Linked by Eugenia Loli on Tue 29th Mar 2005 05:28 UTC, submitted by Kelly Rush
SkyOS In the next beta of SkyOS, users can look forward to seeing a completely re-designed Viewer. The new Viewer will take advantage of the powerful features of the SkyFS (derived from Haiku's BFS), including extremely fast searching and organizing of files, on-the-fly filtering of files and folders within the Viewer, fast insertion of meta-data into multiple files, and more. Update: Screenshots!
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by youknowmewell on Tue 29th Mar 2005 20:08 UTC

I said before that when Red Hat was selling their RedHat Linux distro, they made a mint doing so. Today, they have a different market they are selling to, but that still doesn't mean they aren't Free. CentOS is Red Hat Enterprise Linux for free-as-in-beer AND free-as-in-freedom, repackaged without the trademarked things like the shadowman icon, etc.. This is allowed because RedHat is Free, and you know what? RedHat LIKES IT. It helps them far more than it hurts them, and they realize it. You don't realize it, however.

It is a better strategy than going bankrupt because of bending over backwards to provide free betas. It is a better strategy than letting anyone put your OS in the direction they want rather than the well-thought-out direction you want it to go in, to a niche that isn't filled. It is a better strategy than trying to exactly emulate what Linux is doing, because know what, if it did this thread wouldn't exist, no one would even realize SkyOS wasn't another Linux distro, and no one would care to pay for it, and it would go bankrupt. It is a much, much better strategy than any of those concepts.

Who said that you wouldn't have control over your OS if it was open-source? Novell, RedHat, Mandrake, etc. all have their own distros and control the direction that their distros go. However, I'm not locked into their distros if I become unhappy with it.

If SkyOS was just another linux distro, do you think it would be at the top of like Arch Linux, a distro I've never heard about until a month or so ago? How about Gentoo? Ubuntu? These all started out as just-another-distribution and have since gotten their own following. Your distro would be in a different group along with Linspire, SuSE, Xandros, etc., and all the poor and downtrodden distro developers. I pitty whoever is part of that bankrupted group.

It's not about the money, it's about the CONTROL, ABSOLUTE CONTROL over the OS. You want an absolute monopoly on the interface and the APIs you're developing. You're hanging on to the proprietary software developer's dream, following in MS's shadow.

This is all fine by me. It's a flawed strategy, a stupid strategy, but your strategy. Good luck, you'll need it.