Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 30th Jan 2009 20:58 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 346261
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[8]: Comment by ddd_
by umccullough on Fri 30th Jan 2009 19:31
in reply to "RE[7]: Comment by ddd_"
At this point it IS trying to be BeOS. In the future it strives to be more than that.
Hmm... probably splitting hairs, and definitely off-topic now, but I still disagree.
Even Haiku's compiler no longer even defines __BEOS__ - and there are MANY MANY changes in Haiku that definitely differ from BeOS.
It's a common misconception that Haiku aims to only re-create BeOS in it's R1 release, this simply isn't true. It only aims to be BeOS R5 compatible for the R1 release, saving anything that breaks such compatibility for R2 and later. It's a very fine difference, but a difference nonetheless.
Perhaps on the surface, it re-creates the BeOS look and feel, and much of the same functionality - but that doesn't mean it aims to be a drop-in replacement with exactly the same behavior.




Member since:
2006-01-26
No, let's not sugar-coat this - BeOS is pretty much dead. It's important to distinguish that Haiku != BeOS - BeOS was a closed source OS that is pretty much buried at this point.
Just because Haiku aims to be binary and source compatible with BeOS, and picks up on many of the same designs as BeOS, that doesn't make it BeOS.
However, I think it's fair to say the BeOS dream lives on with Haiku