installation, but with Syllable that is not the case.

Re:Looks interesting.

[Vanders]

Thanks, but we already have hardware swapping and automatic configuration down and it works pretty darn well.

We support a whole bunch of video cards straight out of the box, and if your video card happens to be unsupported then Syllable will indeed fall back to a Vesa 2.0 driver.

Re:Looks interesting.

[Short Circuit]

Uh, I had a Voodoo 1, and I could have sworn it was 3D-only.

Re:Looks interesting.

[Vanders]

Sorry, I listed those in the wrong direction. The driver supports the Voodoo 3, 4 and 5 cards (Not Voodoo 1 & 2)

*Sigh* Where are you BeOS?

[NightWulf]

Now *there* was a great OS. Small, lean, easy to use, ran great. I know there's an attempt at an opensource BeOS but it seems to be a long way away. I looked at Syllables website, atleast they have a livecd, I might as well try it, got nothing to lose. Until then i'll still keep my midnight candlelight vigil until BeOS comes back.

Re:*Sigh* Where are you BeOS?

[craqboy]

there are many different Beos opertating systems that have tried to pick up where Be left off. I just installed BeOS Max last week and love it. I have my tv tuner card working with firefox and some other stuff. I never thought an OS would run as good on the lil pentium 200 with 256 Mb of ram.

Re:syllable.org slashdotted

[AKAImBatman]

As to the complexity of Linux issue. It appears to me that Syllable is a Linux based system

Incorrect.

using Gnome

Incorrect.

and it looks similar to Fedora in some ways.

Probably superficial.

So I ask you, how can a Linux system be less complex than Linux?

Because it's not Linux. They swiped the icons. IIRC, AtheOS was written in 100% assembler as a pet project by the guy who wrote it. He (and others) later built some POSIX, KDE and GTK API mappings so that Linux and Unix software could be compiled and used.

Re:syllable.org slashdotted

[Short Circuit]

In the same way as Linspire?

Hopefully they would have taken a different approach, though. But the reviewer's screenshots don't look promising in that respect.

Re:syllable.org slashdotted

[dmhoward]

Yes. I keep clicking on links and get their home page over and over. Not a good first impression.

Hmm...

[g3000]

Interesting. When can I run iTunes on it??!

Holy AtheOS

[Anonymous Coward]

Can you run AtheOS and still believe in God?

Re:Holy AtheOS

[spektr]

Can you run AtheOS and still believe in God?

Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide, and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and many are those who enter by it. For the gate is small, and the way is narrow that leads to life, and few are those who find it. -(Matthew 7:13-14)

Translated into a more contemporary language, this means that you might still be on the safe side, at least as long as you don't touch Windows.

Re:Holy AtheOS

[Ari_Haviv]

AtheOS is dead. I don't believe in it anymore.

Re:syllable.org slashdotted

[tutwabee]

Same thing here. I got about five pages deep and then it happened again. I guess I'll have to wait till the slashdotting effect dies down

i remember AtheOS...

[torpor]

... sorta sniffed at it when my aging BeBox arrived at its final unsupported destination, but ... I don't remember if this project had architecture-neutrality as a spec ... and i retired the BeBox and bought a powerbook instead, abandoning x86 forever (or at least as much as possible)...

still, a powerpc port of another new and interesting OS would be an interesting endeavour. anyone care to answer the question as to how portable syllable is?

Re:i remember AtheOS...

[kraut]

when you say you retired your BeBox - do you still have it? I've been looking around, trying to find one.... if you're willing to get rid of it I'd love to know!

Re:i remember AtheOS...

[torpor]

i still have it ... sitting silently on the desk behind me, a reminder, sort of a testament, to the ideal of nicely-design hardware not having any commercial future ... my shrine to 'hardware that didnt make it' ...

i don't really want to get rid of it, unless i'm offered a good price for it. its still 100% operational, running the last BeOS that Be released for it... its occasionally still fun to boot up and play with, but alas, its slow.

Re:syllable.org slashdotted

[tutwabee]

Excuse my mistake. The icons do make it look like a Fedora-style Gnome copy-cat though.

Re:syllable.org slashdotted

[spektr]

IIRC, AtheOS was written in 100% assembler

No, I think it's written in C and C++.

Re:Hardware cost

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you kidding me? For those prices you can get a PC with 5x the computing power.

Poor Cosmoe...

[drightler]

Syllable is getting more press than the other AtheOS fork Cosmoe.

Re:Poor Cosmoe...

[excaliber19]

Perhaps that is because Cosmoe is not an AtheOS fork?

"Cosmoe is a new user interface that runs on top of the Linux operating system"

Which is absolutely nothing like AtheOS or Syllable, which are scratch coded OS's.

Re:Poor Cosmoe...

[Durin_Deathless]

From the site you reference:

Cosmoe is a new user interface that runs on top of the Linux operating system (and soon others). Cosmoe implements a powerful but easy-to-use high-level C++ API that is quite similar to BeOS. In fact, many BeOS programs can be recompiled to run on Cosmoe with little or no changes!

That leads me to believe it isn't related to AtheOS at all. What gives you this idea?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but this seems to be an entirely new project, not an AtheOS fork.

Re:Poor Cosmoe...

[drightler]

Yep.. its true, from the FAQ:

"Do you allow source code changes to be submitted for inclusion into Cosmoe?"

"...This question gets asked a lot simply because Kurt Skauen, the author of Atheos (on which Cosmoe was largely based) did not allow changes to be submitted..."

Re:Poor Cosmoe...

[DrWhizBang]

Correct me if I'm wrong,

OK.

Cosmoe is in fact an AtheOS fork, but of a different sort. Bill took the appserver (gui layer) from AtheOS and ported it to the linux kernel. So the API is almost the same as Syllable, but the kernel (and driver subsystem) is linux. He stated at the time that his aim was to have the hardware compatibility of linux, but get rid of X.

The two (syllable and cosmoe) have diverged somewhat since their respective forks, since Bill is aiming for a BeOS API, whereas syllable is not attempting to be a clone.

Re:Poor Cosmoe...

[dlockamy]

Cosmoe was orginally using the Atheos/Syllable appserver and api libs for it's core
But they have since switched to the opensource beos clone Haiku appserver

I wouldn't exactlly call it a fork...but it was a port of a large chunk of their code

Re:syllable.org slashdotted

[Vanders]

AtheOS was written in 100% assembler as a pet project by the guy who wrote it

The kernel is written in C. The high level stuff is written in C and C++.

He (and others) later built some POSIX, KDE and GTK API mappings..

The AtheOS kernel has always been about 95% POSIX compliant. There are no KDE or GTK API's for Syllable; it has always had it's own C++ API and appserver.

Re:syllable.org slashdotted

[Anonymous Coward]

This message was brought to you by Pavlov's dog.

Pavlov? Sorry, that name doesn't ring a bell...

Re:Hardware cost

[EdipisReks]

the iBook is the other reasonable choice, for people that don't want to go with a CRT, until the iMac gets refreshed. since the iBook has gone to the G4 architecture it has become a very good machine for a very reasonable price. the PowerBooks (i love my 1.25 15") and the G5's offer very good value for what you get, but are significantly more expensive than the eMac and iBook. they aren't any more expensive than any other companies high end products, though, and one could argue that they offer greater value than many competing machines.

Re:syllable.org slashdotted

[AKAImBatman]

The kernel is written in C. The high level stuff is written in C and C++.

Yeah, some other guy pointed out that I was thinking of Minuet.

The AtheOS kernel has always been about 95% POSIX compliant. There are no KDE or GTK API's for Syllable; it has always had it's own C++ API and appserver.

Hold on a sec here. I'm pretty sure this was one of those pieces of history I'm not screwing up on. As I remember it, there was no attempt by the AtheOS author to be POSIX compliant except for the purpose of running BASH and a few other utilities.

Later on, I remember that KHTML and other KDE software was ported to AtheOS. How you guys did that, I don't know, since AtheOS lacked X11. An X11 mapping perhaps? Which would (hopefully) allow you to support the KDE libs with a simple recompile.

Re:syllable.org slashdotted

[DrWhizBang]

IIRC, AtheOS was written in 100% assembler

not exactly. Generally low level stuff is C, everything else is C++. The API to write gui apps is C++.

He (and others) later built some POSIX, KDE and GTK API mappings so that Linux and Unix software could be compiled and used.

nope, not at all. Syllable has always been a posix OS, so posix apps generally compile effortlessly. But part of the raison d'etre of syllable is to create a more BeOS, Mac, or Amiga inspired OS. This means no X, GTK or QT (a subset of QT was ported to port KHTML, similar to what Apple did for Safari), and these toolkits will never be ported to Syllable. At least not by the core devs.

MacOS Comparison

[eeg3]

"Tempted by Mac OS but not thrilled with the hardware cost?"

Ugh, having the start menu at the top isn't really making it like MacOS, and it sure seems that's the only similar thing. It doesn't even integrate the application menus into the title bar. Another great part of MacOS is the fact it "just works." I doubt you get this with Syllable. Furthermore, the MacOS UI is a lot nicer.

Moreover, I doubt this OS will really take off with a "big future." BeOS/QNX/etc were a lot spiffier, and they didn't survive. I wish them the best of luck, however.

Re:MacOS Comparison

[Anonymous Coward]

Huh? It was suggested as an alternative OS, not a Mac OS replacement, you cretin! As for QNX, I like the way you say it "didn't survive".

That's the QNX used in millions of embedded devices, is making a profit, and doing very well eh? http://www.qnx.com

You are astoundingly ill-informed!

Re:MacOS Comparison

[dgagley]

Another great part of MacOS is the fact it "just works."

I have yet to have a single month were OSX doesn't come up with an error. cannot print, menu items dissapearing etc.

Horrible to say but my XP has been up without a problem for a good year and I cannot say that about the OSX. Yes this has happened on different versions and hardware.

