“There are a lot of misconceptions and false sentiments surrounding SkyOS. And every time someone mentions SkyOS, these same old misconceptions bubble up. In this article, I will try to contradict them and explain why they are untrue.” Read the rest here.
On Misconceptions, SkyOS, And The GPL
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
I find the whole article repeatedly being dismissive of desktop Linux. It doesnt even mention OS X as a good alternative system.
Please present a more balanced opinion. lets be accomodative of every potential player in the market.
that includes Linux, skyos, syllable, haiku or whatever.
acknowledge that gpl’ed applications ported to sky os make skyos better. stay proprietary if you want
reconsider paid beta software thinking
Agreed. In fact it seems that the most enthusiastic supporters of hobby os’s are the ones that believe Linux doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of making it, they just need to step back and look at the big picture.
That was pretty bad really. Starting from the premises that Windows is proprietary and Windows is the most successful OS, we learn that open-source OSes *cannot* be successful.
I can’t be the only one to see the ludicrous flaws in that logic. And as for the idea of paying hard cash for testing beta software? What? Paying for the honour of being someone else’s quality control? I can see that working out real well.
I don’t see why an open-source OS can’t be successful. Linus seems to keep a pretty tight rein on Linux; the only reason that it is so fragmented is because it’s only a kernel, not a whole user environment.
If the people behind SkyOS want to keep control they can do, but that shouldn’t mean they should dismiss the advantages of OSS out of hand.
So this guy claims that Linux isn’t ready for the desktop, even though (according to the article) SkyOS is esentially running the same as is on Linux. So, why should either Windows users or Linux users care?
Most Windows users choose the platform because of the availablity of applications we can’t get on Linux, and most Linux users use Linux on the desktop for religious/financial reasons, neither of which SkyOS can fill.
The only way I’m gonna care about this OS is if they get a lot of kick ass applications.
From the article:
Of course the applications are important to an operating system, but they are not the end-all-be-all.
Umm, I beg to differ, especially if your apps aren’t as good as the competition and/or do not meet my needs – your OS is practically useless to me.
That was pretty bad really. Starting from the premises that Windows is proprietary and Windows is the most successful OS, we learn that open-source OSes *cannot* be successful.
No, that’s not what he’s saying. He says that people are posting on their forums saying that SkyOS has to be open source in order to succeed, and he’s merely pointing out that the most successful desktop OS (Windows) is closed source, and so is OSX for that matter.
That was not a very interesting story. I read it hoping it would dispell rumors of GPL infringement through some solid journalism. Instead the author goes on at length on why you can use open source software on a closed OS. OBVIOUSLY!
CD-EX, Cygwin, Gimp, VNC, etc All have WINDOWS versions!
The question is if SkyOS uses GPL code in the closed source portions of the OS. I personally don’t think that is the case, but the arcticle provides no evidence either way.
And yeah, he is rather dismissive of Linux as a desktop OS. I think he’s selling recent progress short, but that isn’t why he wrote his piece.
In general, this is a very unimpressive piece of work. The only somewhat interesting part was his response to the paid beta, and even that was a very superficial handling. If someone wants to actually tackle the issue of the GPL and SkyOS’s relationship to it, i’d be very interested to read their work, but Thom Holwerda has not.
Mike
I almost stopped reading when the author offered up the stunningly illogical notion that there is no justification for open source since there is not a dominant open source desktop.
But then the author states:
“Anyway. Gaining a solid userbase has nothing to do with being open source or not.”
To which I wonder what the point of the first two paragraphs was.
How about gems like:
“Desktop Linux is the perfect example of open source being unsuitable for desktop operating systems oriented towards the home user”
Really? Linux desktop userbase is much much much larger than the SkyOS userbase, and it always will be.
Given that this article was written at all, the author is nursing his own insecurities in public.
There is no point or value in a new closed source OS. Furthermore, SkyOS is totally immature even compared to linux on the desktop (yes, I have used it).
I suspect if SkyOS were ever opened source we would see a striking similarity to an old version of either linux or freebsd.
I would like Robert to tell us just how many people have bought into the SkyOS 5 beta. I don’t think there are more then 100 SkyOS users (probably far less). I am sick of those little zealot fan boys annoying other people (me, me and you).
I mean they call Linux unusable but write on Wikipedia that SkyOS is already in use as a productive environment. The only real apps that run right now are ports of Linux apps.
SkyOS is a nice OS but it is not the greatest thing since sliced bread. It still needs allot of time to get all the drivers and apps (most of them Free Software no doubt) ported/written.
Pleas be a bit more realistic about what SkyOS is NOW and where it is going.
>> he’s merely pointing out that the most successful desktop OS (Windows) is closed source, and so is OSX for that matter.
but it follows from a flawed premise that they are succesful *because* they are closed source
but it follows from a flawed premise that they are succesful *because* they are closed source
I beg to differ, but that isn’t really the point. The point is that the author dismisses the fact that SkyOS would have to be open source in order to be successful by pointing out that Windows is much more successful on the desktop than any open source OS that currently exists.
I was really interested in this article, since I’m someone he paid the beta fee, and tries out almost every release.
But it seems the article is just a yet-another-linux-isn’t-windows article.
I’m really fed up with those.
