Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 18th Nov 2004 10:19 UTC
QNX I think that everyone reading OSNews will have heard at least something about QNX. You can regard this article as an introduction, but also as a review, and as a "Is-QNX-Ready-For-The-Desktop? article". To start off, I put together a short explanation of the merits of using a microkernel. Let me start off by saying that QNX Software Systems (QSS) does not aim towards the desktop with their Neutrino RTOS.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Various
by Thom Holwerda on Thu 18th Nov 2004 12:04 UTC

@Jonathan Thompson:

QNX was a catastrophe, probably still is, but if Voyager was fixed and some extra native apps where written it COULD be a nice desktop OS.

No offence, but I found that post of yours rather much flamebait.Still, I reply, in order to make sure others do not fall for it. Voyager was indeed a lacking browser in the 6.1/6.2 releases, I will not counter that. BUT, Voyager, as it is now, is in my opinion a better browser than FireFox or Mozilla. Why? Well, because Voyager can use other engines as default. For example, one could also run Voyager with the Opera engine.

What I'm really waiting for is for someone to port webcore/khtml over to QNX ;) .

And how did you manage to bring the entire OS down with a crash of Voyager? That is highly unlikely. I'm looking forward to a more detailed description.

@Buck

The worst thing that may happen to QNX is the same thing that happened to BeOS. Although this seems to be very unlikely, this recent buyout and main GUI designer departure mean that QSSL doesn't care anymore.

This is definitely something i'm afraid of as well. I don' think it will happen any time soon, but if it happes, it won't surprise me at all. The whole buyout happened during the writing of this article, so I didn't mention it, for the sake of clarity.