Re:MacOS Comparison

[phoenix.bam!]

I think the editor was pointing out that Syllable runs on any system you want (x86 for example) while you have to run OSX on comparably more expensive PowerPC MAC hardware. THe comment wasn't comparing the interface of the OS's at all.

Re:MacOS Comparison

[christurkel]

QNX made a big splash with its free download and live floppies but its hardly a failure; the move was intended to attract developers and was a triumph. QNX lives in the embedded world, where it is the most popular OS.

Re:MacOS Comparison

[eeg3]

How does "Tempted by Mac OS but not thrilled with the hardware cost?" equal to just an alternate OS? It's comparing MacOS and Syllable. It's insinuating syllable is a free x86(cheaper hardware) version of a macos-like alternative. Which it's not. That's like saying "tempted by Walmart, but not thrilled with the distance there? Go to Bob's Backyard Retail Store." That's insinuating Bob's backyard retail store and Walmart are similar.

"You're astoundingly lacking in the reading comprehension department!"

Re:MacOS Comparison

[snuf23]

It doesn't even integrate the application menus into the title bar. Another great part of MacOS is the fact it "just works."

Number one thing I HATE about MacOS is the application menu integrated into the title bar. And this is coming from someone who used Amigas and Macs long before Windows or UNIX/Linux. I can't tell you HOW many times on OS 9 I've had to handle support calls where the user is out of memory because they have closed all the windows and don't realize the applications are still open.
Integration to the title bar makes the interface screen-centric rather than window-centric. It means you have to mouse farther every time to get to the file menu. This was fine in the old days of 15 inch monitors and single tasking but for modern windowing systems it's not intuitive at all.
As for your second comment... "just works". Hahahaha Yeah sure it "just works". Sometimes, except when it doesn't - sort of like other operating systems. And yes I support OS X machines and know what I'm talking about.

Re:MacOS Comparison

[be-fan]

Actually, the reason that having the menu-bar at the top rocks is that it's much faster to access the menu (Fitt's law). Measurements show that Mac users can get to the menu 5 times faster on average than Windows users.

Re:MacOS Comparison

[martin_b1sh0p]

I agree that QNX is alive and well but it is not the most popular in the embedded world. That would be WindRiver's VxWorks last time I checked.

Re:MacOS Comparison

[pfriedma]

Mac OS 'just works' for the most part because the hardware is standard. On the X86/pc platform, you have to deal with a vast range of hardware and external software which is not always suported by the os maker. If you want Linux to 'just work' the way that MACOS does, you would have to be able to prove that your software works on ever possible piece of hardware you expect it to. Also, a universal install system w/nice shiny frontend would help.

Re:MacOS Comparison

[ChronoZ]

BeOS/QNX/etc were a lot spiffier, and they didn't survive.

As previously mentioned, QNX is alive and well. It has never been targeted as a desktop alternative OS ;it's an embedded developer OS. So just because you've never seen it "grow" in the desktop OS market doesn't mean it's dead. Please check your facts before posting in the future.

Re:MacOS Comparison

[xScruffx]

Well, I have about half-a-dozen boxes running a developer release of QNX from a year or so ago. That's about 6 more than I have ever run MacOS or Syllable on (though looking at Syllable a while back was interesting).

xScruffx

Re:MacOS Comparison

[snuf23]

I see your bullshit and raise you another bullshit.
Sure its easy to get to the same place on the screen - and so long as your application focus is correct you will get the right menu. But if you are clicked on a different window than the app you wanted to access the menu for you are going to have to mouse over to highlight the correct window and then scoot back up to the menu bar again.
As for your try it drunk sometime comment. I have. It isn't a problem at least for me. I guess my hand eye coordination is better than the rest of the population.
Regarding which OS version - the integrated menu is in all versions of Mac OS. Yes I don't hear the "why am I out of memory issues" anymore from OS X users. I understand the technical differences between the OSs. I just get grumpy because MacOS up to version 9 had horrible memory (lack of)management and multitasking. And yes I still have to support OS 9 for some legacy applications and older systems. Whereas I haven't seen Win 3.1 in years.
I really would like to hear your defense of my second personal thing I can't stand about Macs - the one button mouse. And don't you give me that "because the interface is so good you only need one mouse button". Having done plenty of time in desktop video and publishing environments I can tell you its really one button plus 3 keys to modify the one click.
But seriously all BS and flames aside, I think OS X is a very good OS. I just have a problem with Mac users who need to chime in on every thread to tell us how it is the PERFECT OS. It's not. It has it's problems. It's very good and better for a lot of tasks than the other ones out there. But it is NOT perfect anymore than the Windows version of iTunes was the greatest win32 app ever written.
Steve Jobs likes to use those kind of terms and they are BS marketing talk. If you say Macs "just work" or that they "saved Christmas" you are just parroting Jobs bombastic marketing drivel.

Re:Website problems

[Vanders]

Sorry, the page is hosted on Sourceforge. I didn't know you could Slashdot Sourceforge like that. We can't fix it because we're not Sourceforge administrators.

Re:Hardware cost

[Guppy06]

$1000.00 >> $0.00, which is the cost of using the hardware I already have. I have yet to see Mac OS ported to PC hardware.

Re:syllable.org slashdotted

[Anonymous Coward]

Hold on a sec here. I'm pretty sure this was one of those pieces of history I'm not screwing up on.

I think you're mis-remebering slightly.

As I remember it, there was no attempt by the AtheOS author to be POSIX compliant except for the purpose of running BASH and a few other utilities.

No, Syllable and AtheOS really are about 95% POSIX compliant. We even use Glibc. The only ommisions are edge cases which are not technically POSIX anyway, such as missing mmap(). Bash is the default (Pretty much only!) shell, the utilities are GNU Coreutils, Diffutils, Textutils, Sed, Grep etc. just as you would find on most Linux machines.

I remember that KHTML and other KDE software was ported to AtheOS

KHTML was ported, but nothing else. Kurt wrote Qt wrappers around the native AtheOS classes, so there is very little Qt involved in the port. It's almost exactly how Apple ported Qt to OS X. There is no X support for AtheOS or Syllable.

Re:Hardware cost

[finkployd]

But what if you are like 90% of the population and do not need that computing power (in fact, will likely never even have oppertunity to use it)? Perhaps you value ease of use and productivity over raw cpu power?

I'm no apple fanboy ( I have one but I have more Linux and BSD boxes ), but this whole irrational obsession with raw CPU speed that Intel fans have is a little odd. There are other aspects in most people's computing experience how fast "openssl -speed" runs.

Finkployd

Lacking?

[Mullen]

What's lacking: Some features and subsystems not yet coded; limited range of apps; occasional stability issues.

Wow, just glad it's missing the little things that don't matter.

Re:Lacking?

[djlurch]

While witty, I think the previous post should not slip by without comment.

I have said the very same thing about the Linux platform. It doesn't have the applications that I need. Those that are available are in a pre-beta phase as opposed to the Windows platform software.

I find it ironic that the poster has "Linux or Death (Muerte)" in their signature. The Linux fanatics here at Slashdot are so blinded by their allegience to the product, that they fail to remember one of the primary reasons for support of alternative operating systems.

Apparently it is ok to support alternative OS's. Just as long as it is Linux.

Re:Lacking?

[Zebbers]

Yah and theres a poll on their website about paying for Syllable software.

Re:Lacking?

[Vanders]

Whats wrong with asking people? I'm not suggesting we start doing it. Trying to discern meaning from a poll on our website is about as useful as looking at the poll on Slashdot and discerning that CmdrTaco wants to put everyone to sea on a raft.

AtheOS

[KillerHamster]

How do you pronounce that? And for that matter, how do you pronounce BeOS? Just wondering, in case I ever have to communicate with a live human about it.

Re:AtheOS

[green pizza]

How do you pronounce that? [AtheOS]

It's pronounced: "Syllable"

Re:AtheOS

[thelenm]

It's pronounced: "Syllable"

And you must be careful not to put the emphasis on the wrong syllable.

Re:Hardware cost

[bcrowell]

For $200, Fry's sells 1.8 GHz intel boxes with Linspire. If you have a monitor already, that's a heck of a lot cheaper than $800.

Opportunity

[iamdrscience]

I don't know if Syllable will be the ones to take advantage of it (or if anyone will), but I think that in the next few years there is a real opportunity for somebody to take over the PC operating system market. Microsoft has delayed Longhorn numerous times already, and it looks like the difference between WinXP and Longhorn will be as vast as the difference between Windows 3.11 and Win95. That added to the fact that many Windows users are already unsatisfied enough to be looking for something new.

Apple will not be the ones to usurp windows because their hardware is too expensive for most people. Linux or other BSDs won't be the ones to take over because they're too difficult for most people. Even the most user-friendly distros like Mandrake and Redhat, despite their continuing progress and great efforts, have some problems. Most fundamentally I think it's the fact that despite all of the friendly aspects, it's very difficult for a user of Linux to avoid ever using the command-line. I think the way OSX uses the command-line is much more appropriate -- if you want to use it and learn it, it's there and you can use all of its power, but realistically, no normal user will ever be FORCED to learn how to use it.

If Syllable manages to get some momentum, they might be able to do it. We'll see.

Apple could become a contender if they decided to take the leap towards porting OSX to the PC, or working to make their hardware cheaper. Neither of those look very likely though, but they're certainly possibilities, and things I would love to see happen.

Re:Opportunity

[Anonymous Coward]

Fixing Linux's ease of use issues would be far easier than bringing Syllable to a state where it's ready to compete with Windows. Although architecturally it appears very solid, I'd be surprised if it's able to compete with Windows 3.1 at the moment in terms of actual implemented features, from an end user's perspective. While I don't believe it's necessary to match Longhorn's feature set in all areas to be competitive, you should at least be in the same ballpark.

Now, perhaps by the time the NEXT major revision of Windows rolls around Syllable will be ready to stir up some real trouble, but Longhorn just isn't a realistic target.