Just my 2 cents
I understand that the developer is defending the belief that a proprietary OS can be successful. I actually agree with this. Software is good if the people creating it care about it and strive to make it better. OSS just happens to bring in a lot of these people onto one project.
Where I disagree is on his viewpoints about how to judge the success of a software product. Internet Explorer is a HUGE failure. Install base does not equal success. IE has caused companies more money than the accountants care to report. Same goes for Outlook, and Windows in general. Desktop Linux has certainly not failed and WILL be wildly successful. SkyOS might be as well. Look out on the road today and notice all the different cars that people drive. The highway of today will resemble the desktop market of tomorrow. Everyone will be using the OS of their choice, but they will all adhere to certain standards and interfaces. And MS will be no more than a beatup old VW.
Be wise, support “small” projects, do not step on them.
So Linux was never a small project? Oh right, it became popular. So if SkyOS becomes popular(which IMO it won’t) will you start bashing it and start writing about the coolest new underdog?
Thom Holwerda, this is seriously pathetic. Millions of people are using Linux as their primary desktop and are happy. Its progressing at an unimaginably fast pace and will continue to do so.
That’s it, I’m writing an article about why SkyOS will be a failure! (I’ll post on Friday)
“.. Guy doesn’t have a clue
By Darius (IP: —.dsl.austtx.swbell.net) – Posted on 2004-10-19 00:37:05
So this guy claims that Linux isn’t ready for the desktop, even though (according to the article) SkyOS is esentially running the same as is on Linux. So, why should either Windows users or Linux users care?
Most Windows users choose the platform because of the availablity of applications we can’t get on Linux, and most Linux users use Linux on the desktop for religious/financial reasons, neither of which SkyOS can fill.
The only way I’m gonna care about this OS is if they get a lot of kick ass applications.
From the article:
Of course the applications are important to an operating system, but they are not the end-all-be-all.
Umm, I beg to differ, especially if your apps aren’t as good as the competition and/or do not meet my needs – your OS is practically useless to me. …”
Actally he does have a clue. He is stating that there is no set of stanrds for everyone to go bye. Per distro or per WM/DE. Point in case, last week I think it was, Patrick is going to drop gnome from slackware. WHY? you ask. BECUASE there is _NO_ standard where there needs to be. SkyOS has a stanard for evrything it does. It doesnt use Linux core. It uses open source applications. IF you would see the article as biased, then maybe you need to read it again, or a few more times to actally get what its says. The author isnt “dissing” linux or opensource. He is just tired of the GPL Trolls/Zealots, dissing SkyOS becuase its not free or open source. He also states that he is tired of trolls saying its gonna succeed becuased it closed source, he uses OS X/Windows as proof that CLosed Source operating can in fact succeed. And the “applications” that linux has that windows doesnt doesnt exist. YOu cna get practically ANY program that linux has for windows. and if you cnt get it , you can download cygwin and compile the program in cygwin for windows and problem solved. I dont blame the author, I wouldnt give my aunt/mom/dad/grandmother/sister/ or anyone thats not a techie linux because I’d get tired of giving out advice of how to do this or that.
YOu cna get practically ANY program that linux has for windows. and if you cnt get it , you can download cygwin and compile the program in cygwin for windows and problem solved.
—-
please show me how to run k3b or quanta+ in windows. seriously. then learn to talk about something you can back up without fooling yourself. there are several software products unique to linux and some definitely wont run on windows
ooohhh wow. @ programs that have a closed source alternative that are free… http://www.deepburner.com and http://www.evrsoft.com/ both of which, may I mention, are Successful, at both price FREE! and doing what they do best.
In all the articles and subsequent postings on SkyOS I’ve read on OSNews, I’ve tasted this. Very few people seem to care for SkyOS, but those that do, are pushing really hard for SkyOS to gain traction.
The majority reaction to this “advertising campaign” has been: “Why should I care?” The most convincing answer seems to be SkyOS is not Linux. Upon which all the questions about the use, the license and place of SkyOS welled up.
I’ve taken notice of the existance of SkyOS. I’ve come to know that it is a for pay, closed source OS that is capable of running Apps that are available on GNU/Linux too.
My reaction to it was: Good, let it be bliss to those that care for it. I couldn’t care less. I’ve found a worthy system in GNU/Linux and up till now, I haven’t had a significant reason to switch.
I do keep the BSD’s as second option, just in case GNU/Linux fails (cold day in hell). A system being Open Source is one of my heavy weighing criteria.
So my nagging quesion is why so many people that believe in Open Source are so vehemently interested in a closed source OS? SkyOS will remain a for pay, closed source niche system. Why nag about the for pay part, the non-GPL license and the small userbase? Its not like the world will end if SkyOS remains closed and insignificant. (Even if SkyOS became the dominant platform, the world wouldn’t end!)
So my nagging quesion is why so many people that believe in Open Source are so vehemently interested in a closed source OS? SkyOS will remain a for pay, closed source niche system. Why nag about the for pay part, the non-GPL license and the small userbase? Its not like the world will end if SkyOS remains closed and insignificant. (Even if SkyOS became the dominant platform, the world wouldn’t end!)
—
very valid question. why do people care about skyos and gpl applications. I believe that skyos developers need to put up a page explaining the relationship clearly and in a non inflamtory manner. dont deride anything else. just state the facts and explain the position along with a faq.
