Saturday November 8, I received an email from someone, inquiring if I would be interested in "doing a first interview/introduction into a new operating system". We get these emails and news submissions all the time, and most of the time, "new operating system" means Ubuntu-with-a-black-theme, so we don't bother. I figured this time things wouldn't be different, but after a bit of digging around, there's a little more to it this time.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-01-24
poundsmack wrote:
-"While there are less drivers for it the kernel itself is more stable and has far less overhead."
Far less overhead? iirc it's a hard realtime kernel, hence it sacrifices some efficieny in order to execute prioritized threads at exact times, also since basically everything runs as a user process it seems to me it pretty much must have more overhead than Linux, if you have any facts you can point to that shows otherwise I'd be very interested.
As for Anubis choice of Linux, my guess is that it mainly boils down to hardware support. Don't quite understand the 'stripping' part though, it's not as if the Linux kernel is bloated, particuarly not for what I assume is a desktop oriented os.
While I've always liked Aros due to my Amiga nostalgia, lack of memory protection (guru meditation memories comes back to haunt me) and smp etc isn't the best foundation on which to build a system for modern use. Add to that an API which really hasn't stood the test of time (imo).
So yes, I can definately understand that some developers might want to implement an Amiga-ish environment over a small, very fast kernel with broad hardware support. On the other hand I can also see why people who like Aros will see this as a bad thing.
However it is their spare time and I'm absolutely certain that they are the experts on how they want to spend it.
I wish them luck and will file this under 'another one to keep an eye on' while I passionately continue to stalk... follow the Haiku development.
Member since:2005-07-13
while there are tons of QNX vs LInux articles i could fine, none of them were comapiring QNX to the 2.6 linux kernel so I chose this one, ( http://www.qnx.com/news/pr_2870_1.html ).
I can verify this is correct that QNX can boot in a few seconds and is lightning quick and utalizes (at least on intel) multi core CPU's better than linux currently ( as up 2.6.27.5 ) as i have and develop for both. this has actualy promted me to do a bench marking of the 2 systems, both in just kernel and text mode, as well as light weight GIU's (linux with something like fluxbox, and QNX with photon).
but as someone who uses embeded version of QNX and linux daily i can honestly say QNX is faster in boot, alication load, and data write to the file system. as far as apication usage and responsiveness, well that usualy depends on the app, so it's a toss up.
Edited 2008-11-11 16:28 UTC
Member since:
2005-07-13
if you really want ot take a kernel to build on top of dont take linux. Take something like QNX. While there are less drivers for it the kernel itself is more stable and has far less overhead. With all due respect for linux (and i mean try linux, the kernel) there are better things to use as a templete for creating a "new" OS. NetBSD 5's code base would be another good example, small, fast, moduler. But I wish them the best of luck.
also as far as OS's that have taking the linux kernel and tried their own thing, there is also The Athene Operating System ( http://www.rocklyte.com/athene/ ). I happen to like them white a bit, and their omega workd bend GUI reminds me of my old Amiga 4000t. good times.
Edited 2008-11-10 23:22 UTC