Re:Opportunity

[westlake]

That added to the fact that many Windows users are already unsatisfied enough to be looking for something new.

Market share, as reflected in the Google Zeitgeist for June:

Windows (all) 91%, Windows XP 51%, Mac 3%, Linux, 1%

The only visible trend is the growing dominance of XP, it's share rising at the rate of about 1% a month.

Re:Opportunity

[The Infamous Grimace]

The problem is with few drivers and support issues.

That, and a little thingy called 'Velocity Engine'. Oh, and that endian stuff. Trivial, I'm sure...

(tig)

Re:Opportunity

[renoX]

> I think that in the next few years there is a real opportunity for somebody to take over the PC operating system market.

You fail to provide any "proof" of this..
Even if Longhorn was never released or a flop (doubtfull: Microsoft monopoly ensure more or less that the new version is installed in all the new PCs), why do you think people need something better than XP??

I don't think XP is perfect, just that it is "good enough" for the majority of people and any new OS would suffer from the lack of drivers or the lack of application, hell even Linux suffer from lack of drivers: it is much better to select the HW before buying to be sure that the compatibility is good, otherwise there can be surprise..

Re:Opportunity

[Archibald Buttle]

That, and a little thingy called 'Velocity Engine'. Oh, and that endian stuff. Trivial, I'm sure...

You forget that Mac OS X runs on machines with G3 processors that have no Velocity Engine. That isn't a big problem.

As for the endian problem, it's not really that tough to handle.

You're also forgetting the heritage of Mac OS X. NeXTStep ran on Intel hardware, and the first versions of Rhapsody (the immediate predecessor to Mac OS X) ran on Intel too.

Re:Opportunity

[The Infamous Grimace]

Actually, I'm not forgetting. I don't own any G4s; both my in-use Macs are G3 (iMac DV 400 and PB Wallstreet 300). But many production suites use it, such as the Adobe and Macromedia apps. And lets not forget the games. They would need some serious recoding as well.
Macs aren't about 'faster', per se. They're about 'smarter'. The PPC architecture, what teensy bit I understand about it, isn't about clock speed, but rather ops per clock. And Velocity Engine can provide a major boost in this area. Assembly optimizations would all have to be rewritten. Remember the hoopla surrounding the release of OS X, and how major apps such as Photoshop took a while to be rewritten? And this was with the help of the Carbon API, andf the '90%' compatibility. How much work would it take to rewrite Photoshop to take advantage of a new set of APIs for the x86 architecture?
Naw, We'll never see OS X on Intel. I think it far more likely that Apple will begin supporting Linux on x86 and license OS X out for G4 PPC clones, once their product line is solidly G5 and beyond. They're already collaborating with HP in regards to the iPod; how do you think OS X would be perceived by the public should HP start offering low-cost G4 boxes?

(tig)

Re:Opportunity

[dave420]

There is no real opportunity here. Windows has nearly 95% of the desktop market. You can't make inroads against that by offering an ideological difference at the cost of some functionality.

You can't take over that without offering MORE than Windows offers. I'm not trolling, but it's easier for most people in the world to configure their computers to play games and videos, run software they can find in their local shops on Windows than Linux. It's not going to change any time soon, as Linux isn't moving in one direction. There are too many people trying to drag it one way or another. You need someone saying "Yup. That's what we'll do. Work towards this." or "That goes against our direction". When that happens in Linux, people just go and start a new faction, further increasing the diversification and lessening overall inertia of Linux as a whole. The only way people will listen to that person with the "yes/no" answers is if he's paying their bills. That's a more solid agreement to obide by their rules than just meeting up on /. or IRC and deciding to work on the same project.

This really isn't trolling. I'd love to have another O/S out there battling with MS. Unfortunately, most people here have rose-tinted glasses and are too quick to forgive linux's foibles that are stopping it from going mainstream. A penguin and great ideology won't impress most people, especially if their computer is just another grey box in their house.

Re:Opportunity

[Archibald Buttle]

Whilst Mac OS X definitely does make good use of the Velocity Engine to speed things up on machines that have them, and applications also make use of it, much of this is handled through the compiler. From what I've read XCode 1.5 (due any day now) includes some improvements to GCC which do some automatic vectorising. Those improvements are either already part of the main GCC branch or they'll filter into it.

We'll never see Mac OS X for Intel simply because it's not in Apple's interests to support a general Intel platform. They make too much money from their hardware business. I also doubt very much that Apple will return to licensing the Mac OS.

What is sad is that Apple killed of Yellow Box for Windows. Yellow Box is what is now called Cocoa on Mac OS X, and the Windows version was basically an updated version of OpenStep. Of course most of the big apps don't use Cocoa right now, but there's many coming that do use it, and it would have been nice to see them portable between platforms. Instead the only portability option is GNUstep, which is a bit behind, to put it mildly.

Re:syllable.org slashdotted

[AKAImBatman]

Hmm... Oh well, I must have misunderstood the news bits as they were coming across the wire.

BTW, do you guys have any plans to port the Mozilla Gecko engine, or are you sticking with KHTML for the foreseeable future?

Re:Limited Applications

[Vanders]

I would have also liked to see information about what would be involved in developing applications for Syllable. Is there a well-documented API? What about support for multiple languages?

All the information you'd like is on the website but we're Slashdoted, so I can only ask you to try again in a few days time. The API is documented, there are some tutorials, example code is abundent and we're happy to answer questions in the forums and mailing lists. Multi-lingual support is currently in the CVS version which can be compiled if you want it, and will be officially available in the next release of Syllable.

Re:not quite there guys.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not, at least not where it matters to the user! Consider:

Driver installation. In Linux, mess around compiling your kernel and/or modprobing modules and editing /etc/conf.modules. In Syllable, just copy the driver into a directory.

User-interface: single toolkit and desktop, sane design. Consistency is the result.

Plus, there are other things. The initscripts are cleaner and shorter (one of the factors involved in the sub-10-second boots), the GUI subsystem is like X and a toolkit all-in-one, and others.

So install it, and you'll see that it's not as complex at all!

Re:syllable.org slashdotted

[Jahf]

You must be new here. Welcome to /. We can take down pretty much any non-commercially-backed page.

Re:syllable.org slashdotted

[Vanders]

The KHTML port is a total dead end; maintaining it is a nightmare. I hope we'll have a port of Gecko within the next 12 months, which will hopefully be much easier to maintain as it is designed to be portable. Personally I think we need stronger debugging tools before anyone tackles a large codebase like Gecko, so I intend to work on the development toolchain some more and then maybe tackle Gecko.

One of the pros was low memory use?

[LWATCDR]

How is 64 Megs low memory usage?
Seems like a pretty good chunk of memory if you ask me for a less than complete OS.

Re:Hardware cost

[green pizza]

>>Tempted by Mac OS but not thrilled with the hardware cost?
> [Reference to eMac]

I can build a full Athlon XP + Radeon 9600 system, with DVD+/-RW, for $480. For an extra $20 I can upgrade to a really snazzy case.

So what's your point again?

Is it me or ....

[theManInTheYellowHat]

Or is there only 2 different menu systems now?

There is the "Start" button which reveals the program listings and there is the CDE type dock system. Syllable seems to have the Start button. With all the different OS's there should be more than 2 menu mechanism's.

I actually liked Program Manager.

I guess everyone is trying to give the new users a break.

Re:Is it me or ....

[evilviper]

Or is there only 2 different menu systems now?

No, as a matter of fact, there's only ONE system.

The menu system and dock systems are really so similar, you can't rightfully distinguish them (at least not while lumping all menu and dock systems together).

What does a menu do that a dock doesn't? It just hides the dock until you click a button. Which, as a matter of fact, some dock systems do as well...

The only real difference I can think of between the two, is that a dock displays the icons more prominently, and the menu displays the text more prominently.

Re:Website problems

[OmegaBlac]

I didn't know you could Slashdot Sourceforge like that.

Shoot...I didn't know that you could Slashdot Slashdot.org, but with all the 503 errors I've recieved from the site lately anything is possible.

Re:syllable.org slashdotted

[AKAImBatman]

Thanks for the info. :-)

I might have to give Syllable a try one of these days. I've only had a chance to use AtheOS back when it was an active project.

Re:Hardware cost

[simetra]

Macs cost a lot, that was the point. You have to buy an Apple computer to use Mac OSX.

Macs are not expensive

[nsayer]

The old saw about Macs being expensive is old and tired.

It is more accurate to say that you cannot buy a "cheap" mac. That is, the lowest price mac you can get is more expensive than the least expensive PC you can buy. But those two machines won't wind up being even close to either other in features or TCO. This is particularly the case with laptops.

Re:Macs are not expensive

[pyrrhonist]

It is more accurate to say that you cannot buy a "cheap" mac. That is, the lowest price mac you can get is more expensive than the least expensive PC you can buy. But those two machines won't wind up being even close to either other in features or TCO. This is particularly the case with laptops.

Bullshit.

When I was in the market for as new laptop, I compared an Apple Powerbook to a Dell Inspiron. The Inspiron was less expensive and had better graphics capability. I'm not talking about a matter of 50 bucks less expensive or even a couple hundred dollars - it was an entire fucking grand . Yes, $1000 difference. Why should I spend $1000 dollars more for a less capable machine? That's absolutely ridiculous.

The resolution of the 15 inch Powerbook is still only 1280x854, and the top of the line 17 inch Powerbook is 1440x900.

I'm using 1600x1200 on my low end Dell right now.

Re:Macs are not expensive

[nabasu]

No, but, I _can_ get a new top notch PC that can contend with a new Mac for a lower cost.

Re:Macs are not expensive

[jaoswald]

Which Inspiron do you mean?

