Slashdot Mirror
A Free XML-Based Operating System
Dotnaught writes "For the past five years, Xcerion has been working on an XML-based Internet operating system (XIOS) that runs inside a Web browser and promises radically reduced development time. To provide developers with an incentive to write for the platform, Xcerion's back-end system is designed to route revenue, either from subscription fees or from ads served to users of free programs, to application authors. Think of it as Google AdSense, except for programmers rather than publishers. Is it absurd to think this poses a threat to Google and Microsoft?"
I don't know if it's absurd or not because there is absolutely nothing to look at on that web site whatsoever. What is an XML-based operating system? XML is a container format.
Let this be the thread for all "So what?" posts, please.
By TA's own admission, it's not an OS, just an abstraction layer on top of a real OS.
"Is it absurd to think this poses a threat to Google and Microsoft?"
Yes.
The command line is very friendly:
a rg>stuff</arg><arg>*</arg></args></command>
<command><command-name>grep</command-name><args><
If XML doesn't solve the problem, use more XML.
Considering they use javascript for the basic hyperlinks on their website, it seems they lack technical knowledge. That doesn't bode well for a company doing a web OS and if they're doing it using XML why does the W3C validator throw 103 errors on their (non-XML) home page?
Personally, I don't see these guys as a threat to anyone except themselves and their investors.
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww .xcerion.com%2F
Those guys can't even put down proper HTML, I'm not sure i'd trust them to write a whole web-based "OS" in XML
As subject. How is this meant to change the world or "threaten" Google or Microsoft when you need an OS (probably from Microsoft) and a browser (probably with Google as the homepage, both if we take the most popular)?
Once you wanna do something in this "internet OS" you'll fullscreen your $179 copy of Internet Explorer on Windows Vista, and fire up an app which probably uses some Google API internally. World changing? Or just another layer between you and them that serves yet more adverts?
Back in the late 80's when I got on the net we all had a pretty good idea what "the internet" was. Now, 20 years later, the internet is almost synonymous with WWW. I'd like to see good solutions taking advantage of the internet, but why does it always have to require a web browser?
Internet Explorer 7 has experienced and error while running script:
XIOS
Would you like to send an error report to Microsoft?
Send Don't Send
How is this meant to change the world or "threaten" Google or Microsoft when you need an OS (probably from Microsoft) and a browser
Presumably becuase that OS could be Ubuntu, and that browser could be Firefox. Or OSX/Safari, or Suse/Konqueror, or.....
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
I like their front page message: Software should be free(TM)
Wow, it's like they snuck into Slashdot's secret headquarters and stole the root password... to our hearts!
But then, it's not that long ago that Google was just two guys doodling on scrap paper.
A few problems have to be overcome including internet latency and the tendancy of everyone to cache stuff they should not be putting in caches (If your PC's memory cache worked like Internet caches do, you'd be lucky to get a Solitaire hand dealt before the PC crashed.)
And I doubt this is a threat to Google because they will do the same thing it if it works out.
My impression is that what's good about this specific scheme is that only data is sent over the network, so the annoying latency issues many of us have with Google spreadsheets and Writely should be less of a problem.
What's bad is that the data is stored on someone's servers. Security will be an issue. So will availability. And loss of data. And ...
Another problem is that networked "OS"es may not be acceptable for a lot of users because they are just plain too damn slow. A few years ago I slapped together a networked application running on a server here at home for keeping notes together. Worked, sorta. But even though I owned the network and the application was built into server code, not run via CGI, it was too slow to be usable. The problem looked to be latency, not slow processing.
The few serious attempts I've seen at using HTTP/browsers to do real jobs varied from awful to marginal. IMHO even things like SAIL suck. I'd rather update the /etc files directly. Hell, even ed/EDLINE would be faster and more satisfactory.
Maybe the problems can be overcome with brains, technology, and money. Maybe they can't.
Back on topic. Is this stuff a threat to Microsoft? You just bet it is. MS makes most of its money off OK, but overpriced, products that do way more than most customers need (Exception--Xbox which may eventually be a real, money making operation with a bright future). Furthermore, adding more features and charging more for new versions of Windows/Office is probably an unsustainable strategy. We're already seeing geeks and a few organizations walking away from Microsoft. I think that is only going to become more common and some of them may well go to schemes like this.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
It also shows very poor use of XML, sadly. For instance, wouldn't it make more sense to have stuff*< /filespec></cmd>? It's not only shorter, but more future-proof, and more clear.
Still not short enough for me though. XML is OK for interchange, but it sucks as a human-readable markup language, even when used with forethought.
