OSNews: http://www.osnews.com/story/18282/Syllable_0_6_4_Live_CD_IDE_Documentation Exploring the Future of Computing en-us Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams adam+nospam@osnews.com Fri, 10 Jul 2009 01:56:21 GMT http://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gif OSNews.com http://www.osnews.com live cd http://osnews.com/thread?256133 http://osnews.com/thread?256133 The live CD should be fun to try. Tue, 17 Jul 2007 20:50:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (mikesum32) Comments RE http://osnews.com/thread?256138 http://osnews.com/thread?256138 It works well in Parallels. Create an "Other Linux" machine and select Virtual PC on startup. It's a very basic system, but it's still early, and it seems pretty stable. I can't say it's clear what the precise aim of the OS is ATM (i.e. what differentiates it from others). Tue, 17 Jul 2007 21:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Kroc) Comments And now, for something completely different... http://osnews.com/thread?256145 http://osnews.com/thread?256145 The more I use Windows or Linux, the more think that there's stuff going on that it's just plain wrong. Sure an OS is defined by the apps that run on it, and what those apps enable you to achieve. In that perspective there's little argument that indeed Windows rules the corporate and multimedia desktop because of office 2K7 and flash, photoshop, etc... and Linux is really starting to gain momentum in the home and small office, mainly because of the security features and the availability of superior everyday usage applications(pidgin, firefox, exaile, banshee, f-spot, etc).

That's all fine and dandy... However, a few days ago i followed a link on slashdot and found:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1659841654840942756 (google.com)

I watched that video and then it struck me... I suddenly remembered why I used to say that BeOS was the best OS ever... I mean... that stress test is just plain sick! I've shown that to a friend of mine and he just went stupid. He said "This can't be true, this is not possible, not even my P4 does that." He uses Vista. I use Ubuntu on a Centrino Duo, and I don't think I can do it either.

What I'm trying to say is... yes, applications and compatibility is very important, but what the hell have all our operating systems turned into? Gruesome multi gigabyte monstrosities, no longer the means to an end but an end in themselves... If it was possible to squeeze this kind of performance back then, why isn't it possible now with our "modern" OSes and muticore CPUs?! I for one salute syllable and haiku, because you guys are doing what needs to be done: Getting rid of the bloat, applying modern OS design principles and rewriting the whole damn thing from scratch! Reinventing the wheel? Hell yeah! Ferraris don't run on chopped logs! Take your damn time and build a lean, mean platform on witch to build the killer apps of tomorrow. Make my old Centrino work like it's nobody's business and make those fancy x64 Vista powered machines crying in utter humiliation. But please... Can we have a prettier GUI? ;) Tue, 17 Jul 2007 21:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (n0xx) Comments Imagine... http://osnews.com/thread?256157 http://osnews.com/thread?256157 what could have been accomplished if the Haiku, Syllable and SkyOS guys would have worked together the last few years... Tue, 17 Jul 2007 23:00:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (jello) Comments RE: Imagine... http://osnews.com/thread?256163 http://osnews.com/thread?256163 That would be cool, but SkyOS wouldn't really eneter into the equation as it's a completely different design and philosophy. Still, Syllable is looking quite excellent... Tue, 17 Jul 2007 23:34:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (madcrow) Comments RE: And now, for something completely different... http://osnews.com/thread?256164 http://osnews.com/thread?256164 Nicely put. ;)

My mind boggles at what a rewritten BeOS would do on modern processors & with gobs of memory and a killer videocard setup.

*sigh*

:) Tue, 17 Jul 2007 23:40:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (MissinBeOS) Comments RE: And now, for something completely different... http://osnews.com/thread?256177 http://osnews.com/thread?256177 actually, you can do pretty much all of that easily on new hardware ;)

but for back then, that was pretty cool.

I still love BeOS.. ;) wish it hadnt died Wed, 18 Jul 2007 02:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (helf) Comments RE: Imagine... http://osnews.com/thread?256195 http://osnews.com/thread?256195 Imagine what kind of babel tower we'd have if all linux developers, instead of making 7000 forks of a same thing, would work together?

But people are selfish...open source people are selfish beyond limits because gpl doesnt require any common courtesy and everybody wants to be called the "Project lead"Edited 2007-07-18 05:58 Wed, 18 Jul 2007 05:56:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Kishe) Comments RE: And now, for something completely different... http://osnews.com/thread?256205 http://osnews.com/thread?256205 I watched that video and 3 things struck me.

Did that guy early on remind anyone else of Christopher Walken?

That was extremely impressive for it's time and the hardware it had.

But pretty primitive compared to any modern OS. Bragging about being able to scale to 8 processors and not bog down when maxed out? Playing an uncompressed video on top of another one? Handling a crashed app without crashing the OS? If a Linux distro bragged about doing these things today, it would be laughed off the internet. Some of the stuff they did manipulating the video was pretty neat, but I have to wonder if transitioning from 1 source to the other is very useful - it's certainly something current apps could do if they wanted to.

Anyway, it's too bad BeOS didn't survive, because they were clearly ahead of their time. Wed, 18 Jul 2007 07:46:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (smitty) Comments RE[2]: Imagine... http://osnews.com/thread?256206 http://osnews.com/thread?256206 Imagine what kind of babel tower we'd have if all linux developers, instead of making 7000 forks of a same thing, would work together?