I can't find any that are exactly 1600x1200. When I chose a 8600, and configured it like the low-end 15-inch (Combo drive only, 256 MB ram, 64 MB VRAM, 60 GB hard drive, 1.5 GHz Pentium M, PLUS remembered to add 802.11b/g built-in), I got a price of $1422. Compared to the $2000 for the Powerbook.

That's $578, not $1000, AND, I still didn't get Gigabit Ethernet, a Pro version of the OS, or Firewire 800, and the external video port isn't digital. And it weighs a pound more (6.9 vs. the 5.7 lb powerbook).

Re:Macs are not expensive

[XMyth]

My inspiron 8200 has a 1600x1200 native resolution. Probably the laptop's best feature.

I don't think I got the "UltraSharp" screen, but rather the one just under that (I forget what they called it...)

Re:Macs are not expensive

[pyrrhonist]

apple has decided to go for the ultra portable market, they actually make laptops, not moveable computers like most of the dell laptops...

NOT!

Re:Macs are not expensive

[BRTB]

I'd LOVE 1600x1200 on a 17" LCD. Higher, if they could do it. 1600x1200 on the 15" screens in Inspiron 8200's is just about perfect, especially with Cleartype enabled. Hell, if they made standalone DVI versions of my laptop's 1400x1050 14.1" screen I'd be happy enough.

Re:Macs are not expensive

[pyrrhonist]

Which Inspiron do you mean?

I have an 8200 with the UltraSharp screen.

There was no Mac with equivalent features, and the one that was closest was $1000 more.

I still didn't get Gigabit Ethernet

Which is absolutely useless. What other devices am I going to be talking to that use GigE? Most hotels don't have gigabit ethernet. My house and most public internet access points use WiFi. Work doesn't have gigabit. The fastest speed I can download from my house is 3 Mb/s, and my other computers all have 10/100. Gigabit is a useless added expense.

a Pro version of the OS

I have a Pro version of the OS.

or Firewire 800

Yeah, that'll be good for the iPod. Oh, wait, the iPod doesn't have it.

the external video port isn't digital.

I don't need digital out for presentations. Most TVs and projectors I encounter don't support it. It's another completely useless feature.

And it weighs a pound more (6.9 vs. the 5.7 lb powerbook).

Okay, yeah, it would be nice if the Dell weighed less. But it's not worth $1000 dollars for that.

Most of what I do is programming, and for that I like to have as much screen real estate as possible. My old laptop had 1400x1050 screen resolution, and I got used to using that. Apple doesn't even offer the "standard" screen resolution of 1280x1024 in a laptop. These other features that you mention just don't do it for me.

Re:Macs are not expensive

[pyrrhonist]

First of all, resolution is not the only measure of graphics capability.

That is true. I also compared the chipsets of both machines. The Apple had a slightly better chipset. However, I needed more screen real estate. I was used to working in 1400x1050, and now I always use 1600x1200. I also compared the Dell with an Apple after the Dell arrived, and the UltraSharp display on the Dell was much crisper.

Secondly, if that's your only criterion for a laptop, I'm sorry.

It wasn't my only criterion. Duh.

When people compare computers, they usually consider the whole package. Not just the price and the screen.

I did consider the whole package. I forgot to mention that the Dell came with a larger hard drive as well. All the other features were the same. The only major difference was the screen and the $1000 price difference. The Dell was better on three points, so that's what I purchased.

You're buying more than a monitor, when you purchase a notebook.

No, but that is the major component of it considering that that's the part you look at.

Troll.

Why, because I carefully compared features and prices and decided not to go with the Apple? I think not.

I also compared and didn't purchase an Alienware laptop. Does that also make me a troll?

Re:Macs are not expensive

[pyrrhonist]

Here you are advocating 1600X1200 when I would not use that res on my CRT.

I don't have a CRT. I have a laptop. It has an LCD, and it looks great at 1600x1200. If you want to use a CRT, fine, but they look awful and hurt my eyes.

Normal people would not want that resolution on a small laptop screen.

Than why are most laptops capable of it these days?

Are you running at a DPI higher than 96? If so, how do you like the distorted fonts and UI?

No, I'm not. Oh, and there is no distortion whatsoever. I have a UltraSharp screen, and it's almost like looking at paper it's so clear. Because my screen is so large, I have the screen real estate to increase the font size to make the words clearer, and still be able to see most of the page. I can also shrink the words down to fit more on the screen with no loss of readability. On smaller screens, you can't do these things without sacrificing usability. Believe me, having what amounts to a two-page display on a laptop is very useful for presentations and documents.

Re:Macs are not expensive

[pyrrhonist]

You claimed that it was a less capable machine. Just because it has features you won't use doesn't mean it's less capable.

It is less capable. It can't display 1600x1200 or even 1280x1024.

Re:Macs are not expensive

[pyrrhonist]

HA! No, because in your post you said "Dell's screen is better ... Apple is the SUCK!" That's a troll.

No, I didn't. I said:

"When I was in the market for as new laptop, I compared an Apple Powerbook to a Dell Inspiron. The Inspiron was less expensive and had better graphics capability."

In no place does that say: "Apple is the SUCK!". I didn't mention anything about Apple sucking. If you somehow got, "Apple is the SUCK!", out of that, you have serious issues with reading comprehension.

We can't all see your thoughts unless you type them down; a reader would have had no way to know you considered anything but the screen, and for all intents and purposes you made it out to be a completely uninformed decision.

Only a complete idiot would assume this. A reasonable person would assume that after comparision the the two points that differed significantly were the screen and the price.

Try reading your post, man.

I did, you didn't.

(And don't be like the typical Slashdot ass: not everyone who talks is an Apple zealot ready to accuse you if you actually have something to say.)

I didn't even mention the word zealot. Why even bring this up? Methinks thou protest too much.

Again, in case you missed it, I did actually prove my point by linking to Apple's web site that the Powerbook's screen is still only 1280x854. That isn't even a standard resolution.

"Those who don't understand X . . ."

[Tony]

He stated at the time that his aim was to have the hardware compatibility of linux, but get rid of X.

Those who do not understand X are condemned to reinvent it.

Poorly.

(Paraphrased from a Henry Spencer quote about Unix.)

Re:"Those who don't understand X . . ."

[H09N0X10U5]

Those who do not understand X are condemned to reinvent it.

Poorly.

And the only people who do understand it are those who already implemented it. Piss-poorly.

Re:"Those who don't understand X . . ."

[Erik Hollensbe]

God, please spare me from something that's worse than X.

knickers to Nics

[Anonymous Coward]

The SiS 900 NIC driver was ported by Michael Krugger in half a day.

Is it a true port of the linux one, or does it actually work?

(If someone can show me a version that works for dead rat 7.1, I'll be impressed). Yeah, I know it's old already.

Re:Limited Applications

[wayward]

OK, I was able to get through. From what I saw about GUI programming with the Syllable API, it looks like it will be sort of laborious, but doable.

Re:Website problems

[daniel23]

There are a bug report and comments at sourceforge, looks like there is something unsound about handling the cookies.
Maybe the new color scheme threw a bad spell...

Re:Hardware cost

[Hognoxious]

Don't even mention clones, Apple stopped licensing them.

Stopped? Did they ever start?

Re:not quite there guys.

[osu-neko]

Driver installation. In Linux, mess around compiling your kernel and/or modprobing modules and editing /etc/conf.modules. In Syllable, just copy the driver into a directory.

I'm reminded of the good old days, when installing a driver was as simple as clicking on the driver's icon and dragging it into the System:Extensions folder. Alas, most modern operating systems aren't anywhere near as usable as MacOS was in 1989...

Nice to see some are at least starting to get a clue...

Re:Limited Applications

[Vanders]

Classes such as VLayoutNode and HLayoutNode are a great help. If you take a look at E.g. the main Whisper window the actual GUI creation code (In the constructor) is around 100 lines. You just nest widgets inside Views (Or derivative classes of View) and the Window and LayoutNode code will take care of most of the laying out work for you.

It could be easier, but it's certainly much easier than E.g. Win32, or even MFC (In my opinion, and I'm biased, and I havn't done very much MFC programing at all apart from one small dialog based application but that sucked enough to warn me off anything more complex with MFC!)

OMFG, you need an Amiga, man, dude, holy crap!

[Anonymous Coward]

Until then i'll still keep my midnight candlelight vigil until BeOS comes back.

Like totally you totally need like an Amiga, man! Dude, holy crap, the Amiga with OS/2 Warp was like the greatest system ever and you could install it on like a NeXT and it was like so cool because like... uhhh... ummm... JUST TRUST ME, IT WAS THE GREATEST OS EVER!

Except of course for JoS. And Freedows, which begat the equally successful Alliance OS.

And don't forget Haiku OS, which nobody knows what it is or why anybody'd bother working on it -- it's another one of those JoS-style "announcement engineering" projects, where they've got 200 pages of elaborate plans and a really beautiful, artistic, state-of-the-art website... But no working code and nobody trying all that hard to write any. They're too busy appointing committees and making plans to make plans to debate their plan-making proceedures.

Rule of thumb: If a project has a website already but hasn't yet released a working alpha or prototype, it's unlikely ever to release anything at all. If the website is plain-vanilla HTML 1.0, maybe there's a slim chance, but if it's got CSS? Forget it. Just a bunch of losers playing with themselves.

There aren't many things too big for two or three programmers to whack together a halfassed prototype/proof-of-concept (or at least proof that you HAVE a concept) and get it running. You don't need a website for that, and you sure as fuck don't need graphic designers and a logo. I seem to recall hearing about some Finnish guy banging out a fubar'd first crack at a Unix-ish OS kernel all by himself some years ago... And THEN he asked for volunteers.

Be Inc. gets credit for at least releasing a usable operating system (I was quite fond of it, though I didn't use it much because no useful software ran on it), but they get a big fat Cock-in-the-Face Award(TM) for providing a "solution in search of a problem" and therefore failing utterly in the marketplace.

Re:OMFG, you need an Amiga, man, dude, holy crap!

