Linked by Eugenia Loli on Tue 26th Mar 2002 20:24 UTC, submitted by Jean-Baptiste Queru
Syllable, AtheOS Bill Hayden did the obvious: He forked AtheOS (which is technically similar to BeOS) and used its app_server and Interface Kit (without the use of X11) and rest of its kits on top of the 2.4.x Linux kernel. While the AtheOS kernel has some very nice features, by being modular, semi-microkernel, with good preemptive/multithreading support etc., it lacks a solid VM and swap support and of course, it lacks a good driver support, things that the Linux kernel provides. Bill Hayden accounced his fork on the AtheOS mailing list and made known that the "Atheos API has been merged with the BeOS API, there is PowerPC support, gcc 3.0.X compatiblity and OpenTracker/Deskbar as the desktop manager".
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Re:Linux kernel..?
by Felonious Hiddenbottom on Wed 27th Mar 2002 02:54 UTC

>>WHo will want to install a new kernel?<<


BeOS is a desktop operating system. Linux is a server operating system. The goal of BeOS was to be just as easy to use as Windows. While BeOS was primarily used by geeks such as myself, Be, Inc. wanted broader use by the average user.

Linux otoh is designed by geeks for use by geeks - regardless of what Mandrake, et al, would like us to believe. It has come a long way (I remember that horrible whine coming from my monitor when I mistyped a refresh rate in my x configuration file) but it still has along way to come before it can be used for desktop consumption. In short, it ain't ready for prime time on the desktop. Basing a desktop OS on a complex-to-configure-properly server-grade kernel is foolish, IMHO.

Will I down load this AtheBeOSux operating system and use it? Ab-so-friggin-lutely. But then again, I am a geek.