Linked by David Adams on Wed 17th Aug 2011 05:55 UTC, submitted by cromat
OSNews, Generic OSes SilveOS is a familiar-looking desktop "operating system" within a silverlight app. Just fire it up using any browser with Silverlight installed and start poking around.
Order by: Score:
Not an operating system
by kolmyo on Wed 17th Aug 2011 06:30 UTC
kolmyo
Member since:
2005-07-11

A web app that looks like a desktop is not an operating system. Calling it such is an insult to anyone who has ever tried to create one.

Reply Score: 8

RE: Not an operating system
by adinas on Wed 17th Aug 2011 09:31 UTC in reply to "Not an operating system"
adinas Member since:
2005-08-17

It is as much an OS as Windows 3/95/98/me were

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Not an operating system
by sagum on Wed 17th Aug 2011 12:58 UTC in reply to "RE: Not an operating system"
sagum Member since:
2006-01-23

It is as much an OS as Windows 3/95/98/me were


See OPs statement about being an insult.

Your statement and the people who continue to call these web apps an OS are insults.


Windows 3, 9x, me etc were and Operating system. Sure they needed DOS to boot, but thats like saying Linux isn't an OS because it needs Lilo or grub to boot, and the are far more advanced then a simple bootsector program now, they read and can write files to the disk.

When an application takes over system calls to the hardware THEN it is an operating system. Until then its just an application running on the platform its running on.

Windows 7 still uses the NT loader to get from the BIOS into the what we know as the Operating System.
As soon as the windows loads the kernel files, it takes over at the hardware level. Its then the Operating system of the computer.


Now, if the SilverOS was to create its own hardware emulation and run on top of that, you could argue that it was a virtualised OS running in the browser...


just sayin'

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Not an operating system
by Laurence on Wed 17th Aug 2011 12:59 UTC in reply to "RE: Not an operating system"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

It is as much an OS as Windows 3/95/98/me were

I wouldn't even go that far.
Windows 9x had it's own driver model that could expose hardware functions.

This is just a graphical shell - and not even a good one. For example the web-browser is just an embedded trident frame. In fact if you middle click a link then the new window doesn't even open up in this "operating system", instead in a separate tab in the host browser.

Whats worse is this shell doesn't even add anything functional nor different to Windows' own shell - it literally just copies Windows, only badly and more fugly.

I'm all for hobbyist OSs and even web-shells as "proof of concept", but this servers literally no purpose nor point other than to kill a few hours of boredom for the developers.

Sorry if I sound harsh, but it's not an OS let alone a news worthy one.

Edited 2011-08-17 13:02 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Not an operating system
by Soulbender on Wed 17th Aug 2011 14:35 UTC in reply to "RE: Not an operating system"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

No it isn't. Windows 95/98/Me are real operating systems, SivlerOS isn't. And before we go there; no, Windows 95/98/me was not glorified DOS shells.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Not an operating system
by BluenoseJake on Wed 17th Aug 2011 09:47 UTC in reply to "Not an operating system"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

But one based on a web browser is? Thanks for clearing that up.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Not an operating system
by Laurence on Wed 17th Aug 2011 13:42 UTC in reply to "RE: Not an operating system"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

But one based on a web browser is? Thanks for clearing that up.

Erm, where did that come from?

If you're talking about ChromeOS, then that generally refers to the whole stack from the Linux kernel through to the Webkit shell rather than just the browser specifically

Edited 2011-08-17 13:53 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Not an operating system
by BluenoseJake on Wed 17th Aug 2011 14:12 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Not an operating system"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

It came from the issue I had with the original post saying that this isn't an OS. Why not? Why does he get to decide what an OS is.

I was speaking about ChromeOS, because it's just a browser running on Linux. Why is this any different?

ChromeOS is just a bunch Web apps running in a browser. Is it because it runs on Windows? Because it's Silverlight? Google didn't write the rest of the stack, just the interface.

I don't see the difference, other than one is made by google, and one was made by this dude. Maybe it just a toy, but applaud the guys effort, his willingness to try something, and not put him down for no good reason.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Not an operating system
by ebasconp on Wed 17th Aug 2011 14:42 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Not an operating system"
ebasconp Member since:
2006-05-09

But, ChromeOS technically IS NOT an OS.

An OS is something that handles memory allocation, virtual memory handling, threading, multitasking, communication with devices, filesystem management, etc.

If you take something that runs on top of any kernel (say Linux, Windows NT kernel, etc.) is not an OS.

