Amiga.org
Operating System Specific Discussions => AROS Research Operating System => Topic started by: adonay on April 26, 2007, 02:31:41 PM
-
I resently checket out HAIKU (http://haiku-os.org/) and it struck me that it is as AROS a more or less new os and are beeing developed in a beta open source stage ... I just wonder will this os be a AROS killer in future ,,, after a brief check it looks and feels much like aros and has just as much futures today as i will think aros to have. The bounties seems the same, were there are USB stack Firewire etc on the wish list as well as it will run some older BeOs written programs.. I just wish AROS will have 68k JIT emulator soon so that i can justify its use as a future os...
-
Haiku is more or less BeOS continued. After Be Inc. ceized existing (bought by Palm) BeOS became Zeta/Yellowtab. In immediate reaction upon that a few people began developing OpenBeOS, which became Haiku, a (fully?) BeOS compatible OS.
Where AROS aims to be a next-gen AmigaOS (with some classic AmigaOS compatibility as a nice extra), Haiku aims to be BeOS continued (subtle difference, but hey :-))
I don't think AROS and Haiku will be direct competitors, since they aim at different usergroups. However, like AROS, Haiku is well worth while the look.
I have used the original BeOS on my PowerMac some 10 years ago and I really liked the Amiga feel it gave me. I guess Haiku does pretty much the same.
Heh, I just thought about making a multiple-OS machine out of my PC. Lose Windows (or just a small partition) and add AROS, Ubuntu, Haiku and maybe one or 2 more OSes. How's that for diversity? :-D
-
put E-UAE on Haiku and you have a AROS competitor.
-
I don't think AROS and Haiku will be direct competitors, since they aim at different usergroups. However, like AROS, Haiku is well worth while the look.
Yes and no. I think both AROS and Haiku have two distinct groups of potential users: those that were enamoured with the old system (Amiga OS and BeOS respectively) and want to see it continue, and those who aren't satisfied with the current mainstream options (Windows, Mac and Linux) and are looking for something better but don't necessarily have any emotional attachment to a platform. Haiku and AROS are definately competing with each other for users in the latter category. I should know as I'm mostly in the latter category and I held an interest in AROS for a while, but ultimately I've moved on to a different alternative open source OS.
However, I didn't turn to Haiku. My interest currently lies in a OS called Syllable. It's not a BeOS clone, but it gets a lot of its inspiration from there. From my perspective at least, it's quite a ways further along than AROS or Haiku, but it doesn't seem to get nearly as much attention (presumably since it isn't a clone of an existing system with a rabid fan base). If you're interested in alternative OSes it's definately worth checking out: http://www.syllable.org/
Personally, I don't think AROS will go very far outside of the core Amiga fanbase. Amiga OS was a great OS for it's time, but I have a hard time thinking of any virtues it had that aren't handled better in other alternative OSes. I'm not entirely convinced Syllable will really go anywhere either, but at least it's not hobbled by 20 year old design decisions.
-
Are we forgetting anything? ;-)
How about POSIX compliance?
-
Darth_X wrote:
Are we forgetting anything? ;-)
How about POSIX compliance?
Pah, bollox to that. What about EXNG2 compliance?
:lol:
-
Karlos wrote:
Darth_X wrote:
Are we forgetting anything? ;-)
How about POSIX compliance?
Pah, bollox to that. What about EXNG2 compliance?
:lol:
How's that Speccy port coming along? ;-)
-
Darth_X wrote:
Are we forgetting anything? ;-)
How about POSIX compliance?
From that point of view, Haiku has a greater potential future... since it has unrestricted access to Linux/UNIX software.
AROS, on the other hand will always have my heart... if I want POSIX... I'll use MacOSX ;-)
-
I checked out syllable. It seems to have some great ideas but needs more software. The software link didn't work for the software named. It doesn't seem to work on PPC, either. I couldn't get a firm fix on the hardware named. It doesn't clearly state what CPU you need. Could you tell me. Haiku is good, too. OS4 is good but it needs to get rid of old dependencies and get more software.Without hardware it is hard if not impossible. Let me know about hardware if you can.
-
Still a Mac diehard. Unless you get core 2. It is a dog. I had Windows running in only 4 meg of ram and I'm no windows lover. Mac OSX has a big software base, but if an altrnative gets good software it could offer a real alternative. I hate the spinning beachball. You confuse bloat and high end processors with a good OS. A good OS should run well on lesser hardware. By the way, I am a real programmer with Assembly language and C and C++ experience. I tested the original Amiga OS and have written some original programs. When I said the deal about Mac not be a microkernel, I meant it has a mixed kernel heritage. OSX is mach plus BSD. BSD is monolithic. QNX by contrast is not. It is distributed. Some monolithic features work better for some applications. Others are better distributed. However, I hate slow boot and 1 gig plus OS. I have had 2 major crashes with my hard drives and the filesystem is NOT great.
BE file system is better. Two kernels is more to go wrong. Apple has never been the great inventor. It started on the Amiga and Commodore. Apple 2 was a piece of junk. I don't like apples attitude as a company towards it's users. No real support. Still a dog OS. Prove me wrong with REAL info. I have used all their software. It is pure bloat. Anything can run well on a Core Duo.
-
Go to the syllable home page. It has posix compliance if I remember right.
-
Kathyone wrote:
When I said the deal about Mac not be a microkernel, I meant it has a mixed kernel heritage. OSX is mach plus BSD. BSD is monolithic. QNX by contrast is not.
You say that like Microkernel = Good, Monolithic Kernel = Bad.
Also you seem to think that Microkernel would run faster and use less memory... both of these assumptions are wrong, in fact a Microkernel sufferes badly from context swithing times (i.e. it requires a faster CPU) and uses much more memory... it is these two flaws which resulted in Apple (or rather NeXT) making a hybrid between Mach and BSD... that way they get the best of both worlds.
MacOSX does run on the iPhone... that suggests it can run on limited spec machines...