You don’t seem to understand GPL at all.
Once upon a time, programmers realized it’s dirt stupid to rewrite code that already works. So prevent rewritting code, some programmers chose to allow others to use and modify their code and redistribute it modified or not. However, these programmers didn’t want greedy people taking the code they were providing so generously and changing it without allowing others the same benefits they had.
If you don’t want to use GPL’d code fine, but it’s a crime to take someone’s code and then turn around and hide the code you piggybacked off of.
I personally don’t think Robert has violated the GPL, but if he has, it doesn’t matter how nice SkyOS is, it’s a crime. No one is forced anyone to steal GPL’d code. Your categorization of GPL code as “a virus” or people who obey the GPL as “Communists” is offensive.
Mike
I think the author is missing a critical point about open source. The advantage of open source is not that it’s a big selling point of the end product. Instead, it’s a fundemental factor in allowing the product to exist at all. A commercial company is hampered by a very real problem: it can only develop the OS as long as they’ve got the money to do so. Breaking into the OS market is a 10-year job (as Linux has shown). No startup can afford to hemmorage money for a decade before showing some profits.
That’s the fundemental problem SkyOS has. No matter how good it is, it’ll take years before it can sustain it’s own development with it’s userbase. Without open source, can it maintain that pace of development?
For the record, I’ll point out that my comments aren’t aimed at just SkyOS. I’ll cite these reasons as why BeOS was a dismal failure, and why Zeta will also be a dismal failure. Much better products than SkyOS have failed for this exact reason.
A commercial company is hampered by a very real problem: it can only develop the OS as long as they’ve got the money to do so. Breaking into the OS market is a 10-year job (as Linux has shown). No startup can afford to hemmorage money for a decade before showing some profits.
Rayiner, there’s like 1 developer for the entire OS. If he can get a thousand people to pay the $30 for it, then he probably has enough to live off of for a year, even after administrative costs. Who knows, the kids parents might be rich or something.
The real problem is porting all those drivers over to the OS. If it was me, I’d pull an Apple. Use a kernel that is already out there and close the userland stuff as much as you want.
Using Windows to show how closed source software can win is just stupid. MS Windows won because of draconian license agreements with clone makers that made them the ONLY game in town. They didn’t do it because people loved DOS. They didn’t do it because they were better than anyone else. They did with a shotgun wedding.
Why hasn’t the mythical year of the linux desktop appeared? Because there will never be any such thing. Linux will continue like it has from the start, it will grow with time. No matter how hard the media or the fanboys try to make it otherwise, thats the reality. So stop waiting for something that will never happen.
And for the the “what about Mac OS X” folks. Look its nice, and the hardware is sweet. BUT there is no way your going to talk the world into scrapping what they have so they can spend more money than they used to. And when in reference to a system that seems to run on the x86 platform then talking about Mac OS X is stupid. Mac OS X is NOT an alternative OS for the x86 (and Darwin x86 is not the same as Mac OS X) so please stop using that arguement.
BeOS rocked. But it wasn’t even a speed bump to Microsoft. Think about it, MS has crushed Be Inc without directly attacking them. Apple percentage of the market is measured in single digits. So is Linux, but the Linux numbers are growing.
The reviewer is correct though about the applications and the fact that for SkyOS they aren’t a big issue. SkyOS is a hobby OS, and will most likely never really be anything else, its there for the developers to play with, and users to fiddle with and feel special because its an obscure OS. Kind of like Be. Well accept that Be was company that had investors, and developers it courted. But in the end it died and remains just a hobby OS for the few the proud users of weird OS’s.
Will or should people pay for beta? Hell yes! Why not? I paid for beta versions of Be to help support the company. I wanted to see them succeed. So if you like a OS (hobby or not) why wouldn’t you send some of the developers or a company that makes your life easier a couple bucks? Its called supporting a company or project. People do it because they like the company product or project in questions.
Me I don’t think I would pay a company money again to beta test proprietary software. Companies die and the software gets auctioned off. I have and do support Open Source projects that make my life better.
Peace,
Solkaris
sorry if that was to rambling.
So I give SkyOS a big thumbs up. I want to see more choice in operating systems, be it Open Source or not. Not going Open Source also is a choice to be respected, fellows.
P.S.:
Too bad, they chose the worst hardware platform (x86) to begin with…
True, they’ve got a very small number of developers to support, but I don’t see how they could possibly keep up with the Joneses with such a small amount of developer resources.
You’ve got a good point in that if they really want an alternative to Linux, they should base their efforts on existing code. The idea of getting a competitive desktop OS by starting with your own kernel is foolish. There is nothing in there that is all that interesting for a desktop user. There is no need to reinvent the filesystem, or all those drivers, or the network stack, etc, etc. I believe that BlueEyedOS really had the right idea here — too bad development on that seems to have stalled.
P.S.:
Too bad, they chose the worst hardware platform (x86) to begin with…
hehe, my thoughts exactly.
Unless you’re an assembly programmer, who gives a rat’s ass about how ugly the x86 architecture is? All that matters is price/performance, and x86 delivers that in spades.
I still think SkyOS is lacking a few things, first off Java, they have the vm but not libraries, this make’s the vm useless until libraries are there. Also it could do with a spread sheet app. Once SkyOS gets these things I may use it.
