Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 9th Apr 2012 12:02 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless RIM has announced it's going to remove the PlayBook's ability to sideload applications. The company claims it's to prevent the piracy problems in the "chaotic cesspool of Android Market". However, the company provided no evidence, studies, or whatever to back up their claims. Considering the state of RIM's business, I'd say the company has bigger fish to fry, but alas. At this point, I'm just hoping they don't do a BeOS, but open the QNX code before they go belly-up.
Thread beginning with comment 513278
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
QNX to FSF = HURD
by miker on Mon 9th Apr 2012 13:33 UTC
miker
Member since:
2009-07-08

QNX is the only successful microkernal POSIX operating system. I have thought for awhile, that donating QNX to the FSF is the only way Hurd will ever become a reality.

Reply Score: 3

RE: QNX to FSF = HURD
by CapEnt on Mon 9th Apr 2012 14:29 in reply to "QNX to FSF = HURD"
CapEnt Member since:
2005-12-18

I think otherwise: it's the fastest way to bury Hurd into oblivion, since QNX will swallow his few active developers if open sourced.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: QNX to FSF = HURD
by demetrioussharpe on Mon 9th Apr 2012 20:30 in reply to "RE: QNX to FSF = HURD"
demetrioussharpe Member since:
2009-01-09

I think otherwise: it's the fastest way to bury Hurd into oblivion, since QNX will swallow his few active developers if open sourced.


Either that, or bury QNX in the developmental hell that's HURD development. Injecting a working system into a broken system doesn't always yield good results. More than likely, the HURD developers would try to make QNX match the HURD philosophy, ruining QNX in the process.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: QNX to FSF = HURD
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Mon 9th Apr 2012 14:29 in reply to "QNX to FSF = HURD"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

The problem with HURD is not the lack of a viable microkernel, its with HURD's complex design and ambitious goals combined with lack of developer resources.

In retrospect, they probably should have in the name of freedom, just done a FOSS unix-like clone. Its pretty clear the FOSS market chose that in GNU/Linux, rather than trying to realize the HURD.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: QNX to FSF = HURD
by demetrioussharpe on Mon 9th Apr 2012 20:32 in reply to "RE: QNX to FSF = HURD"
demetrioussharpe Member since:
2009-01-09

The problem with HURD is not the lack of a viable microkernel, its with HURD's complex design and ambitious goals combined with lack of developer resources.

In retrospect, they probably should have in the name of freedom, just done a FOSS unix-like clone. Its pretty clear the FOSS market chose that in GNU/Linux, rather than trying to realize the HURD.


Right! At this stage of the game, HURD's the poster child for vaperware.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: QNX to FSF = HURD
by Thom_Holwerda on Mon 9th Apr 2012 14:39 in reply to "QNX to FSF = HURD"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

QNX is the only successful microkernal POSIX operating system. I have thought for awhile, that donating QNX to the FSF is the only way Hurd will ever become a reality.


I highly doubt QNX can be made FSF-compliant open source. It's chock-full of patented and proprietary technology (i.e. drivers).

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: QNX to FSF = HURD
by fithisux on Tue 10th Apr 2012 08:28 in reply to "RE: QNX to FSF = HURD"
fithisux Member since:
2006-01-22

Yes but special drivers could be removed. Moreover Hurd could work with Darwin Mach version and enhance it. The bonus : IOKIt.

Reply Parent Score: 2