I'm imagining it, and it doesn't look pretty. I'm seeing a monstrosity of a program that no one actually likes to use except the developers and much lower participation in free software. Sure, some forks are just stupid and wastes of resources, but one of the best features of open source software is the evolutionary process it creates. Someone creates some software, there are disagreements about what to change in it, and a fork is created - then the users and developers get to vote and pick which one they like better instead of simply being locked in to what 1 person likes best. Better software rises to the top and the crud dies out, at least in theory. It's also OSS's greatest weakness, but don't pretend it is all bad. Wed, 18 Jul 2007 07:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (smitty) Comments RE: Imagine... http://osnews.com/thread?256213 http://osnews.com/thread?256213 A lot of in-fighting, disagreements and sulking, probably. The three projects aren't very similar, and don't even share the same goals. Superficially it may look that way, but if you scratch the surface the differences are a little clearer. Wed, 18 Jul 2007 08:47:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Vanders) Comments RE[2]: Imagine... http://osnews.com/thread?256220 http://osnews.com/thread?256220 Imagine what kind of nice forum osnews would be if people just shut up with their uninformed opinions and stopped trolling? Wed, 18 Jul 2007 10:33:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Soulbender) Comments RE[2]: And now, for something completely different... http://osnews.com/thread?256223 http://osnews.com/thread?256223 All of these things linux can do..

you are confusing various things, you have to realize that when you install a "desktop" linux distribution today, you get a much more complicated system, which you probably would describe as "bloated".

But this is where Linux and all the free software's strength is, you could without too much trouble brew up a very custom tailored suite of software based on linux and other free software, to do this, and in the same performance range. Will it be with gnome? no, with kde? no. but did BeOS have these huge things? no. Wed, 18 Jul 2007 11:05:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Redeeman) Comments RE[2]: Imagine... http://osnews.com/thread?256227 http://osnews.com/thread?256227 Remember what happened at the tower of babel?
God forked the whole project into hundreds of different languages, and that was before anybody had come up with localisation. Wed, 18 Jul 2007 12:04:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Kroc) Comments RE[3]: And now, for something completely different... http://osnews.com/thread?256233 http://osnews.com/thread?256233 than ask yourself:
Why is it complicated?
Aren't there any ways to make it simplier?
Isn't it possible to "hide" the complexity.

I think one of the problems of the "desktop" linux is that it still grows on the design failures of the past.
They can't say: "Now we start from the beginning and create a new and better foundation".
Apple was able to do that and Microsoft will perhaps do the same in the next years.
Linux is getting old and perhaps the time will come (in the next 10 years?)for something new. Wed, 18 Jul 2007 12:25:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (cipri) Comments RE[4]: And now, for something completely different... http://osnews.com/thread?256248 http://osnews.com/thread?256248 Actually if you look around there are quite a few things changing in linux for the better.. many of its components today have been rewritten, and there is a window manager/ Desktop environment to cover many different usability angles, with a different focus alltogether.

10 years is a little overkill, new things are being done every day, and I think you will see major advancements in a year or two, not 10. Mingle around a little, you can learn alot from OSNEWS and many others about what linux IS doing. Wed, 18 Jul 2007 13:59:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (hollovoid) Comments RE[3]: Imagine... http://osnews.com/thread?256250 http://osnews.com/thread?256250
Remember what happened at the tower of babel?
God forked the whole project into hundreds of different languages, and that was before anybody had come up with localisation


If I remember right, originally everybody spoke C. Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:12:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (fretinator) Comments RE[4]: And now, for something completely different... http://osnews.com/thread?256254 http://osnews.com/thread?256254 Except for the fact that the "new MacOS foundation" you mention is based on Mach, FreeBSD, NeXT and a lot of software that can hardly be considered new. Wed, 18 Jul 2007 15:55:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (merkoth) Comments RE: Imagine... http://osnews.com/thread?256283 http://osnews.com/thread?256283 Another over-bloated, over-complicated mess that has no hope of ever having a year where it will because suitable for the desktop. In other words Linux.. Wed, 18 Jul 2007 19:59:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (computrius) Comments RE[4]: And now, for something completely different... http://osnews.com/thread?256284 http://osnews.com/thread?256284 there are no old crappy design decisions. What people want and expect from todays modern desktop environments are simply more.. Wed, 18 Jul 2007 20:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Redeeman) Comments RE[2]: Imagine... http://osnews.com/thread?256285 http://osnews.com/thread?256285 and that would be only because of morons like you, who simply go with the mass and judge it "not ready", while reality is that its a hell of a lot more ready than what "currently accepted as ready" systems are.. Wed, 18 Jul 2007 20:19:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Redeeman) Comments RE[3]: Imagine... http://osnews.com/thread?256286 http://osnews.com/thread?256286 I am not going with the mass.. This is my opinion. Through my own usage of it, and my own experience I have determined MYSELF that in my opinion it is not ready, and shows no signs of ever being ready. For reasons of usability, design, bloat.

Not to mention the un-winable challenge of those with money and power looking out for their pocket books by keeping windows the standard. Wed, 18 Jul 2007 20:40:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (computrius) Comments RE[4]: Imagine... http://osnews.com/thread?256539 http://osnews.com/thread?256539 Nah, C was a latecomer. Languages like FORTRAN and ALGOL existed well before C appeared. :-) Thu, 19 Jul 2007 18:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (rcsteiner) Comments