Quote: I would like Robert to tell us just how many people have bought into the SkyOS 5 beta. I don’t think there are more then 100 SkyOS users (probably far less). I am sick of those little zealot fan boys annoying other people (me, me and you).
I run one of the beta download mirrors for SkyOS, and I have seen the output of the BetaCenter login and distribution system. I can tell you for sure that there are at least 200 people who download the beta every time a new version is released.
Also, while there are indeed some applications which were ported from Linux to SkyOS, there are quite a number of native applications. Most of these, however, are still in beta stages due to the fact that it takes time to write software from scratch.
I talk to Robert Szeleney several times per week, and I am simply amazed at his willingness to listen to the users of his operating system. He’s the most committed man I’ve ever met, and also one of the most intelligent. SkyOS is a work of art, and I’m proud to be a part of it.
Sorry, got a little fluffy there towards the end.
First of all, I am one of those who paid my $30 for SkyOS. Yet I would say that paying just for being on the beta program *is* ridiculous, as it amounts to paying someone for the privilege of doing the work for them! But in case of SkyOS remember that $30 INCLUDES the finished product. This is very important, as it effectively changes the whole deal from “paying for beta” to “paying in advance”, which is a lot more palatable! In fact, it would’ve probably been better for SkyOS to stress this aspect more, perhaps calling the whole thing “a sponsorship program” or something – anything that does not suggest the users are not only used as guinea pigs but charged for it as well…
… Which is something we should discourage.
True, they’ve got a very small number of developers to support, but I don’t see how they could possibly keep up with the Joneses with such a small amount of developer resources.
Spoken like a true sheep. Life is not about such things. Until you realize that, you’ll always be miserable trying to “keep up with the Joneses”, whatever the situation may be.
Comparing the popularity of SkyOS vs Linux is pretty retarded at this point. Linux has been around for much longer. Give SkyOS a few years. How popular was Linux back in the mid 90’s? Not very. Besides, what does popularity have to do with anything?
Not only did the BlueEyedOS guy have the right idea, but he seemed to know quite a bit about optimizing X. I remember he wrote some article about benchmarking and optimizing X that was here.
I think the Haiku guys are going to learn the hard way that backing up statements like “Linux is just a server OS” is going to be harder than they think.
I think the main reason why I dislike the beta fee is that I always want to try every operating system that comes my way -just for fun, to see how it works and how cleanly it is designed.
This fee just prevents me from trying SkyOS – sad thing because only then one could really judge if the hype around this OS ( if you even want to call the yelling of the SkyOS fans a hype ) has any substance.
From the docs, there is no substance in SkyOS and the screenshots look dull to me.
>> It doesnt even mention OS X as a good alternative system.
He’s talking exclusively about x86 and since OS X is ppc…
with this article. It does more harm than good.
Yes, SkyOS is cool. Me is doing an OS thing too. I know what work is behind.
No, I do not think it is ok to *defend aloud* where nothing is to be defended. Mostatime those who feel guilty go in defending position. The article in question is definitely not a good one.
It is more of Marketing Prosa and I’d wish there were more technical oriented articles about SkyOS. F. Ex. How are Semaphores handled in SkyOS or What Kind of Schedulers does SkyOS offer? Something *in depth* which makes the guru’s eye widen or at least twitch a bit out of curiosity.
And no,I don’t think, Linux is not ready for the Desktop. It is as ready as the user is. Period. If one lacks the guts to install SuSE on a spare hard disk, his bad luck. That’s the by far easiest install you’ll ever experience. Even WIndows is more complicated – because it asks its questions in the middle of the installation not at the beginning – like SuSE does.
Just stop this Linux Is Not Ready For THe Desktop crap. Thats plain polemics.
Well unfortunately it seems that Blue Eyed OS is “stalled”, so it won’t be those who will show that Linux is not a server OS..
Currently I’m having many difficulties trying to create accent with a QWERTY keyboard on Linux, these kind of difficulties still show that Linux is not very good for a desktop..
Anyway to go on topic: I found the article pretty bad, he spends his time showing that OpenSource is not so good as Linux doesn’t really manage to compete in the desktop, but why should closed source be better?
Be died, and I don’t see why SkyOS would be able to break the ‘vicious circle’: no user –> no app, no app –> no user, sure they can try to port free app on a proprietary OS, but I think that they will learn that there are no many free developpers which are interested in helping porting/maintaining apps to proprietary OS (Windows and MacOSX are the exception because of their already large user base).
Also those free apps will probably work much better on Linux than on SkyOS due to the higher number of developpers..
Well, I kind of expected this thing to offend a lot of people.
First, I didn’t mention OS X because OS X does not run on x86 and therefore it’s irrelevant to the the whole SkyOS matter. OS X itself is far from irrelevant though. Heck, it’s my main OS
.
Just stop this Linux Is Not Ready For THe Desktop crap. Thats plain polemics.
Opinions are opinions. I clearly said that it didn’t fit my desktop, and therefore I concluded it doesn’t fit others’ as well.
If the people behind SkyOS want to keep control they can do, but that shouldn’t mean they should dismiss the advantages of OSS out of hand.
