Studio33 has released part II [part I] in its series of articles looking at the current state of Haiku. "In the previous part I talked about the achievements of the Haiku Team since the project was first started, this time I will go deeper into the work that has been done lately and which parts need serious attention in the coming months." Screenshots o'plenty, boys and girls.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-08-06
"A high performance desktop kernel can be built from the Linux kernel codebase."
Yes yes yes, we've heard this before and we will hear it again.
The whole point is, Haiku has made decisions (well thought through) about how they want to handle everything from the Kernel to the logo on deskbar. The "one size fits all" rule doesn't apply to Haiku.
In case you missed out on that, B.E OS (Blue Eyed) already tried the path with the Linux kernel and surely they got results, just that Haikus was more impressive. Now maybe they implemented something wrong, I don't really care, the thing is, Haiku has shown it's the way to go.
Besides, there are already a 100 Linux distros, and if it's suitable for "High performing desktop" I still don't understand why I constantly have the feeling it sucks (for my purposes)?
Not to mention, that the license philosophy makes the Linux choice even more difficult.
I'm glad Haiku has come the way it has, I hope the remaining journey will be fast and prosperous!
Member since:2006-03-21
Member since:2005-07-06
You're line of reasoning is fallacious. Just because B.E.O.S failed doesn't imply that their technical decision to use the Linux kernel was at fault. Haiku had much more mindshare and developer support than B.E.O.S did. Now, perhaps you can indirectly relate the magnitude of developer support for Haiku to the decision to use a different kernel, and you might be onto something, but that's a secondary issue entirely.
Besides, the point was not that Haiku should have used the Linux kernel. The original poster said that Linux would've been unsuitable for Haiku's purposes. Now it's fine that Haiku went with the kernel they wanted, but that doesn't mean that Linux would've been unsuitable.
The point about the "Linux distros" just shows how little you understand the underlying situation. Linux distros look the way they do because they all use the same software --- the GNU utilities, X.org, GNOME, etc. A Linux-based Haiku wouldn't use these things, and wouldn't look or feel anything like a Linux distro. Utlimately, Apple has shown that the underlying kernel, as long as it supports certain features, is mostly irrelevent to the desktop experience. OS X is a very fine desktop OS built on a kernel cruftier than Linux has ever been.
Member since:
2006-03-21
You obviously do not understand the fundamentals of OS design if you think that a BeOS replacement could not be built on the Linux kernel. BeOS itself is an OS of separate components outside of its kernel, including the GUI processes.
A high performance desktop kernel can be built from the Linux kernel codebase. It all depends on how you build it and what features from the codebase that you want in your compiled version of the kernel.