[andreyw]

No offense, but looks like someone forget to RTFA. (No offense again, maybe you did).

You do bring up a VERY valid point. BUT - AtheOS has been around for a while as well as its successor Syllable, and all I see is progress, progress, progress.

These folks do seem to want to make a full-fledged, USEFUL OS - not just a pet project.

On the other hand - there is me - who is making a microkernel as a pet project to learn more about osdev and low-lever programming. Doesn't have a flashy website though... only the basic SF site.

Syllable has been intriguing me for a while now. I just might make a go for it.

Re:A bit too easy to crash...

[Vanders]

The answer then is to ensure that you do not delete anything which derives from os::Looper..

Rules like this exist in any programming enviroment; don't free() memory twice. Don't dereference an invalid pointer. Don't take a semaphore and call sleep(). Don't delete an os::Looper object.

In all fairness, it should be more robust. There isn't much reason why the appserver or kernel should panic just because you try and delete an object. The application, maybe.

Why oh God Why

[thebdj]

Why do we keep trying to bridge this "gap" between Linux and windows? I mean really there is a gap there for a reason. I do not expect nor do I want every modern home user using the operating system that since its inception has been FGBG (For Geeks By Geeks).

There are other more geek-ish OSes, yes. However, linux is the mainstream one with the most support. There are a few reasons that the gap should stay the huge gap that it currently is.

If it became a mainstream operating system, maybe not even necessarily on the scale of M$ Windows, it would become even more prone to virus, trojan horse and other horrible attacks. I am not saying these things do not happen now. On the contrary there are vulnerabilities exploited all the time. However, most geeks know how to fix the holes pretty quickly and there are not enough linux machines to make a hardcore evil-doer write a virus for it. After all when was the last time you heard a nifty name on the news for a linux worm. I can name at least two dozen Windows worms/viruses.

For home users tech support is already enough of a pain in the butt. Dell and HP/Compaq must get millions of inane questions a day, and most those chimps they have working for them read from a book and probably could barely turn a PC on themselves. So I can see a conversation between tech support involving the install of a program. My mom has a hard enough time double clicking setup.exe.

Backwards compatibility is also a hold-back. I mean who wants to give up their present machine and lose with it all the other games and software which they came to love oh so much. WINE is good for a lot but there are still a lot of games that cannot keep up when in WINE. While there may be a lot of replacement programs available for users that isn't what they always want.

In the end Linux needs to just stay put. It isn't about catching the big evil M$. The fact is they will somehow manage to self-destruct themselves on their own. Leave Linux and any other "geek" OS alone. They should stay with the geeks and some of those lucky server admins.

I think Syllabus will prove to be another "fad", a fake "linux" of sorts that never quite made it. To be honest the OSes we have now are enough. If you want simple to use with a pretty powerful interface hidden away then use OS X. If you want a fairly stable, even if buggy, OS with lots of support and tons of software and ease of use (for the most part) use Windows XP (maybe 2K) all others are CRAP. If you want true power and don't mind the occasional frustration and want to seem cool around your geek buddies then use Linux, [fill in the blank]BSD, or maybe even that proprietary OS Solaris.

---
"The same thing we do every night Pinky; Try to take over the world!"

Re:Why oh God Why

[Gurney5]

(I'm a member of the Syllable community.)

We are not trying to bridge any supposed gap between Linux and Windows. We're dissatisfied with Windows as a desktop OS, and we're dissatisfied with Linux as a desktop OS. So, we're working on a completely different OS that meets our needs.

We do not expect every modern home user to use Syllable.

I honestly find the final argument in thebdj's post humorous. It reminds me of the "Everything that can be invented, has been invented" argument, and reminds me of the arguments against Linux five to ten years ago, which suggested that Windows and MacOS were "enough."

thedbj's reading an awful lot into the Syllable project that simply isn't there. When I look at the tremendous amount of work being put into Syllable for such little reward, the idea that we're making Syllable simply to be cool is ludicrous.

Re:Why oh God Why

[aristotle-dude]

Don't mind him. There are trolls like him on Apple stories calling Apple to abandon their xnu kernel for a linux kernel. They don't get that now that portage has been ported to OSX, we will have access to all that "linux" available on Gentoo.

Re:Why oh God Why

[ravingidiot]

Why do we keep trying to bridge this "gap" between Linux and windows?

From a consumer standpoint, I want my operating system to be compatible with the software I buy. I want to retrain myself as little as possible, and I just want my computer to do what I tell it to do. Microsoft has a habit of breaking away from standards and creating their own, which is why this is easier said than done. However, there are different distrobutions commited to different purposes. The big advantage to the FOSS movement is that that Linux has become quote versatile in its uses. Remeber, Windows used to run on top of DOS.

and there are not enough linux machines to make a hardcore evil-doer write a virus for it.

Perhaps most home based machines aren't Linux based, but remeber, there are several thousand servers out there that run Linux. Linux still easily act as a gateway for viruses. Concerning viruses and exploits, FOSS has always had the edge on Microsoft because Microsoft is secretive about its exploits. And even dating back to AT&T UNIX, before the FOSS movement ever existed, existing bugs were documented in man pages. When you have more than one team working on a problem and you have something like CVS in place, you get things done faster and in some cases, better.

Backwards compatibility is also a hold-back. I mean who wants to give up their present machine and lose with it all the other games and software which they came to love oh so much. WINE is good for a lot but there are still a lot of games that cannot keep up when in WINE. While there may be a lot of replacement programs available for users that isn't what they always want.

I agree that this is a holdback. Windows emulation exists on other platforms however (including commercial ones), and as with any emulated environment, it can't be perfect. WINE has things a bit better because all it does is emulate the API, not an entire system.

The problem I see with Microsoft is that with each new Windows release, they taunt their userbase more and more. If it's not through forced upgrades, then its through policies such as product activation and DRM. Linux keeps every kernel branch since 2.0 going, which should be more than enough if you're into having choices. If you don't like 2.6, by all means, revert to 2.4 and things should still run fine.

So I guess linux has a good way to go before it becomes capable of completely overcoming the desktop world, but it has standards that I feel should prevent alot of this mess again once Microsoft finally kicks the bucket (whenever that will be). UI standards are pretty up to par too; I think most distros will agree to start the user off with KDE/Gnome (which are close enough in function), bash, and tools such as ssh. The model is flexible enough to where you can adapt with tools that are written to standards open enough to properly create.

As far as the rest of the hobby OSes are concerned, I think they are a good idea. If you can't stand Windows and you find linux is too much for you, SkyOS looks like it's headed in the right direction.

Re:Why oh God Why

[Vanders]

Bridging the gap between Linux and Windows? We're not trying to bridge the gap between Linux and Windows; we're trying to replace Linux on the desktop totally!

I think Syllabus..

Syllable

I'll not bother to reply to the rest of your post. It's very silly.

Re:Limited Applications

[wayward]

Fair enough. I'm guessing that if Syllable takes off, there might be some development tools that make it even easier. Overall, it looks like an interesting project, and I'll be eager to see what happens with it.

Overrated?

[wayward]

I noticed that the original post, which hadn't been moderated at all before, got marked down as "overrated." How does this work? I'd be less confused if it was off-topic or obvious flamebait, but it seemed to be pretty innocuous.

Re:syllable.org slashdotted

[sp0rk173]

ba-zing!

Meh

[Anonymous Coward]

Interesting project. I think SkyOS stands a lot better chance. Better UI, better technology, easier for end users....everything seems better.

Best of luck to the Syllable team though. Prove me wrong.

Re:Meh

[Anonymous Coward]

Interesting project. I think SkyOS stands a lot better chance. Better UI, better technology, easier for end users....

..closed source, costs $30, less drivers. Oh and "better technology"? What do you base this on?

Re:Syllable

[Anonymous Coward]

"To clear up a few misconceptions..."

You just confused a lot more people. I'll try to help you a bit.

"The OS that was written in pure assmebly was, I think, SkyOS."

Wrong. SkyOS is coded completely from scratch. It was written in the 'C' language (except for small necessary parts, written in ASM). What you are thinking of is MenuetOS.

Syllable's web browser is based off of KHTML, the engine that runs KDE's browser, as well as Apple's Safari. This engine is also used in SkyKruzer, SkyOS's current web browser.

Syllable development?

[aclarke]

I'm glad to hear that Syllable development is finally progressing. Now I can use the syllables "fug", "nrut", "lurg" and "gip".

You might say that this is very "lurgciting" news...

Re:Hardware cost

[xenoandroid]

Even leaving out the monitor, that's an inferior processor, inferior graphics card/chipset, inferior sound card, and let me guess, inferior disc drive? Need I go on? Processor frequency isn't all that matters to some people.

Re:Hardware cost

[xenoandroid]

You're missing a sound card, monitor, mouse and keyboard, speakers, hard drive, network card, modem, firewire ports, usb ports (okay go and leave the last two and the network card out since they are on most mother boards now) and operating system in that setup. Now tell me how much it costs.

Seriously, I agree that you can BUILD a slightly more powerful non-mac PC for cheeper but if you buy a prebuilt one from Dell or some other vendor you shouldn't be surprised to find that the PC doesn't really perform all that much better than the mac at the same price.

Companies have to make money to survive, you can't really expect Apple to sell their computers at the same prices it would cost to build their computers (if you could) on your own.

AtheOS

[Osinoche]

I tried AtheOS a few years ago, it WAS amazingly fast and pretty stable, not many apps but it worked. Good project, Linux started as a pet project and blossomed into a full blown competitor for Microshaft or sorts. Try syllable, I know I'm gonna try to download it sooner or later. -- Osi -- Militant Agnosticism -- Have you had your miniature condoms today?

Re:Hardware cost

[aristotle-dude]

Are you saying that PC hardware was free? Did you never spend money on upgrading to a new system? How much time have you spent on it?

What about non-geeks? Are they really going to care about tinkering?

