Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 11th Jul 2006 17:15 UTC, submitted by Lakedaemon
SkyOS A set of major changes in SkyOS is now complete. The entire GUI subsystem was rewritten to support desktop composing including flicker free drawing, double buffering, full alpha transparency, plugable composing effects, etc. Secondly, PE support has been dropped completely, and all libraries, applications, drivers, and the kernel are now ELF binaries. Thirdly, everything is now compiled with GCC 4.1.1 and the latest binutils. And last, but personally definitely not least: SkyOS now has support for BeOS people files. Other than the above, a lot of bugs were fixed as well.
Thread beginning with comment 142262
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
pandronic
Member since:
2006-05-18

... but if you had the source code to SkyOS, then hey, you could have a look at it and tinker with it and change and improve upon on it to your hearts content ...

... or maybe I am one of those crazy individuals that likes to get work done instead of tinkering on an open-source project to get it on par with the equivalent commercial product.

Let's not diss a project just because it's not open-source. I've seen a comment on another site today that said "I love Opera's features, but I'll use it when it will truly be free". No comment. Does it really matter if a product is free as in beer, free as in speach, or costs a reasonable amount of $$$ if it gets you where you want to go - for most proffesionals I doubt it matters.

Reply Parent Score: 1

mike hess Member since:
2005-08-22

@ pandronic

How many times have you downloaded a free program only to find that the developers have added "features" where the software tracks your online activity, displays loads of popups, or installs other unwanted software?

Or what about a perfectly well-meaning development team who simply releases a program with defects and security vulnerabilities. Now, its users are at the mercy of the vendor to provide patches to fix the defects, let alone provide those patches for free.

Free Software ensures that users have the final say in what runs on their computer. You don't have to be a programmers or a "tinkerer" to benefit from other people's tinkering, Mr. Professional.

Edited 2006-07-12 16:31

Reply Parent Score: 1

Morin Member since:
2005-12-31

> Or what about a perfectly well-meaning development team
> who simply releases a program with defects and security
> vulnerabilities. Now, its users are at the mercy of the
> vendor to provide patches to fix the defects, let alone
> provide those patches for free.

Yes, this happened to me with OSS projects several times. The program had defects and vulnerabilities, and there was no realistic[*] way to get these fixed except hope for the mercy of the developers. The only positive point was that, *if* such a patch came, if was for free.

[*] I am almost expecting here the answer that I could have hired a programmer. If anyone wants to say that, please think a moment about how much it costs to hire a programmer who is alien to a project, understand the whole thing, and then fix bugs.

EDIT: I think I have to add this to please the fanboys. I have also found many OSS projects to be well working and going. It just happens that OSS is no silver bullet to avoid such problems, and one should carefully judge on a case by case basis, OSS or not.

Edited 2006-07-12 17:19

Reply Parent Score: 2