I never dismissed the advantages of OSS. I only said that for a desktop operating system oriented towards the home user, OSS has not and is not producing a decent choice; and it seems like the rest of the world is pretty much agreeing with me (seeing Windows is still the no. 1 operating system)
For applications for example, OSS is doing extremely well, as I mentioned. OO.o, Mozilla, etc.
Thom Holwerda, this is seriously pathetic. Millions of people are using Linux as their primary desktop and are happy. Its progressing at an unimaginably fast pace and will continue to do so.
That exact same line was said to me in 1999. Yeah, that’s 5 years ago.
I haven’t bought SkyOS but I’m indeed very interesting in the operating system. We need a lot more diversity in the OS business….
When things start coming together and more HW support is there and there is actually some working apps (Not beta) I’d love to buy the product.
My guess is skyOS is 20% original code + 80% GPL code then how can they say bad about GPL?
SkyOS is 100% original code. Some of the applications suplied aren’t, of course.
on another note, asking people to pay for beta is quite stupid. If you are a true developer, then i bet you are not running after money and if you are after money or market skyOS then why the hell you are working on your own?
The money gets put into the development of SkyOS. If you would’ve actualy read this piece then you would’ve known.
It seems *not* possible to me that one person can create an OS which can be used by masses. Last time i heard they had 100 beta tester…wow big number…LMAO
You really didn’t read, did you? I stated in the article that there are currently 317 beta members. And “LMAO”? What have you contributed to the software world, dude?
Its the reason i have no respect for that skyOS developer who likes to boast that its an OS coded by 1 person. He is a l-user…
Like I said, SkyOS is 100% original code. And calling him a loser… Dude, you got some serious issues.
What happens to SkyOS when Robert dies (all such happened already to developers) or just will discontinue this project for any reason… freeing SkyOS would make SkyOS more interesting for other developers (Robert ist good but not the best) as naturally for potential users.
Think about it, i cannot believe Roberts 1st goal is making money, wrong?
of course, opinions are opinions.
but your statement … lemme remember … it didn’t work out for you so you deduce that it doesn’t work out for others (or similar) … is simply polemics.
This statement is of couse your personal opinion, so be it. But this personal experience of yours is not to be projected onto other ppl. Say, I use Linux now for 6 years in succession without any *bigger* problems than those out of my own fault and the steep learning curve. It is a perfectly suited desktop for me as is windows.
see just what I say: ‘”Linux is not ready for the desktop”, is crap.’ If you ‘d say “Linux is not ready for Joe Average or your neighbours momma”, then I’d propably nod and say yes this statement is correct in a limited scale.
It *depends* on the ppl. If neighbours momma doesn’t want to *learn* how to handle her new OS, then I perfectly understand her. Neighbours momma is propably more concerned about cooking and cleaning the hearth than about fiddling with her computers innards. And that joe average shall never be let near any computer is a known issue for such lads/lasses even close the window on the floor if told “close that window and klick on the program picture once again.”
But again: “Linux is not ready for the desktop” and “Linux is not ready for neighbours momma nor for Joe Average” are two very different statements, and I agree only with the second one.
Mark, what I’ve said: Linux is as ready for the desktop as the user is.
Tack sa mycket
But again: “Linux is not ready for the desktop” and “Linux is not ready for neighbours momma nor for Joe Average” are two very different statements, and I agree only with the second one.
What I said:
“If you do find that there are viable alternatives to Windows, then that is all fine with me. For me, there just aren’t. For our precious home user, that is. I, myself, rely on my iMac and BeOS for my daily routines.”
Aren’t those lines what you mean? I also mentioned the hypothetical momma and grandma. What more do y’all want??
Mark, what I’ve said: Linux is as ready for the desktop as the user is.
It is just impossible to say anything about Linux in any article– this article wasn’t about friggin’ Linux!
Until Photoshop, MS Office and at least 1000 popular games can run SkyOS, and until SkyOS is pre-installed on computers, SkyOS will never succeed on the desktop!
SkyOS has few users, how many doesn’t really mater. If 100, 200 or 1000, SkyOS is a small OS NOW; SkyOS has no drivers and apps NOW. Your community is delusional with visions of grandeur before that grandeur has ever arrived. That is especially annoying since the truth is being glossed over for hype.
About SkyOS native apps, the only real app under development for SkyOS I know of is the IRC client. Tic tak toe and the match game aren’t something you should count.
I would appreciate, like many others here if your zealots stop posting this type of dribble and we could get back to OS part of OSNews.
About SkyOS native apps, the only real app under development for SkyOS I know of is the IRC client. Tic tak toe and the match game aren’t something you should count.
Please only comment if you have knowledge on the subject at hand. I could also name Personal Organizer, an email client, calendar and personal organizer application. Or aFTP, a full featured ftp client. Or WBD, a fps shooter using the Irrlicht engine. Or a whole new instant messenger protocol, which is also under development.
Now you again, dude.
Ok, nice for you. I haven’t fallowed your forum so closely with all the crap being posted. What license will they be under? GPL like the apps you port? How goes the plan to make native versions of GTK apps?
You see, with all of this license crap that comes our way we don’t really get to hear much about what is actually being DONE to make SkyOS viable.
SkyOS is 100% original code. Some of the applications suplied aren’t, of course.
So suddenly SkyFS became 100% original code?
Who knows what else is in there.