Re:Hardware cost

[aristotle-dude]

Yes, and Apple was about to conquer to desktop market. Oh wait, they were close to bankruptcy and Apple had to settle out of court with MS in exchange for a cash infusion. I believe Jobs was involved with that deal.

Re:not quite there guys.

[citog]

Although I use OS X (my first mac was a year ago) and think it's great, I get the impression from the lifers that OS 9 and perhaps some of the earlier ones were more usable.

Re:Hardware cost

[aristotle-dude]

Many of us "Mac Zealots" deal with the other glorious side of the computer world at work in IT jobs day in and out running Windows. That is the very reason why many of us are happy to have macs made by Apple.

If you don't like it, don't let your butt hit the door.

BTW. The clones almost killed Apple by undercutting their sales and profits. Contrary to popular belief, the clones did not really expand marketshare for Apple but they certainly did increase support costs while cannibalizing their sales.

To put it simply, the clones decreased Apple's marketshare.

Re:Poll: WHICH IS BETTER

[Chuck Bucket]

Wait, which one is ceren? I can't tell.

CB

Hardware cost?

[JeffTL]

I suppose you haven't seen the eMac or iBook, then. Yes, you can get a Dell for less, but are the bottom Dells as good? Will they hold up as well or last as long? Are the batteries as good?

Re:not quite there guys.

[jafuser]

This sounds like the Amiga DEVS: directory, where each driver was a *.device file, IIRC.

Not worth it yet

[ShadowRage]

so far my experience with syllable has left a bitter taste in my mouth, not only did it lock up on startup, but left my machine hanging. (power button didnt even respond!)

of course maybe that was only a problem with the machine's hardware, or compatibility with it.. but still, even linux doesnt do that, nor does beOS or bsd or anything else I've tried..

I'd give it several more releases before trying it.

Re:Not worth it yet

[lambsonic]

left my machine hanging. (power button didnt even respond!)

Apparently you are a Linux user who has never needed to turn your computer off from the case. I am guessing you probably just needed to hold down the button for a few seconds.

Re:Hardware cost

[RenaissanceGeek]

You forgot the screen. eMacs come with a 15'' CRT.

Incorrect: the eMac comes with a 17" CRT.

Aside from that, I'd say that your analysis is spot-on.

Re:not quite there guys.

[Daniel Dvorkin]

Well, speaking as a middle-term Mac user (I switched from PC's in 1995, which means that I have roughly the same amount of time using the "Classic" MacOS as I do using OS X) I'd say that OS X has finally caught up in terms of overall usability, but it's taken a while. I had to grit my teeth and make myself use everything below 10.2; I kept doing it since a) I knew I'd have to get used to it, and b) as an old DOS-head, I really did (and still do) appreciate having Unix so close to the surface. With 10.2, I'd say they achieved roughly the same level of usability as they had in the System 7 days; 10.3 is as good as OS 9 overall. Certainly there are things about the old MacOS I miss, even now, but the cool new stuff in OS X more than makes up for it, most of the time.

All things considered, what I really wish they'd done was produce an evolved version of the Classic interface with Unix running underneath, and added in the cool NEXT-derived stuff piece by piece. They had already proven they could this successfully, with A/UX, but I believe that was one of many things that got "Steved."

Re:Hardware cost

[The Infamous Grimace]

For $200, Fry's sells 1.8 GHz intel boxes with Linspire. If you have a monitor already, that's a heck of a lot cheaper than $800.

And if you don't have a monitor? Remember, the eMac uses a flat CRT. Also, how much for the software that provides the functionality of iLife? And how about the warranty? Not that Apple doesn't stroke you for the extended warranty, but at least you get a year for free.

(tig)

Re:Hardware cost

[The Infamous Grimace]

and Apple had to settle out of court with MS in exchange for a cash infusion.

Sorry, but you are quite wrong. The $150 mil MS paid had nothing to do with 'bailing' out Apple, but rather was a final step in the on-going GUI lawsuit. The agreement also provided for 5 years of MS Office for Mac dev, which allowed MS to say that they were supporting alternative OSes.
Start here, and google for more, if need be.

(tig)

Re:not quite there guys.

[Brandybuck]

User-interface: single toolkit and desktop, sane design. Consistency is the result.

At least until someone ports GNOME or KDE over. Please, pass a law banning freedom or we will never get a free desktop suitable for the masses!

just look at all the whiners

[maxpublic]

Bitch and moan, bitch and moan. You'd think tech geeks would step up to the plate and encourage the makers of Syllable to keep up the good work, just as a matter of course. But what do we get on good ol' Slashdot?

Whining, of course. Whining that Syllable doesn't work as well as Windows or Linux, despite the fact that it's an alpha (at a 0.5 release, no less) and that it's only been in development for two years. Whining that it doesn't do everything under the sun right now! And especially whining over the fact that some poor brain-dead schmuck who has the gall to call himself 'tech-savvy' might, at some point in the future, have another choice in the field of OS's. God forbid that this pseudo-nerd should be presented with the opportunity to use another OS; this moron is already troubled by the existence of Linux (although the ten or so MS operating systems that he's installed over the years doesn't seem to bother him), and refuses to even believe that a thing like BSD exists.

Crawl back into your holes, naysayers. You aren't geeks; you aren't even good enough to aspire to geekhood. You're just one of the sheep and I, for one, would rather my food didn't pretend to sentience.

Max

Re:just look at all the whiners

[SpectralOne]

Yes, it is all bitch and moan. That's because for all the do-gooding in the Linux community, the truth is that it's Linux or nothing for most. People want to work with what they know.

Amiga OS anyone?

[SpectralOne]

Syllable looks a lot like the Amiga Workbench to me. They even use the "Prefs" terminology, the shell formatting is the same. Let me guess, it supports Rexx?

Re:not quite there guys.

[10Ghz]

User-interface: single toolkit and desktop, sane design.

What if I don't like that toolkit or desktop?

Consistency is the result.

my KDE-desktop is pretty damn consistent.

Re:not quite there guys.

[osu-neko]

Heh. I'm afraid I can't say -- my last Macintosh ran System 7.5. I do know that Systems 6 & 7 were quite usable, having many features I find lacking in most "modern" operating systems. I'm told by a friend who uses OS X on a daily basis that it still has some catching up to do in the usability department. Having peeked a bit under the hood of his OS X machine, I do note that behind the pretty interface they appear to have replaced the very logical and organized filesystem layout of classic MacOS with the horrible file spew that characterizes most Windows or Unix-alike systems (ala the File Hierarchy Standard).

Hint: if you need something like InstallShield to install a program, you've screwed up already. A program should be installable by copying a single folder onto your harddrive, and uninstalled by simply deleting that folder. (I hear there's a project called ROX working on introducing sane, usable file system structure to Unix-alike systems.)

Re:not quite there guys.

[10Ghz]

Apart from the GTK+ apps, and Firefox, and OO.o.

I don't use any GTK+ apps. Well, I do have GIMP installed, but I use it only rarely (in three months I have used it for grand total of 2 times for 5 minutes total). I do have OO.org and Firefox installed, but again, I don't use them that much. Firefox is just for sites that require flash (Konqueror is 64bits on this machine, and it doesn't work with 32bit flashplayer-plugin). OO.o is installed, but I haven't used it at all.

Maybe it's just barable if you want to stay right on the bleeding edge of Linux and KDE, where every application you always run is always totally upto date, but for those of us who don't buy into the rabid Gentoy fanboism and who don't enjoy upgrading everything every month,

Why did you bring Gentoo in to the discussion?? What does having up-to-date software have to do with consistency between the apps?

consistency on Linux is a total fucking joke

And, like I said, my KDE-desktop is VERY consistent. I would say that it's MORE consistent than Windows is for example! Many apps in Windows use their own toolkit/look 'n feel. Hell, Office XP looks different than W2K does for example! on my desktop, 95% of the apps look and behave in similar way, and the remaining 5% aren't even used.

a myth purpurtrated by fools and fanboys who don't understand the term and think that a semi-transparent XTerm over their anime wallpaper is the panacea of good design.

Do you want some cheese with that whine? IMO good design is something that lets the user do his job as smoothly as possible. If that transparent Xterm over an anime-wallpaper helps the user to gets his job done, who the hell are you telling him that "No, that is wrong! You shouldn't run your system like that!"?

Re:Hardware cost

[nmk]

For the price of an iBook, you will usually get a 1-1.2 Ghz Pentium M notebook. Well guess what, with the iBook you get a 1-1.2 Ghz G4. Last time I checked 1/1 or 1.25/1/25=1. On top of that, the iBook comes with an entry level (3D game capable) ATI GPU. The Pentium notebook will probably have Intel integrated graphics.

As far as the eMac is concerned, you might get a PC desktop with twice the computing power for the price. You still won't get a decent GPU with it though. It will also have cheap, third rate, components. I think we've had enough of the FUD now.

Re:not quite there guys.

[10Ghz]

You then go on to mention a GTK+ app and several other non-Qt applications.

I said that I have few such apps installed, but I don't really use them at all. If I don't use them, what does it matter what toolkit they use?

Oh yeah, my KDE desktop is perfectly consistent, but that's only half the picture and you know it.

"half the picture"? In my case, KDE/Qt-apps satisfy my needs just fine, so they are all I run. And they are perfectly consistent.

If you manage to turtously stick to KDE and Qt only, ever, then of course you'll have a wonderfully consistent desktop (Unless you have an old Qt 1.x or 2.x application you might want..whoops, did I just say that?)

I have tried non-Qt/KDE apps, and went back "turtously" to KDE/Qt. Like I said, they do what I want them to do, and that's good enough for me.

No, I don't have any Qt 1.x or 2.x apps. Those are old news.

Welcome to the real world though, where you are the exeception to the rule by a very, very long way.

I don't give a flying fuck about your or anyone elses desktop. I care about MY desktop, and my desktop is consistent. And if I can do it, why can't everyone else do it as well?