I see ChromeOS as a desktop environment, not quite different than Gnome or KDE, just running on top of one more abstraction layer: the browser.

Edited 2011-08-17 14:44 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Not an operating system
by BluenoseJake on Wed 17th Aug 2011 15:00 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Not an operating system"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

I agree with you a hundred percent. This is no different than ChromeOS, and ChromeOS is not an OS.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Not an operating system
by Neolander on Wed 17th Aug 2011 16:07 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Not an operating system"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

ChromeOS is an OS, unless I'm misunderstood. If I download an image of what's called "ChromeOS" (or "ChromiumOS"), burn it on a CD/DVD, and run it on my computer, it works in a freestanding fashion, right ?

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Not an operating system
by Laurence on Wed 17th Aug 2011 16:04 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Not an operating system"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

It came from the issue I had with the original post saying that this isn't an OS. Why not? Why does he get to decide what an OS is.

This isn't an OS by nearly everyones definition of an operating system.

I was speaking about ChromeOS, because it's just a browser running on Linux. Why is this any different?

Because ChromeOS is an entire Linux distro. This is just a webpage. ChromeOS refers to the bespoke Linux architecture just as much as the webkit shell.

ChromeOS is just a bunch Web apps running in a browser.

The shell is, yes. But ChromeOS, as a distro, is more than that.

Is it because it runs on Windows? Because it's Silverlight?

It's because this doesn't ship with the underlying architecture where as ChromeOS does.
If this project shipped with a heavily customised Windows core which booted straight into this shell and those components were all interdependent, then I'd argue that this was an OS too - albeit just a "Windows distribution". But it doesn't - it's just a webpage.

Google didn't write the rest of the stack, just the interface.

Actually they did. ChromeOS is far from a vanilla Linux distro. There's a great deal of bespoke stuff in there.

I can see the point you're making though and I do think that ChromeOS is largely pointless regardless of it's classification. ;)

Reply Score: 4

RE: Not an operating system
by abstraction on Wed 17th Aug 2011 10:41 UTC in reply to "Not an operating system"
abstraction Member since:
2008-11-27

I couldn't agree more. At the same time most programmers can't distinguish between their ass and their face so I'm not surprised.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Not an operating system
by reez on Wed 17th Aug 2011 14:27 UTC in reply to "Not an operating system"
reez Member since:
2006-06-28

A Silverlight application linked/embedded into HTML also isn't really a web app. ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE: Not an operating system
by David on Wed 17th Aug 2011 16:46 UTC in reply to "Not an operating system"
David Member since:
1997-10-01

That's why I called it an "operating system" app.

Reply Score: 1

dpanov
Member since:
2009-01-12

Such apps are good for demoing what can be achieved with specific technology, but I can't see anyone actually using it.
From a user perspective it's pretty pointless.

Reply Score: 1

pandronic Member since:
2006-05-18

In theory, and let me emphasize theory, you could do a Chrome OS type of thing ... take a barebones OS, add a web rendering engine, a Silverlight or a Flash runtime and add your "Web OS" on top.

Granted the web part is more of a shell or a desktop environment than an OS.

Reply Score: 3

AndrewZ Member since:
2005-11-15

In theory, and let me emphasize theory, you could do a Chrome OS type of thing ... take a barebones OS, add a web rendering engine, a Silverlight or a Flash runtime and add your "Web OS" on top.


In theory, if you put a saddle on a dog, it's now a horse. But in reality it's not. Silverlight has no: protected memory, virtual memory, filesystem support, multi-tasking. So it's not really close to being an OS.

Bad article title.

Reply Score: 5

BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

as in ChromeOS, these things would be provided by the "Real" OS running underneath it.

Reply Score: 2

pandronic Member since:
2006-05-18

In theory, if you put a saddle on a dog, it's now a horse. But in reality it's not. Silverlight has no: protected memory, virtual memory, filesystem support, multi-tasking. So it's not really close to being an OS.

Bad article title.


I'm not so sure this things are important to the vast majority of people. What I think is important is the experience to the end user. The rest is easily provided by Linux, BSD or why not a stripped down Windows.

Reply Score: 2

AndrewZ Member since:
2005-11-15

"In theory, if you put a saddle on a dog, it's now a horse. But in reality it's not. Silverlight has no: protected memory, virtual memory, filesystem support, multi-tasking. So it's not really close to being an OS.

Bad article title.