Do I care? Well, not really. Even though it would be interesting to know if he is using sourcecode from other project it doesn’t really matter(as long as it’s legal).
What matters is how the final product is put together. There’s a lot of developers out there that could write all those little parts, but making them work well together as a complete OS is more difficult, especially if the development is fragmented. This is where Linux fails. (it’s getting better though)
“Thom Holwerda, this is seriously pathetic. Millions of people are using Linux as their primary desktop and are happy. Its progressing at an unimaginably fast pace and will continue to do so.”
That exact same line was said to me in 1999. Yeah, that’s 5 years ago.
??? So? And now, according to some polls, Linux users outnumber Mac users. So it appears that its fast pace is yielding results.
…it seems like the rest of the world is pretty much agreeing with me (seeing Windows is still the no. 1 operating system)
Now that is an incredibly arrogant statement, coming from the creator of an OS that a marketshare measured in the fractions of a percent (if that). I’ve used Linux on the desktop exclusively since 1999. My (now) 13-year-old daughter has been dual-booting Linux for three years, booting into Windows only for games. We’ve been watching the Linux “state-of-the-deaktop” in that period, and its acceleration in ease-of-use and maturity is obvious. Each new distro is not only better, but it’s better by a significant amount.
The reason that Linux has not made more leeway towards the desktop has less to do with whether it’s “ready” than it does with users’ feeling that Windows is “good enough.” This is the same roadblock that will haunt SkyOS, regardless of how good it is, or how much better it is than Windows. The average non-techie Windows user would rather buy more anti-virus software, more anti-malware, more firewalls, than to learn a new OS, even if all they do with their computer is e-mail and web browsing. For example, this last weekend, I helped a friend with his Windows box; it was so compromised that any attempt to surf to anti-virus sites were blocked. Finally fixed that and loaded Firefox on his machine. He liked it, but said his wife wouldn’t “because it doesn’t look like IE.” This is the same kind of mindset you’ll come up against with “the masses.”
Another reason that the average person doesn’t normally consider Linux (or any other alternative OS) is that most people expect their new computer to come with an OS. That means Windows machines and Mac boxes. Until people can walk into a Wal-Mart or Micro-Center and see Linux boxes up and running, the possibility of anything other than Win or Mac will never enter their minds. Again, this is the same hurdle that you will face if SkyOS ever takes off.
Ok, nice for you. I haven’t fallowed your forum so closely with all the crap being posted. What license will they be under? GPL like the apps you port? How goes the plan to make native versions of GTK apps?
First, it’s not my forum. Second, the licences they will be under is not of my interest; that’s up to the people who develop the apps. Thirdly, I’m not porting anything. And finally, I have no idea how the native version of GTK apps are doing, since I’m not part of the SkyOS team. I’m only on the beta team, that’s all.
You see, with all of this license crap that comes our way we don’t really get to hear much about what is actually being DONE to make SkyOS viable.
That’s because a lot of people are whining and moaning about the fact that SkyOS is closed source.
So suddenly SkyFS became 100% original code?
Since when is a filesystem part of the operating system?
/me bashes head on keyboard.
My god people.
1. SkyOS will not be GPLed anytime soon.
2. If you pay for the beta you are helping the developement of the os and you will also get the final version when its released. So stop whining about it not being free.
3. Why do you keep comparing it to linux? stop. It doesn’t make any sense to considering it’s still in beta stages.
4. The core OS (kernel and what not) are roberts. The SkyFS is based on BeFS. How is this wrong? Anyways, there no ‘stolen gpl/linux/bsd/whatever’ code in the os. The tcp/ip stack might be bsd based. I don’t remember. But if thats the case, so what? Even MS used it in windows..
5. Why do so many of you show so much disrespect to Robert, the developer? If you don’t like the OS then stop posting here about it. It’s his hobby, his love, and not something for you to ridicule because ‘its not linux!!’.
jeez..
I’m sure I’ll get modded down. Any post that points out stuff like this does
>>That’s because a lot of people are whining and moaning about the fact that SkyOS is closed source.
Yes and your SkyOS zealots are wining and moaning over the wining and moaning of the GPL zealots, that is just as bad.
What a poorly written piece of drivel. This guy wants to make people believe that 1995 is 2004.
There were no real Free desktop operating systems that grandma could use back then, but Linux is here and ready now.
I know plenty of older folks who use Linux on a regular basis. Leave an email address and I’ll send you links to pictures of our community computer labs.
There will never be another proprietary OS.The only thing that Windows has going for it is existing momentum and OEM agreements, which is a lot. If SkyOS were ever to become a real threat, Microsoft would either buy you out or push you out.
Finally, you and the parasitic community that you claim as your own make me sick. Of course, you can take all of our GPL apps and run them on your closed operating system, but it hypocrisy to the highest degree to feel that you are entitled to the many man-years that went into making the Gimp, yet no one should be able to have access to the code for SkyOS. Well, keep it that way,because if you opened the code, it may actually go somewhere and it may actually take developer resources from Linux.
SkyOS, from “The Pie in the Sky People”.
Finally, you and the parasitic community that you claim as your own make me sick. Of course, you can take all of our GPL apps and run them on your closed operating system, but it hypocrisy to the highest degree to feel that you are entitled to the many man-years that went into making the Gimp, yet no one should be able to have access to the code for SkyOS. Well, keep it that way,because if you opened the code, it may actually go somewhere and it may actually take developer resources from Linux.