Almost nobody runs only KDE and Qt applications only just so they can have a consistent desktop.

I don't use KDE-apps just so I could say "my desktop is consistent!". I use them because I like KDE, the apps do what I want and I'm comfortable using them. The consistency that comes with it is a mere side-effect.

Most of us have real work to get done.

So, you are saying that you can't get work done with KDE? uh, OK.....

Nice try, but why there is not any innovation?

[master_p]

I've run a small part of the docs, especially the GUI apis. They are nice and simple C++ code...the whole system is nice, but since you are doing an operating system from scratch, why not put some innovations in there?

Here is a list of innovations I would put in:

1) full garbage collection, system wide. C++ is ok for programming, but it is even nicer if it is garbage collected. It would certainly attract more developers on the platform.

2) instead of doing a traditional file system, why not do a live object-oriented persistent distributed database system? it would attract even more developers to it. Applications are 90% I/O...if you could eliminate that, you would have a sure winner. And you would solve all the registry and persistent storage problems.

3) a new object-oriented programming language that is fully garbage collected, compiled on the fly, distributed over the network (the class installation and download would be transparent to the user), coupled with full garbage collection and persistence, would truly rock the O/S world. It would mean that we simply wrote the applications, without worrying too much about memory management, installation, updating, compiling etc.

Re:Nice try, but why there is not any innovation?

[Misagon]

The improvements you mention are still quite esoteric.
They are hard to design and implement and hard for a newbie programmer to the OS to grasp.
1) and 3) are solved by Java. If you want a Java OS, then you can contribute to it.
2) is somewhat solved by Eros, except that it is not distributed.
A problem with persistent systems is that corruption is much worse than if files were used. You need a safe language to be safe from them.

Easier to use, for normal people

[melonman]

This has almost nothing to do with the elegance or otherwise of the OS and almost everything to do with the user base. Linux distros have got bigger, technically more complex, and, I would suggest, simpler to use, partly because of better GUIs and so on, but, mainly, because more stuff just works. Windows is, well, Windows, but if you want to get the digital camera in your shopping basket to work with your computer, it's about as easy as it gets, because there's a driver for it. My RISC OS machine was astoundingly simple to use, but since it just can't do most of what I need to do in 2004 it counts as "complicated" wrt real-world tasks. On that basis, any new OS with zippo support from manufacturers and large software companies is likely to be complicated for Joe Public.

Re:Hardware cost

[SecretAsianMan]

I can build a full Athlon XP + Radeon 9600 system, with DVD+/-RW, for $480. For an extra $20 I can upgrade to a really snazzy case.

So what's your point again?

I can build a go-kart for less money than I can buy a BMW. What's your point?

Re:not quite there guys.

[10Ghz]

I'll say it again but slowly this time: because...you...are...an...exception.

What makes me an exception? Because some AC on /. says so? Nothing personal, but I don't accept your opinions and assumptions as gospel. I know plenty of folks who run just KDE and KDE-apps. And I know plenty of folks who stick to Gnome and it's apps. I'm not an exception in any shape or form.

KDE alone? Certainly can't! Should I use OO.o or *guffuw* the glorious crap pile that is KOffice?

Koffice is OK for creating documents, it's doc-compatibility is not perfect, however. If you need oo.org, you can have it KDE-ized just fine. it would then share the look 'n feel, the file-dialogs and the works. I fail to see the problem there.

Firefox or Konquorer?

I use Firefox in Windows and Konqueror in Linux. I have exactly zero problems when it comes to Konqueror and web-browsing. I could just as well use Firefox (I have it installed), but I choose to use Konqueror instead. Just because you prefer Firefox over Konqueror, does not mean that everyone else does as well.

Adobe Acrobat Reader or the KDE Postscript viewer that barely works?

I haven't even installed Acrobat Reader, yet I can read PDF's just fine. Amazing isn't it?

Gimp or..hey wait, there is nothing like the Gimp for KDE! Oh sorry, I forgot that there's KPaint (Ha! I crack me up!)

Gimp is one of the few apps with no equivalent in KDE. But it's not a problem for me since I don't need it that much. And you can't live with the fact that ONE app looks different from the others? Hell, there are apps in Windows that look different from the others!

I have yet to find a decent replacement for the KDE 2.x KBiff that worked so well with KMail.

Well, the Kbiff-website says: "KBiff has now been ported to KDE 2.0 and 3.0.", so it might work with even more recent versions. And if you want an app like that, go ahead and write one. Surely an uber-hacker such as yourself could do it in no time?

Have fun with your consistent desktop. The rest of us will be hoping that Qt fixes their X clipboard support. Again.

Who is this "us" you are talking about? Rest Linux/*BSD-users? What makes you qualified to speak for them? And FWIW: I haven't seen any problems with the clipboard.

Re:Hardware cost

[Refrag]

Link?

Re:Hardware cost

[Refrag]

No, you saw Mac OS X ported to PC hardware and you (and most everyone else) failed to buy it. Which is why it will never happen again.

Re:syllable.org slashdotted

[Archibald Buttle]

Have you considered porting GNUstep to Syllable?

I must admit that I haven't looked at your API for your GUI but going in a completely new direction doesn't seem like a great idea to me. A decent high-level API for GUI work is a must.

I'm a Mac programmer thesse days and the Cocoa API (which is very closely related to GNUstep) provides for a very powerful environment in which to develop applications.

Re:Hardware cost

[Refrag]

I'm sorry, did you say build? Reply to this when you can link to an equivalent Dell or HP system for a much lower price.

Re:Hardware cost

[Refrag]

How in the hell can this be "Offtopic?" It's a direct reply to the article text!

Re:not quite there guys.

[Shulai]

> Driver installation. In Linux, mess around
> compiling your kernel and/or modprobing
> modules and editing /etc/conf.modules.
> In Syllable, just copy the driver into a
> directory.

If you already have the binary module for your distro, you can copy it in the /lib/modules tree.
About modules.conf (You are using RH6.2 or something similar if you have conf.modules!), autodetection is working better each time.
And I doubt Syllabe can magically solve any driver installation problem. I still have an ancient ISA NIC, no OS autodetect it, but at least I can set it manually in Linux and Windows 98 (No, XP doesn't support it).

> User-interface: single toolkit and desktop,
> sane design. Consistency is the result.

That doesn't stand up in the long term. If it ever become more used, Qt/GTK+,etc will pop up.
Even now it has apps ported from Linux, I doubt those are well integrated in the GUI.

> Plus, there are other things. The initscripts
> are cleaner and shorter (one of the factors
> involved in the sub-10-second boots), the GUI
> subsystem is like X and a toolkit all-in-one,
> and others.

Most Linuxes are bloated, I agree, that hurts performance.

Re:not quite there guys.

[Vanders]

If you already have the binary module for your distro, you can copy it in the /lib/modules tree.

If it is the exact same version as your kernel, or compatable, and you have module versioning enabled, and your kernel contains the correct "core" modules already. Otherwise you're SOL.

And I doubt Syllabe can magically solve any driver installation problem. I still have an ancient ISA NIC, no OS autodetect it, but at least I can set it manually in Linux and Windows 98 (No, XP doesn't support it).

Same with Syllable if we're talking about ISA hardware. You'd have to configure it manually, but then it is an ISA device which by their very nature require manual configuration. PCI and USB devices are handled much better.

As for hardware detection, well in the five years I've been using Linux it's always been quite bad. Just the other day a Redhat 9 installation managed to munge the X configuration. Trying to run through First Boot with a garbled display was fun..

READ MY LIPS... "BETTER DEVELOPMENT TOOLS"

[Austin Milbarge]

The reason I truly believe why Linux never took off in the desktop market and perhaps never will is because there are way too many GUI libraries with way too many interdependencies among them. Back in 1970, console applications were simple. vi, emacs and gdb were all that was needed. Fast forward 30 years and you quickly realize that these ancient tools don't cut it anymore.

If the people developing Syllable were serious, they would waste NO TIME and design a serious development system. Not screen scrapers like xxgdb, DDD or even KDevelop, but a powerful, and easy to use development environment that focuses on designing an application in the designer's language. Unlike current GPL tools that force the developer to figure out 10 other helper languages just to compile and distribute the project (and that's after you get all the right versions and their dependencies installed).

Overall, the IDE would need to draw new developers and keep them, not frustrate them. Something Linux has not done and must do in order to even approach competing with Microsoft on the desktop.

[Required for linux GUI app]
GTK+ --> GLIB --> Pango --> ATK --> X11 --> glibc
Oh, lets not forget "pkg-config"!

Needed to compile hello world
http://www.gtk.org/tutorial/sec-compiling.h tml

[Required for windows GUI app]
MFC --> NOTHING (DLLs already on every system)

[Typical development tools needed on Linux]
vi, g++, gdb, automake, autoconf, perl, ...

[Typical Windows development tools]
Visual Studio

I rest my case :)

Re:READ MY LIPS... "BETTER DEVELOPMENT TOOLS"

[Austin Milbarge]

> Actually VS is made up of several independent components, just like your Linux development

Yes that is true (technically) but with a good development environment it all becomes mostly transparent. It's that transparency that keeps developers focused on the project and not on the tools. I agree with you. Developing a single, all encompassing IDE is a big job, but a worthy one. However, developing many semi-usable, smaller IDEs (ala Linux) is worthless because noone is going to use them.

The other problem is that of the GUI library. When it comes to libraries, Linux is the undisputed champ of "too many cooks in the kitchen". X11, GTK+, QT, motif, lesstif, tk, etc. It's a joke! The development effort is spread way too thin and it's only hurting Linux. I hope Syllable will learn from this and decide to keep the libraries simple and manageable even if the widgets themsevles are a little outdated at first.

I downloaded and ran the Live CD of Syllable and I have to say I liked it a lot. I'd like to see it someday give Linux a run for it's money.

