Cosmoe version 0.5.7 was released on Monday, September 23rd. A snapshot of the progress on DirectFB-based Cosmoe 0.6 is also available for developers who wish to work on it. Check the mailing list for more information.
New Cosmoe Release
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
I think Cosmoe is not getting the attention it deserves. In contrast to OpenBeOS and BlueEyedOS, I can download and run Cosmoe and even compile Pulse on it
OK, it’s not a BeOS clone.
Is Cosmoe a BeOS clone?
No, Cosmoe is an OS unique from BeOS which happens to have some compatibility features which make it highly compatible with existing and new BeOS source code.
But it’s close.
Except being based on DirectFB really worries me. If you look at this page:
http://directfb.org/modules.xml
you get the impression that video card support is very poor, and will likely remain that way forever. Anyone have some insight into how this would affect real daily use? Would DirectFB have a chance of becoming popular/mainstream enough for daily use?
(Bill, you reading this? :-))
It appears as if DirectFB has more video drivers than OBOS…
..but still maaaaaaaaany less than XFree86! Am I missing something here, like w/o special DirectFB drivers, things will still be snappy enough for normal use, just won’t have alpha blending, etc…? Still kinda stinks though.
From reading the faq, I get the impression he’s not all that ambitious about Cosmoe:
I didn’t (and still don’t) have any aspiration of taking over the world with it. The design and coding of operating systems is very interesting to me, and it’s been a great learning experience. Hopefully you can find some fun and usefulness in Cosmoe as well.
Though, he contrasts that by adding:
Having said that, I should add that I do take Cosmoe very seriously and plan on devoting significant time to developing it into a top-notch OS.
So I’m not sure what to make of it.
This item is interesting too:
Should I use the native Cosmoe API or the Be API for new programs?
Either one is fully capable of creating Cosmoe applications, but the Be API may actually be a better bet since the number of operating systems that can compile it is much larger and the documentation is better.
So why have a separate Cosmoe API?
It should be noted that not just the DirectFB is being built into Cosmoe’s app_server but rather much of the DirectFB code base. This is more of a way to jumpstart an update to the app_server rather than an easy way to get drivers..Also note that none of us wanted to try to sort through enough of the X code to seperate out the drivers.
If there is no driver for a chipset the system will ( or at least should ) fall back on a VESA standard framebuffer.
It’s not a perfect solution but it’s an great way to get input and video drivers plus maybe OpenGL, 2d accel, and Alpha channels.