EU! Are you one of those devloppers? Who the hell are you to speak for the developers of the GIMP? I find it extremely arrogant and weird that you seem to know what the dev’ of The GIMP think.
Secondly, SkyOS is not violating the GPL by using GPL software, so what’s your friggin’ problem? Maybe you should talk to the people who ported all those GPL programs to Windows. Are they leeches too?
“There were no real Free desktop operating systems that grandma could use back then, but Linux is here and ready now.”
No, it’s not.
“There will never be another proprietary OS”
Yes, there will. It just won’t be successful.
“but it hypocrisy to the highest degree to feel that you are entitled to the many man-years that went into making the Gimp, yet no one should be able to have access to the code for SkyOS.”
It isn’t hypocrisy. That is what the developers of free software intended by making it available. It the developers of The Gimp didn’t desire this, they shouldn’t have worked on it.
I wish them the best of luck, but everyone misses the point.
The O.S. is NOT the end of the game. The OS is a vehicle to run applications.
You can make SkyOS, Syllable, etc… As nice as you want. But, if there are no apps I can be productive with… Who cares?
That’s what killed BeOS.
That’s what has MacOS X be so good. And Linux holding on and growing.
It’s the User Space Apps.
The way to go to challenge Windows, is like ReactOS I think. Or, the original business plan of Lindows.
Run the Windows Apps on a BETTER, cleaner, faster, more secure OS. And Windows is history.
If anyone in the Linux space were smart, WINE would be a MAJOR priority. Because if Linux transparently ran the apps people need to run, and not partially functioning substitutes…
Who would want to deal with Windows? Blue screens? Slow Operation? User-Unfriendly design choices? Bloated OS and Apps?
I’m looking forward to ReactOS being a “Daily Driver”. And when it is, I’m leaving Windows and NEVER looking back.
I’m thisclose to moving to MacOS X.
I wish SkyOS a lot of luck…
I see no point in slamming it. It will be good, and do as well as it’s creators want it to.
And that is measured NOT by what they SAY they want it to do. But, the effort they put into having it be what they want it to be.
BeOS failed because Be gave up. They caved in. They refused to go head to head against Microsoft with a better OS, and better hardware.
I STILL want a BeBox, years later…
Qoute by Al Hartman
“Who would want to deal with Windows?”
I do!
“Blue screens?”
I haven’t seen a Blue screen since the 9X kernel.
“User-Unfriendly design choices?”
What User-Unfriendly choices?
“Bloated OS and Apps?”
Which OS are you talking about here? If your mentioning XP. You can easily change that look bad to the old one. I haven’t see any bloated Apps.
Qouted from Al Hartman
“You can make SkyOS, Syllable, etc… As nice as you want. But, if there are no apps I can be productive with… Who cares?
That’s what killed BeOS.
That’s what has MacOS X be so good. And Linux holding on and growing.”
Ok I don’t know how BeOS exactly died.
But about MacOSX, its more then the apps that keep mac popular. Its also include the advertising they do one TV, internet, magzines, etc. Without that advertising Apple would have less user for their apps and products.
http://www.skyos.org/board/accesslist.php
300+ paid beta members
I’ve heard that by now. Point is that SkyOS still has very very few users.
It also has very very few apps and drivers, and bashing Linux that has more of all NOW is just plain stupid.
Some of your community are out of control, they should probably learn how to program instead of marketing a not jet finished project with lots O’FUD.
i didnt write the article i just run the community site, i personally love linux, i love its diversity and wealth of applications Linux has a home on one of my desktop systems but as a Techy its expected, but my friends who arent techies arent likely to have linux on their systems at all, let alone know what it is.
Linux is ready for the Techy Desktop but not for the average joe desktop but it is getting there, distro’s like Cobind, Lycoris, Linspire, Xandros and such are making it a more viable alternative to the average joe user.
Yes, I am a developer of free software and yes, most developers of free software accept with quiet resignation that people like you will use their software, even if they do not seem to understand the share-and-share alike principle of Free Software.
If the damn code for SkyOS was opened, I might contribute a driver of fixed a memory race problem or write software for it. As it it, you creep me out. You are dooming SkyOS to irrelevance by pissing off anyone and everyone who might at some point lend you a hand.
Keep it up. You have alienated more people with your silly article than you could ever hope, only to satisfy your frail ego and your bias, which is clearly evident in phrases like “GPL zealot”.
You are one of the persons who consistently bashes Linux on these forums. I really hope that you are not an example of what the SkyOS developers are like. But, oh wait, you are not a developer, just a loud mouth idiot.
I guess the truth is just a little bit too much to handle for you, ay?
even if they do not seem to understand the share-and-share alike principle of Free Software.
I very much do. It is you who doesn’t want open source apps on closed source operating systems, so it is you who doesn’t understand the idea of open source.
If the damn code for SkyOS was opened, I might contribute a driver of fixed a memory race problem or write software for it. As it it, you creep me out. You are dooming SkyOS to irrelevance by pissing off anyone and everyone who might at some point lend you a hand.
Mmmm, this article did result in another group of people signing up for the beta… So not exactly sure what you mean.