Emacs macros vs Vi macros

[some guy I know]

C-c C-f C-e gives you \emph{} [...] The best part was that it's quite easy to learn.

'Kay, ri-i-ight, "quite easy" to learn.

So what? You can do similar things in (g)vi(m) using abbreviations:

:abbr eM \emph}<ESC>i

(I used "eM" instead of "em", since it is less likely to appear in ordinary text.
Also, "<ESC>" means the escape character, which must be entered as "^V <ESC>" when defining the abbreviation.)
While entering text, type "eM{", and the cursor will be put in the right spot, between the braces.

Re:Emacs macros vs Vi macros

[MrHanky]

'Kay, ri-i-ight, "quite easy" to learn.

Yes, that surprised me as well. I'm no friend of Emacs, and those key-bindings look weird, but I my productivity improved after only a few hours. I had written most of my dissertation in vim (FreeBSD) then TeXShop and iTexMac (OS X) before I switched to Emacs because the latter two were so bug-ridden and inconsistently quirky. Emacs's quirks are at least consistent.

BTW, I'm not recommending you switch. You obviously know vi better than I do; I used macros instead of :abbr, and that didn't work that well. So thank you very much. I'll have to write this down somewhere.

er...

[PurplePhase]

The BeBox was PPC, never x86. BeOS's x86 support came later - unless you mean you took some old x86 box and installed BeOS on it to make a BeBox-ish clone. Pop the hood and look at your chip(s). Or look here: http://www.bebox.nu/

And if it is running slow for you, I have to think you've bloated it somehow - though I probably have been using mine less that you have yours, and I also never upgraded to the last couple OS releases.

I've seen others out there still developing - some sourceforge projects and such, and if I ever got my butt in gear... :) It seems like there is still a community, though as with Amiga I find the most based in Europe.

8-PP

Re:er...

[torpor]

yes i am aware that the bebox is ppc. i mean to say, as a bebox-owning beos user, i sniffed at atheOS, and also early beta's of syllable in an attempt to maintain my Bebox fix ...

its still there, its still running. its just too slow for the bulk, y'know!

One reason why nextstep flopped

[tepples]

We failed to buy nextstep because it had hardly any apps. It had hardly any apps because it didn't have the "Mac" name that symbolized "the same computer little Johnny uses at school."

There exist hard limits

[tepples]

As long as I have to wait for the OS to finish doing an activity, the system is insufficiently powered.

Some things will never be instantaneous. For instance, there is a speed of light barrier to browsing North American web sites from the Far East or vice versa.

Re:Hardware cost

[tepples]

Point is that not everybody needs the fine piece of German engineering that is a BMW automobile. Some people are perfectly happy with bargain basement kit.

Re:Hardware cost

[Refrag]

Apple tops PC Magazine's customer satisfaction survey.

I guess you could say it is infinitely cheaper if your time is worth nothing.

Re:Hardware cost

[finkployd]

Doom 3 is arriving soon.

Yes, and for the price of the video card required to run it comfortably, I'll just go buy an X-Box :)

(assuming you can use a keyboard and mouse to play it on the X-Box, if not, then fuck you ID Software, nobody wants to play an FPS with a controller)

Finkployd

Re:Hardware cost

[finkployd]

I need that power.

Then by all means, go buy it. But like cars where not everyone needs 500Hp engines, not everyone needs the absolute fastest computer. Ain't variety wonderful?

Finkployd

Re:Hardware cost

[finkployd]

As long as I have to wait for the OS to finish doing an activity, the system is insufficiently powered. When the hardware completes tasks so quickly that I can't tell I had to wait, then the computer power is sufficient.

I'm picturing you in front of a microwave, fuming like Yosemite Sam that a burrito takes 15 seconds to warm up :)

Finkployd

QT over FB

[yngv]

Well, I was going to point you toward this, but it's really designed for small devices like the Zaurus. And having tried both Qtopia and X11 on the Zaurus (default Sharp ROM vs pdaXrom), I have to admit that X11 is snappier and is the one I'm using now.

Given some incentive though, I think the chaps at Trolltech could smooth out the wrinkles.

Re:Hardware cost

[yngv]

1 GHz Pentium != 1 GHz Pentium M != 1 GHz PowerPC G4. Integer, FP, cache, power consumption are all different and affect final perceived performance. So 1.25/1.25 is not always 1.

Alternative (but little known) OS's

[Captain DaFt]

If you're like me and just curious about alternative OS's, here's an interesting one from the boonies of Italy: Hactar If he'd get some help, he might even port Noctis over to linux. (If ya asked real nice...) };-)

Not quite an adequate comparison

[nutsy]

The thing about Macintoshes is this: being able to buy them from only one source (Apple Computer, of course) means monopolistic pricing, but it also means hardware and construction that meets a known standard. Makers of prefab Wintel systems often cut corners on parts and labour to effect the lower pricing; having a more capable video card means little if the mainboard, power supply, cooling, and other such critical items are failure-prone! In the computer I'm using, the mainboard had to be replaced twice; and the CPU fan once; and, oops, there were no inlet/outlet fans in the case, so I had to shell out for those too.

I think a fairer comparison would be between a Macintosh with a certain feature set and a custom-built computer for which you can green-light each part that goes in, not just for big numbers but for quality as well (like, say, turning down the Microsoft tax). Would the custom-built machine be more expensive than a prefab one? Almost certainly. Would it be more expensive than a Macintosh? That, of course, depends.

Re:Hardware cost

[Guppy06]

"Are you saying that PC hardware was free?"

I'm saying that OS/X is one of the very few modern operating systems for which I would have to buy a completely new architecture for.

"Did you never spend money on upgrading to a new system?"

I don't "upgrade to a new system," I "upgrade my system." It's a lot like Ulysses' ship. It's been a very long time since I outright bought a new system, which OS/X would require. Heck, I can't even remember the last time I bought a motherboard, processor and RAM all at once.

Do you know wher I can find a uATX PowerPC board that can also run off my Athlon until I have the disposable income to also buy the new processor?

"What about non-geeks?"

Non-geeks don't give a damn about OS so long as they get IE, Office and Solitaire (not necesarily in that order).

Re:Hardware cost

[evilviper]

But what if you are like 90% of the population and do not need that computing power

So you are saying that 90% of the computer-usin population NEVER encode video or audio? Never use strong crypto (eg. SCP/SFTP)? Never run a CPU-intensive program like Mozilla or Firefox? etc.

Re:Hardware cost

[finkployd]

So you are saying that 90% of the computer-usin population NEVER encode video or audio?

Maybe not 90% (as with most stats, I just made that up on the fly) but certainly a large amount never encode anything. In my experience the average computer user struggles with simply playing these audio and video formats.

And regardless, you do not need a dual Opteron to encode media. You can do it with a 386 if you really want to, it just takes longer. Do you find yourself encoding media enough that it dictates your choice in computers? I rip CDs and pull from MiniDV cameras all the time, but it still accounts for less than 1% of the time I am using the computer.

Never use strong crypto (eg. SCP/SFTP)?

What algorithms are you using as a client that takes this much CPU power. Almost all popular symmetric and public key algorithms are designed to be implemented in minimal hardware as well as perform quickly in software. In the recent AES decision, Rijndael was chosen over the much stronger Serpent based mostly on performance concerns, and Serpent is pretty damn fast.

Never run a CPU-intensive program like Mozilla or Firefox?

Firefox performs admirably on the 450 AMD K6-2 based PC I built for my girlfriend. It certainly flys on any >1GHz processor (assuming you have enough memory to load it without paging)

Now if we were talking about servers, then CPU performance certainly becomes a large issue (or machines used to render graphics, etc). I would argue that IO is still the major bottleneck for most stuff (except Java, which continues to be a CPU hog, ESPECIALLY if you are sadistic enough to use it's ultra slow cryptographic functions).

For client PC's that spend most of their life ideling, and usually only spike in CPU usage when loading a program, or watching a video, or playing a video game, making a big deal out of the slight performance boost that Intel and AMD chips have over Apple's G4 offerings (the genesis of this thread) seems kinda silly.

Finkployd

Re:Hardware cost

[evilviper]

You can do it with a 386 if you really want to, it just takes longer.

Well, since it would literally take months and months to encode one hour of video, I think it's fair to say you CAN'T do it on a 386.

It's true, you don't need the very top-of-the-line systems, however, you do want something significantly fast, or it will take so long as to be intolerable.

Do you find yourself encoding media enough that it dictates your choice in computers?

Yes. I have a dedicated multimedia computer. It is encoding a DVD as well as from the TV-tuner as I type this. I'd dare say that, even though it's on all day, and largely idle at night, it's still probably maxing out the CPU 25% of the time. And that's with the fastest MPEG-4 encoder around. If I was using something like Xvid, the encoding would take so long that it would never catch-up, and the system would never be idle.

I admit I do more encoding than the average person, but I'd bet there's thousands and thousands that do as much if not more encoding than myself. Besides, just from the sales of DVD-Recorders, I'd have to bet that a large chunk of the computer-owning population are doing video encoding, at least occasionally.

What algorithms are you using as a client that takes this much CPU power.

Oh, I tend to use blowfish, since it is the fastest in my tests. It's not too much a matter of the speed of the crypto, it's a batter of volume. A slow CPU just can't keep up with 100MBps of data.

Firefox performs admirably on the 450 AMD K6-2 based PC I built for my girlfriend. It certainly flys on any >1GHz processor

You know something. We obviously have a VERY different opionion of what qualifies as fast.

I'm running Firefox on my 1.2GHz AMD system with 768MB RAM, and I'm always waiting for Firefox to load a page. I end up with 20 taps open, just so it can load in the background while I read something else.

I would argue that IO is still the major bottleneck for most stuff

Well, with Gigabit network cards, fast arrays of hard drives, etc., the issue isn't so much the actual bandwidth, as it is the interrupt storm that eats major ammounts of CPU power.