OSNews: http://www.osnews.com/story/19102/Exclaim_0_2_0_Released Exploring the Future of Computing en-us Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams adam+nospam@osnews.com Tue, 10 Nov 2009 06:12:20 GMT http://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gif OSNews.com http://www.osnews.com Lightweight? Great! Plan? http://osnews.com/thread?294029 http://osnews.com/thread?294029 Each time I read "a project aiming to create a lightweight $foo", I wonder how they want to achive getting more lightweight than the current dominating FOSS project in their domain. Getting more lightweight is a very bold gold, but without telling about the plan for reaching this gold, it just sounds like marketing noise in my ears... Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:26:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (taschenorakel) Comments Like the good old days http://osnews.com/thread?294031 http://osnews.com/thread?294031 It's great to see 2 alternative operating systems outside of the common few making it onto OSNews. It reminds me of 'back in the day' when there was much more of this activity going on. Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:35:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (FreeGamer) Comments RE: Lightweight? Great! Plan? http://osnews.com/thread?294032 http://osnews.com/thread?294032 For me, lightweigth seems to have become just another word for "we will never be feature complete so lets make the lack of functionality a feature!". Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:43:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (J.R.) Comments RE[2]: Lightweight? Great! Plan? http://osnews.com/thread?294048 http://osnews.com/thread?294048 I hear ya, and what is going to make this lightwieght offering different? I want to see a different approach to stability, different approach to security, something that makes it unique among its peers.. Im sure this is cool, and the nerd curiosity in me with have me looking into it soon... but it would be nice to see someone offer something that changes they way we work with computers. Wed, 02 Jan 2008 16:24:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (hollovoid) Comments The domain name is taken http://osnews.com/thread?294049 http://osnews.com/thread?294049 It's a shame that the domain name exclaim.org is owned by a huckster trying to sell it for profit. The .com and .net variants are also taken. Every new project should register the URL before going public with the name.

Of course they can always get another TLD, like exclaim.io. Wed, 02 Jan 2008 16:38:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (KenJackson) Comments UNIX compatible ... http://osnews.com/thread?294050 http://osnews.com/thread?294050 So why not UNIX, Linux, BSD ... I truly fail to see a reason behind this project. Ok, they can ;) Wed, 02 Jan 2008 16:49:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (deb2006) Comments RE[2]: Lightweight? Great! Plan? http://osnews.com/thread?294068 http://osnews.com/thread?294068 Did you install Exclaim and/or did you test it? Wed, 02 Jan 2008 19:09:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (nelvana2005) Comments RE[2]: Lightweight? Great! Plan? http://osnews.com/thread?294095 http://osnews.com/thread?294095 It cannot be worse than the mainstream OS'es: "We'll never manage to make this piece of shit running properly so let's make poor security a feature" or the equally true "We'll never manage to optimize our code, so let's sell the bloatedness as in innovative step" ...

Functionality != A lot of code. Bloat != Functionality.

Bloat is unnecessary (and/or inefficient) code to perform a task.

Lightweight != lack of functionality.
Lightweight == efficient, hand-optimized code with much functionality - and little resource usage. Thu, 03 Jan 2008 01:08:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (dylansmrjones) Comments RE: The domain name is taken http://osnews.com/thread?294105 http://osnews.com/thread?294105 exclaim-os.org? anyway i'd leave it to them... Thu, 03 Jan 2008 06:54:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (makc) Comments RE[3]: Lightweight? Great! Plan? http://osnews.com/thread?294109 http://osnews.com/thread?294109 I really think you do unjustice to mainstream developers with your claims.

Bloat is unnecessary (and/or inefficient) code to perform a task.

Concrete examples?

I think you do not understand fundamental principles of software development:

* Within established projects you have to maintain compability, so quite often you do not have the chance to implement a new feature in the most glorious way.
* Within established projects you have to maintain stability, so in many cases doing minimaly invasive changes is much more reasonable, than doing glorious changes, that require complete rewrite.
* When developing new features you shall focus on solving the problem first, instead of wasting time and brain power on micro optimizations. Risk of getting your feature wrong is very high, if you put more effort into micro optimizations, than into concept.

Also maintainers of new projects have to admit, to stand on giant's shoulders: Their work seldomly appears out of the void. Most often they use experience from using, or even studing older code, when designing their improved features.

Sometimes I wonder if some of those brilliant hobbiest coders should put asside their ego, and use their unique knowledge to improve existing projects. Of course this is less joy, and it takes more effort to gain similiar praise - but guess it is more useful.

On the other hand its really cool, to see your code running on real world devices; to see it used by people who do not even know icons like Richard or Linus... Thu, 03 Jan 2008 09:32:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (taschenorakel) Comments RE[4]: Lightweight? Great! Plan? http://osnews.com/thread?294111 http://osnews.com/thread?294111
I really think you do unjustice to mainstream developers with your claims.


As a former mainstream developer I'll have to say he doesn't.

* Within established projects you have to maintain compability, so quite often you do not have the chance to implement a new feature in the most glorious way.


How does this not make it bloat?

* Within established projects you have to maintain stability, so in many cases doing minimaly invasive changes is much more reasonable, than doing glorious changes, that require complete rewrite.


See above.

* When developing new features you shall focus on solving the problem first, instead of wasting time and brain power on micro optimizations. Risk of getting your feature wrong is very high, if you put more effort into micro optimizations, than into concept.


See above.

You also forgot an important reason for bloat: insane deadlines set by management that prevents doing things properly.
Feature creep is another big contributor to bloat.
It's still bloat though, no matter the reason or excuse. Thu, 03 Jan 2008 10:22:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Soulbender) Comments RE[4]: Lightweight? Great! Plan? http://osnews.com/thread?294135 http://osnews.com/thread?294135 Concrete examples?

"Vista"

:) Thu, 03 Jan 2008 18:23:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (helf) Comments RE[2]: Lightweight? Great! Plan? http://osnews.com/thread?294139 http://osnews.com/thread?294139 I would prefer lightweight over features I dont need.
At least if that means a faster, more responsive os. Thu, 03 Jan 2008 19:23:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Bully) Comments RE[3]: Lightweight? Great! Plan? http://osnews.com/thread?294220 http://osnews.com/thread?294220 I would prefer features I need over lightweight. Fri, 04 Jan 2008 13:23:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Soulbender) Comments