I'm not so sure this things are important to the vast majority of people. What I think is important is the experience to the end user. The rest is easily provided by Linux, BSD or why not a stripped down Windows.
"

Then we are now talking about two different things. I am referring to "Silverlight OS". Not sure why you are responding in this thread, because we are talking about Silverlight as an OS. Not public opinion polls.

Reply Score: 2

pandronic Member since:
2006-05-18

We are talking about how to define an OS and how Silverlight OS fits that definition. And I'm saying that nowadays the UI is the OS to most people, so Silverlight OS and other "Web OSes" can theoretically be considered OSes if you slap a Linux, BSD or Windows foundation under them.

Reply Score: 2

AndrewZ Member since:
2005-11-15

Yeah no. I suggest you read the definition of Operating System, and then look at the functions provided by Silverlight. Shell, command interpreter, programming environment might all be better descriptors.

Reply Score: 2

pandronic Member since:
2006-05-18

What part of put a foundation underneath it don't you understand?

Reply Score: 2

neat!
by Calipso on Wed 17th Aug 2011 10:34 UTC
Calipso
Member since:
2007-03-13

Very nicely done. I like it. Good work devs!

Reply Score: 2

Comment by defdog99
by defdog99 on Wed 17th Aug 2011 11:05 UTC
defdog99
Member since:
2006-09-06

Is it just me, or do youtube videos play smoother inside this silverlight OS youtube app... than they do inside Firefox6.0 and IE9.

Reply Score: 1

Comment by senshikaze
by senshikaze on Wed 17th Aug 2011 11:51 UTC
senshikaze
Member since:
2011-03-08

Doesn't work with moonlight, as far as I can tell.

another very good reason the people at Redmond shouldn't be allowed to create technology for the web. They only create technology for their os (and sometimes mac). I am glad silverlight didn't take off in any kind of appreciable way, or I'd be SOL on the web.

Reply Score: 2

A landscape devoid of Silverlight
by M.Onty on Wed 17th Aug 2011 12:05 UTC
M.Onty
Member since:
2009-10-23

As far as I can remember this is only the second time in four years that I've been prompted to install Silverlight. The first time was on the Microsoft site whilst trying to look at a video about what Silverlight was. Which required Silverlight. And now number two, demonstrating what Silverlight's capable of. Is it actually used anywhere in anger? Even the Realplayer plugin is more commonly used nowerdays ... Not that I install that either.

Has anyone found a real, bonafide, business-like implementation of Silverlight on the web?

Reply Score: 3

Cymro Member since:
2005-07-07

The British Library's "Turning The Pages" was my first sighting of Silverlight in the wild:

http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/ttp/ttpbooks.html

It turned out it was part-funded by Microsoft, however!

Edited 2011-08-17 12:28 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Gusar Member since:
2010-07-16

Netflix

Other than that, I don't know anything else either. Except maybe, didn't NBC also stream the previous Olympics with Silverlight?

Reply Score: 1

Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Yes

Reply Score: 1

Laughable marketing speak
by Sodki on Wed 17th Aug 2011 13:01 UTC
Sodki
Member since:
2005-11-10

From the project's website:

Convenience and freedom - A personalized desktop, files, apps are available and accessible from any computer in the world.

Well, I can't access it from any computer I own or use daily. Freedom, they say?

Reply Score: 2

...
by FunkyELF on Wed 17th Aug 2011 14:04 UTC
FunkyELF
Member since:
2006-07-26

No

Reply Score: 2

WHY!??!?!?!?
by WarpKat on Wed 17th Aug 2011 14:11 UTC
WarpKat
Member since:
2006-02-06

I think I just died inside...

Reply Score: 1

It can be done without Silverlight, too
by Moochman on Wed 17th Aug 2011 14:35 UTC
Moochman
Member since:
2005-07-06

Cool. Though it should be noted, you don't need Silverlight to do this kind of thing...

http://eyeos.org/

:)

Reply Score: 3

Nonsense
by shmerl on Wed 17th Aug 2011 15:27 UTC
shmerl
Member since:
2010-06-08

> Convenience and freedom - A personalized desktop,
> files, apps are available and accessible from any
> computer in the world.

Proprietary technologies (like Silverlight) don't promote freedom.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Nonsense
by Soulbender on Wed 17th Aug 2011 16:15 UTC in reply to "Nonsense"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

What, you don't cherish the opportunity to run an inferior Windows clone on, uh, Windows anywhere?

Reply Score: 2