Furthermore, I'm not sure it makes ANY sense to have commands in XML. That's what programming languages are for -- it's the one thing they excel at. What's wrong with cmd(argname="val") or cmd(arg1, { a, b, c="10" })? It's complex to parse, sure, but that's why you make a parser once -- the point is, it IS parseable, without a human correcting the syntax before the computer can understand it.
How about developing an OS on top of TeX?
This way we would live in the best of the worlds, would we not?
Moreover, this would threaten Google, Microsoft and the great scientific publishers.
Actually, we could make it work on top of an emacs session. Pity that you need another OS to run emacs, but
**it is emacs**, you know! and TeX, of course.
Anyone joining the project?
A UK company, Oceanworks Ltd., already has a web based OS in place.... and even a freebie version... perhaps google should look at that company and buy them out.
Here's a link to their freebie one.
http://affinitygofree.com/
--- http://www.keything.com
This is supposed to be the site where we laugh smugly at people who use the word "internets" or who call an application in user space an operating system. What happened?
http://outcampaign.org/
Xcerion is merely jumping onto the XML bandwagon and doing some nimble marketing around it.
.NET, but their success has been more limited in this area, although some of them have found other uses.
In fact, we have an OS-independent XML-based layer, and it's called xulrunner (Firefox, Mozilla, and Thunderbird are popular applications written in it). It's getting a more powerful language with JIT support soon (ECMAScript 2.0).
Microsoft has already caught on an has been trying to develop their own, proprietary alternative, though they aren't as far along.
There are also some other attempts at this with slightly different perspectives on the same problem, like Konfabulator, Dashboard, Java, and
I've been doing professional active content web developement since the late dot-bomb days. Looking at the site for 15 seconds tells me this is probably nothing other than a scheme to fool investors. The things people put out for 'the next big thing' when they discover that JavaScript is a PL and runs in every browser amazes me time and time again.
... blahblah ... the way people/the world thinks about computers/the web/whatever' is allway a dead giveaway that they don't know the troubles involved in building a good web product. There is no free lunch. Even with technologies around or around the corner like Laszlo, Adobes Flex (a Laszlo rippoff), Curl, Eclipse RIA, AMF, JSON/JDON, XUL/XUL Runner - all of which are basically free (all beer and mostly speech) and cream of the crop, building a working RIA that runs on every OS and doesn't bring your new 2 GB RAM Dual Core Turbo PC to a grinding halt is extremly hard work and a very tricky task with bucketloads of tradeoffs to evaluate. I do this every day, the possiblities are growing but the task itself isn't getting any easyer. And the pipedream of emulating a desktop in a browser has been implemented by many, and the best at it admit it's turned out more like a kind of experiment than anything usefull.
There are some points about RIAs one should learn as fast as possible to avoid wasting everybodys time:
1) JavaScript is nothing new. It's been around for something like 10 years. DTML/Push-Pull JavaScript/Ajax/[Fill in own buzzword of choice] is nothing new. Many people have tried it, many have given up and even the best in 'Ajax' have stepped down again from using it in anything but the most tried and true situations and use cases.
2) RIA is nothing new. Plugins are nothing new. There are entire landfills full of potential competitors to Flash and Java. Most of them failed. A few remain in niches where others can't reach. The only one I would care to mention is curl, and they are having a hard time and only manage by patiently working away at their tool for x-plattform RIAs.
3) The big boys Adobemedia / Sun / IBM and some promising others are currently involved in a giant hack & slay fest over the best and most prevailent rich client / server integration. Joining them with some obscure cross-funded project with bad buzzwords, a crappy website and nothing to deliver than something worse than the most half-assed Ajax kit is like showing up on a Knights tournament riding an aged donkey, armed with a cardboard kiddie helmet, a broomstick and a toothpick.
4) 'We will revolutionize
Bottom line:
This isn't news and it's not the bits worth it takes to transmit it. Move on. No one needs yet another bunch of silly goofs who try and tell the users/clients that they've discovered something new and everything will change if only you run with their buzzword ridden half-assed vision of an untested product that apes things others have finished years ago - and people don't know about for a reason.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Their tagline is "Software should be free"
Which they've trademarked...
I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
There's a 'trend' running amock that inflicts people with this odd kind of insanity. Apparently they want a Visio like UI to build networks and virtual farms with.
Anything that gets released that helps keep track of containers with meaningful text descriptors in containers that have very complex parent / child / dependent relationships, I'm all for. That's just less boring stuff one has to muck with to satisfy a client's web 2.0 fetish.
I don't see this as very novel at all, nor really useful as a whole as its intended. What I do see is a bunch of possible cool parts I can throw in something else. Will withold official judgement until they actually release something.
Could just be vaporware too.