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.
My dumb questions
by BakaSmack on Wed 27th Mar 2002 16:54 UTC

"if you want, you can just look at this as linux sans X .. that is also a very appealing prospect."

Dumb question #1:
A lot of people are saying this is great. I fail to see why. I ran BeOS on an old machine I had (versions 4 and 5), and while there were things I liked about it, like a fast boot time and its power, there were bigger things that I hated about it. Here they are:
1) No apps
2) An ugly interface
3) No apps
4) An ugly interface

I don't see the point of an OS unless it has a lot of useful applications.
I also don't see the point of the tab-like titlebars (especially in that eye-wrenching yellow) that never seemed to be even remotely convenient. Also, why did the old MacOS and BeOS think that the Fisher Price interface was a good one? Why not go for sleek, stylish and extremely functional (I think OSX has this) instead of kiddie?

Dumb question #2:
Why would I want to get rid of X? Sure, X can be a pain to configure at first, but after a while it becomes quite easy.

What I want in a GUI is stability, endless configuration options so I can fit my computer to my taste, and speed. To me, X offers all of these things.

If I don't like KDE or Gnome, that's okay, I can switch to WindowMaker or Fluxbox without any problems. If I don't like a theme, that's okay too, there are thousands to choose from. If I'm running Debian, then my menus will remain consistant across different window managers so all my apps will always be in the same place and under the same groups.

I have run X on a Linux box for two years before without having to restart it (or the machine) even once. X seems faster to me than any other GUI environment I've used. Another plus is I can use X remotely! What more could I possibly ask for?

Final dumb question:
If I were to switch over and use this BeOS-ish thing under Linux, what would I do with all my X apps? I like them and don't want to throw them away. I also don't want to be constantly switching GUIs either.

The only cool application I ever used on BeOS was GoBe Productive, but they are working on a Linux version right now, which if it's anything the new Windows version will be far better than the 2.0 version I used on BeOS.

Everyone seems to think this news is so wonderful. I don't get it. I like AtheOS and hope it progresses well. Once it is a little more mature, I will probably use it. However, I still can't see what compelling reason exists for me to drop X for this new AtheOS GUI on Linux?

Anybody care to enlighten me?