Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Haiku OS Ported To Intel 64-Bit Architecture

Posted by Soulskill on from the five-and-seven-syllables-at-a-time dept.

An anonymous reader writes "The BeOS-compatible Haiku OS operating system has been ported to x86_64. As part of the Google Summer of Code, a student made a 64-bit port of the kernel and user-space and it's now working. However, not all of the BeOS apps and drivers are yet working in 64-bit mode."

22 of 101 comments (clear)

  1. Whoo Hoo! by Osgeld · · Score: 5, Funny

    now I can run a text editor with more than 3.1 gigs of ram

  2. AMD64 != Intel64 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The correct term for x86_64 is AMD64, not "Intel 64-bit architecture". AMD developed it, and licenses the patent to Intel. Intel64 is Itanium, to which Haiku has NOT been ported.

    1. Re:AMD64 != Intel64 by cheesybagel · · Score: 2

      x86-64 (the original name AMD gave to the architecture) is still the best name. Microsoft calls it x64 which I guess is not unreasonable. The Intel names are awful. First they called it IA-32e so people would think it was somehow inferior to Itanium I venture. Then they called it EM64T. AMD 64/Intel 64 are both horrid.

    2. Re:AMD64 != Intel64 by Guy+Harris · · Score: 4, Informative

      The correct term for x86_64 is AMD64, not "Intel 64-bit architecture". AMD developed it, and licenses the patent to Intel.

      Yes.

      Intel64 is Itanium,

      No. IA-64 was Itanium, but that architecture (which I think started out as an HP architecture) is now just called the Itanium architecture. "Intel64" is Intel's name for the 64-bit architecture as originally defined by AMD, modulo some differences and modulo Intel and AMD going their own and subsequently modified by both parties with different flavors of SSE4.

      to which Haiku has NOT been ported.

      Haiku was not ported to IA-64/Itanium. It was ported to whatever you want to call the 64-bit x86 architecture (I prefer x86-64, with my second choice being AMD64, although I guess if you want to include Intel's version of SSE4 rather than AMD's version, that's "Intel64").

    3. Re:AMD64 != Intel64 by hairyfeet · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What is wrong with just x64? We had x86 for years and now we're all using x64 chips, whether our OSes are 64bit or not. Its short, simple, and to the point.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    4. Re:AMD64 != Intel64 by MSG · · Score: 2

      Actually, most of Microsoft's development tools refer to the architecture as AMD64.

    5. Re:AMD64 != Intel64 by jkflying · · Score: 3, Funny

      Because 64 is less than 86, so 86 must be better, right?

      --
      Help I am stuck in a signature factory!
    6. Re:AMD64 != Intel64 by Jeppe+Salvesen · · Score: 4, Informative

      x64 is misleading. The x86_64 still uses the underlying architecture and instruction set of the original Intel 8086.. Changing the name to x64 would imply the instruction set is different from that of x86 - and while the instruction set has been extended it still (as far as I know) still support the instructions designed in the 70s.

      I personally find x86_64 the most descriptive designation for a 64-bit x86-processor.

      --

      Stop the brainwash

    7. Re:AMD64 != Intel64 by bratmobile · · Score: 2

      Lots and lots of SDKs, packages, etc. in the Microsoft world use "x64". One example (among an endless stream of examples): The DirectX SDK uses "x64" for the binary and lib directories. Lots of installer packages use "x64" subdirs or use x64 in the name of the setup executable, etc. Another example: If you run msinfo32.exe on an x64 system, the "System Type" is listed as "x64-based PC". "x64" and "amd64" are both used quite a lot.

      It's really rude to tell someone to "suck it". Be nice.

    8. Re:AMD64 != Intel64 by hairyfeet · · Score: 2, Funny

      Pedantic BS friend, because anybody that would have a damned clue what X86 meant would know what X64 is. Either you're knowledgeable or you're not, kinda an either or there. Anybody who knows anything about chips doesn't need to have the entire history lesson given to them because they know what X86 means, there is no point in the rest. By that same token anyone that knows anything about chips will know that X64 means a 64bit CPU that is backwards compatible with X86, just as IA64 means Itanic.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    9. Re:AMD64 != Intel64 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > Anybody who knows anything about chips doesn't need to have the entire history lesson given to them because they know what X86 means, there is no point in the rest.

