Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 2nd Mar 2010 14:04 UTC
Permalink for comment 411811
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2007-03-26
Indeed.
If he doesn't have the motivation to keep the project alive, then he should at least delegate it rather than stringing people along with "it's not dead! it's not dead! Honest" while coding for other projects.
While I think the whole open source argument is a little unfair (it's his project and FOSS isn't the answer for every development), at the very least he should be looking for partners.
It's almost as if he's just holding out for a corporate buyer. But I can't see there being any money there. If a free and more complete system like Linux is struggling, then what hope is there for an obscure OS like SkyOS?
Plus the OS market moves pretty rapidly so 6 months of stagnation can be lethal - let alone the 18 months of closed doors we've had.
I very nearly paid in to SkyOS about 6 months before it's death *ahem* hold (house move kept my finances tied up at the time). Part of me is gutted as it looked great - but most of me is chuffing glad I hadn't otherwise I'd have felt somewhat ripped off.