Post a Comment
Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 0
Member since:2007-07-06
Fans: 1
Member since:
2006-10-20
Fans: 0
It's silly, but I still mourn for what might have been. Yes, I know BeOS had its flaws (IP stack, etc.) but I have yet to come across an OS that appealed to me more on so many different levels. I think part of the charm was the community that evolved around it. I looked forward to the weekly dev newsletters, especially with JLG's editorial/commentary in each one. It was fascinating getting a glimpse, no matter how small, of the inner workings of a tech start-up that was doing so much in such a relatively short period. I still can't believe what that group was able to accomplish -- the things that could be wrung out of very modest hardware that ran rings around any other OS at the time. Sigh.
Edited 2008-02-25 05:19 UTC
Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 0
Member since:2006-01-26
Fans: 24
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 0
Well... how many years did Haiku spend on their OS already? For that amount of time, it's not that much done. I suppose SkyOS is making more progress... and SkyOS had to be designed too in that time, and SkyOS is a 1 man project. Then, looking at Haiku, it's progress is rather poor. Don't understand me wrong. I like Haiku, and I would like to see it become a good OS. The point is just... will it be done in time. They spend many years on creating a clone of an operating system, that was state of the art in 2001. But we live in 2008 today. Even through it's a fine operating system, the progress is just too slow to keep up with the rest.
Member since:2006-01-26
Fans: 24
Haiku has been at it since 2001 while... SkyOS has been at it since 1996.
Nearly twice as long? SkyOS even uses a fork of the filesystem from Haiku!
Also keep in mind that SkyOS doesn't have the binary compatibility "curse" and the need to reinvent a closed-source OS. (for example, you might say that ReactOS is even less refined than Haiku as far as completeness).
I'm not sure I understand what Haiku is failing to keep up with in your opinion.
Edit: Which OS is "state-of-the-art" today? When I look around, all the "modern" OSes that can be compared to were started decades ago.
Edited 2008-02-25 23:15 UTC
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 0
Indeed, SkyOS has been around a little longer. But back in 1996 is used to be a boot loader. Not an etire OS. But as far as I know, SkyOS 5.0 is a total rewrite of the operating system.
Indeed, SkyOS has no binary compatibility, a SkyOS program is likely to be even binary incompatible between the different builds.
ReactOS is indeed around since 1997, and seems indeed behind Haiku. ReactOS has even the advantage it's using a lot of WINEs code.
I didn't like ZETA that much, it looked to bloaty to me. I liked the BeOS because it was simple and efficient. I guess that's the way Haiku is too. But Haiku R1 aims to be BeOS R5 compatible, wich means it's a net_server only, and no BONE. Since lots of BeOS software needs the BONE stack nowadays, how usefull will it be?
Member since:
2005-07-12
Fans: 2
Member since:
2006-03-27
Fans: 0