Keep it up. You have alienated more people with your silly article than you could ever hope, only to satisfy your frail ego and your bias, which is clearly evident in phrases like “GPL zealot”.
I have alienated no one. The people spewing crap about SkyOS were already doing that anyway. So, no one lost.
You are one of the persons who consistently bashes Linux on these forums.
He who cannot stand critique will fail.
Mr. Thom has one dislike in his life: Desktop Linux, which to his dismay, is slowly but steadily crossing all the hurdles that he loves to highlight in his article. Also, he has one regret in his life: That despite touting closed-source as the *more successful* option, he has to port open-source software over to this *one-and-only-competition-to-Microsoft* desktop.
My question to Mr Thom is: Why don’t you invest in developing all applications as well from scratch and make them closed source? Why pilfer and pirate things off the open-source table? Aren’t you subverting your own arguments when you so lovingly have ported abiword, gaim, gimp and scores of other well-known open-source apps to SkyOS? And by your own admission, you believe that closed source versions of these exact applications are superior!
Go get a life, man! Read the GPL, understand the philosophy behind Linux and then express your thoughts.
Btw, correct me if I am wrong, but SkyOS gained popularity by initially telling the community that they were charging a fee *only* for the beta versions and that there *will* be a free version for the rest of us. Talk about cheats, man!!
Mr. Thom has one dislike in his life: Desktop Linux, which to his dismay, is slowly but steadily crossing all the hurdles that he loves to highlight in his article.
And which hurdles have been overcome in, say, the past three years? Other than extra eye candy?
Also, he has one regret in his life: That despite touting closed-source as the *more successful* option, he has to port open-source software over to this *one-and-only-competition-to-Microsoft* desktop.
Now you are talking complete crap. If you would’ve actualy read the article, you would know that I clearly state that open-source applications like OO.o, Mozilla & Co, and The GIMP are viable alternatives– only a fool would say that they aren’t. Read first, comment later, dude.
My question to Mr Thom is: Why don’t you invest in developing all applications as well from scratch and make them closed source?
That is not up to me, since I am no developer and I’m not in the SkyOS team– I’m only a beta team member that has been around long enough to know just a little bit more about SkyOS than others.
Why pilfer and pirate things off the open-source table?
If operating systems are not allowed to use open source software, than those projects are no longer open-source. All changes have been sent back to the respectful creators of the original products.
Aren’t you subverting your own arguments when you so lovingly have ported abiword, gaim, gimp and scores of other well-known open-source apps to SkyOS? And by your own admission, you believe that closed source versions of these exact applications are superior!
Please point to where I said that cosed source applications are superior. I only said that they are more succesful– which by no means means that they are better. I even emphasized that in the article.
Go get a life, man! Read the GPL, understand the philosophy behind Linux and then express your thoughts.
First of all, it’s great to have a philosophy, but with philosophy alone one can’t get anywhere. Secondly, I did read the GPL and the entire collection of FAQ’s available at http://www.fsf.org . You obviously didn’t.
Btw, correct me if I am wrong, but SkyOS gained popularity by initially telling the community that they were charging a fee *only* for the beta versions and that there *will* be a free version for the rest of us. Talk about cheats, man!!
You are indeed very wrong. One pays the 30$/25E for the betas AND the final version (also clearly stated in the article, once again this shows your foolishness). A LiveCD of SkyOS v5.0 will be available once it’s done. Contrary to some Linux distributors SkyOS doesn’t like to promote mere beta’s to complete releases.
Oh well, you won’t reply anyway. How does it feel to be exposed as a moron?
That last response was great
“The question is if SkyOS uses GPL code in the closed source portions of the OS. I personally don’t think that is the case, but the arcticle provides no evidence either way”
It doesnt containt open source code in the actual OS.. that was the point of the artical… dont you people read? You all seem to be skimming through, and paraphrasing it, for the sole purpose of being able to bitch. You all keep taking things out of context. If you cant be realistic about things, dont post.
“The question is if SkyOS uses GPL code in the closed source portions of the OS. I personally don’t think that is the case, but the arcticle provides no evidence either way”
It doesnt containt open source code in the actual OS.. that was the point of the artical… dont you people read? You all seem to be skimming through, and paraphrasing it, for the sole purpose of being able to bi***. You all keep taking things out of context. If you cant be realistic about things, dont post.
“The question is if SkyOS uses GPL code in the closed source portions of the OS. I personally don’t think that is the case, but the arcticle provides no evidence either way”
It doesnt contain open source code in the actual OS.. that was the point of the artical… dont you people read? You all seem to be skimming through, and paraphrasing it, for the sole purpose of being able to bi***. You all keep taking things out of context. If you cant be realistic about things, dont post.
>> he’s merely pointing out that the most successful desktop OS (Windows) is closed source, and so is OSX for that matter.
“but it follows from a flawed premise that they are succesful *because* they are closed source”
No, it doesnt… It is just simply stating that windows is closed source and successful.. nowhere in the artical does it say linux is not successful because it opensource..
“yet-another-linux-isn’t-windows”
why in the name of god would one say that linux is windows? They are the 2 most oppisite things on the planet. And where do you get the idea that thats what this artical is? did you even read it? thats not even remotly the topic of the artical..