      This is simply not true. See at this thread itself and the confusion that arises among presumably knowledgeable geeks about AMD64, x86-64 and Itanium.

      Semantics matters, name has to mean something more than "let's all agree and use an asspulled misnomer".

  3. Could become the 'Desktop Linux' by buchner.johannes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If only the community of software developers could conquer a community of designers and graphics people to collaborate without charge on a free operating system.

    --
    NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
    1. Re:Could become the 'Desktop Linux' by noobermin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As someone who tries to balance use of both sides of his brain, I understand your quandry. It seems a lot of the thinking types seem to have a disdain for these "Designers" and degrade them as useless, or even harmful, perhaps.

      Well, think of it this way: Art students I've taken classes recognize the importance of the thinkers, they use a computer and photoshop, so they recognize it as a needed thing. However, they don't switch their major to one in computer science. Why? Because, well, it's not interesting or fulfilling, there's no feeling in it perhaps. Well that's what feelers feed off of, creativity. And while some thinking has creativity in an abstract sense, the arts have the more aesthetic visual appeal, so artists feel more fulfilled in that.

      Well, try to flip that. Thinkers feed on precisely the opposite: preciseness, concreteness, definability and ability to discern more quantitatively and not just qualitatively.The thing is that the more feeling/creative stuff doesn't make any sense (unless you are a psychologist and understand how it affects choices, I guess). This is, however, a parrallel to how the thinking stuff doesn't have any soul in the eyes of the artists, I guess.

      The only difference is that they are thinkers so they can rationalize their dislike while feelers can't do as well perhaps--at least in an argument on the internet--and not in as consistent a way. (Thinkers, remember, a logical system can be consistent and correct even when its axioms can be junk-full shit!).

      I think part of the problem is there is no photoshop for the thinkers: the thing that makes them realize how important design and aesthetics is. I mean, there are examples(exhibit A: Apple. Whether or not you like them, their market share is undeniable; Good design is profitable), but may be they just choose to ignore it. I may be a little cynical here, but it might be that rationalizing process again that can help them ignore those examples. Remember, smarter people can be susceptible to biases, so I guess it is no surprise.

  4. I want to be happy about this by ThorGod · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...but, I can't be. Yeah, BeOS *was* awesome and I really *wanted* to see BeOS 5 (I remember one of the versions had a nifty menu system where the selector followed your selections as you drilled down).

    But, come on, it's 2012. Maybe it's time to call it a day.

    Actually, I take that back. I think this is just some Google summer of code project. Great for the student who ported the kernel! Not really big news outside of that, though...

    --
    PS: I don't reply to ACs.
    1. Re:I want to be happy about this by norpy · · Score: 2

      It's not a port, it is a binary compatible cleanroom reimplementation of the kernel

  5. Watch this.... by mark-t · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just wait. Now we'll see
    Everyone posting haikus
    Typical Slashdot.

    --
    File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
    1. Re:Watch this.... by M8e · · Score: 2

      Writing poetry
      in the slashdot comment field
      is this a haiku?

  6. 64 bits sounds wrong by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 2

    What am I missing? Sixty four bits sounds too long Seventeen sounds right

  7. Re:Why do we keep hearing about this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's not a near-useless state. It works. There's a decent amount of software out there. It's fun. It's a hobby.

    It gets brought up on Slashdot because it's news for nerds (not everything here is stuff that matters). It's a nice trip down memory lane for BeOS geeks.

    Haiku might not change the world, but most things don't. Sure is fun, though!

  8. Re:Why do we keep hearing about this? by dbIII · · Score: 2

    HURD isn't dead. I hear the guy that is working on it while telling anyone else that wants to contribute to piss off until they know as much as him is making splendid progress.
    In the end the effort to make it a superior system backfired badly.

  9. It's Haiku! by BenoitRen · · Score: 2

    "Haiku OS" is a misnomer. The correct name is just "Haiku".

  10. Re:Secure Boot by AntiBasic · · Score: 2

    http://losethos.com/

    I'm actually surprised to find him posting.

    God commanded him to make this OS full of songs and hymns to speak to him.