Submitted by 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.
its a pitty it’s not an opensource OS.
Well it’s a pity that I can’t legaly hand it over to my friends for them to try, like I do with the Ubuntu CD’s. Other than that I don’t really care if it’s open or free as long as it’s good, and if it’s good it’s worth paying for(skyos is not good enough for me though). Linux is still there if you are addicted to 100% pure GPL software.
Besides, Haiku and Syllable are both open and similar to SkyOS in a lot of ways.
Its a pity that people think Open Source is the Holy Grail.
It’s also a pity that OSNews’ voting is still broken.
Voting’s not broken… you just need to have comments that people vote for to score voting points.. if you post rubbish, you don’t get any votes.
@memson
More like never criticize/say something in a realistic way about OSS and Macs or people’s unfounded hatred towards Microsoft.
People aren’t following the rules. The voting is broken and flawed. ‘Nuff said.
“unfounded hatred towards Microsoft”. Excuse me? You must have been frozen the last 10 or so years. There are enough reasons to hate Microsoft. One of the most important reasons, btw, is that Microsoft blocks any kind if progress.
Yeah, I hate them. But I also hate Apple for claiming superiority while shipping the same stuff everyone else ships.
@deb2006
One of the most important reasons, btw, is that Microsoft blocks any kind if progress.
What “progress” is being blocked?
Message to all sheep, only horses wore blinkers!
If I could download it, I’d check it out. Instead, I’d have to pay for something I’ve never seen before, so there’s a drastically smaller chance that I’ll ever see it.
I don’t mind that it’s closed and non-free. To me, that’s an interesting twist for a small project, and it gives the OS a bit more personality, in a way. But that doesn’t change the fact that I’m not paying to check out something I don’t know about, need, or have ever seen before.
It’s not exactly expensive, and if you are interested in Operating systems then its worth a look. It may never reach a stable, final version but I enjoy watching the project grow.
I agree completely. I’m just saying it makes it harder for the majority to get too excited.
Have you seen the new Kubuntu? I have. Pretty cool. Seen the new SkyOS? I haven’t. Looks excellent from screen shots and feature lists, but outside of that…
And I’m relatively poor, so I’d have to have more than a $10 USD disposable budget to buy a copy. Maybe I’m in the minority with this, but the fact stands, for me.
It’s definitely interesting, and if you’ve got the money and the interest, you’ll buy it, but that’s a trade-off against project visibility.
Well, Open Source is the Holy Grail. At least in the sense that every OS that comes along and wants money from me has to convince me that it’s better than an open source product. From the screenshots – I have nothing else to judge upon – I consider SkyOS a nice ittle toy; But I won’t pay money for that. Open Source has set the standards, and SkyOS doesn’t look as if it surpasses any of these. Sorry, folks.
It may not be that plainstyle thinks Open Source is the Holy Grail, 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 you could just have a look at how features have been implemented, or if you are not a programmer, you could pay a third party to make improvements for you.
All this of course license-permitting, – considering it is not sold/distributed under a free-license ( http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/free-sw.html ).
Open Source is still useful for Proprietary software, such as in the days of Unix.
Edited 2006-07-12 01:17
… 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.
@ 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
> 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
I used to be a big fan of this OS around the time they had the “UI Redesign” contest a few years ago.
Since then, they’ve had years of paid betas and not much else. Everything exciting about this project has been pretty much squandered. I mean, not to take anything from Robert, he’s a hell of a programmer, but Sky is no longer an OS i would consider using.
And what makes it worse is the increased reliance on GPL tools. At first, Sky had a lot of critism for using GPL software, and many accused Robert of violating the GPL as the only explanation for the quick development of the system. At the time, i thought those people were being ridiculous, but now its become crystal clear how indebt Sky is to Free software even if it is not a GPL violation. And there’s nothing Free (in any sense of the word) about SkyOS.
As a hobby project, Sky is still notable, but Gnu/Linux is really where the action is.
Maybe once SkyOS gets critical mass, Robert might opensource it; right now, the only way to make money, given the very small user base, is to keep it closed source; I’m sure once there are 100,000 users, and 10% of them paying $10 per release, he’ll cover his costs, but until such a day occurs, I don’t see it being opensource.
As for Roberts contribution; as far as I see it, he is giving back in terms of the port to SkyOS of the compiler, the changes and bug fixes he probably needed to make etc. Giving back to the community isn’t always adding new features.
It’s a pitty you haven’t devoted years of your life to writing something comparable and making it open source. Had you done this, we wouldn’t have to hear your kind of comments in seemingly every SkyOS related OSNews article.
@mattst88 (1.96)
Your comments would be well-founded were it not for the fact that SkyOS uses GPL projects left and right.
While i don’t believe there’s any true GPL violations present (though i can’t say i’ve really looked), Sky is still “Standing on the Shoulder of Giants” in a big way.
Sky may not be violating the GPL from a legal perspective, it is violating the spirit of the GPL.
Edited 2006-07-11 22:04
I’m sure you know that Mac OS X is compiled with gcc? Do you have the same stance towards Apple? How about all the BSDs? They certainly aren’t GPL’d products.
So what if GTK and some related apps have been ported to SkyOS? So it’s nice to have more than one option available for GUI programming. If someone writes a good text editor for SkyOS, why would anyone use Abiword? I think of the GTK apps as placeholders until native alternatives are available. Scribis, a jabber client, is being written currently. Forget Gaim.
I’m sure people (you) would like to point out Firefox and Thunderbird are open source software also. Just yesterday I read in the Syllable article where the reviewer wrote something about why not dumb their native browser (ABrowse) in favor of Firefox? I thought one of the advantages of open source software was that it could be easily ported to various operating systems?
You just can’t win.
The truly unfortunate part about his comment is that all non-FOSS violates the spirit of the GPL…
Really, probably all non-OSS violates the spirit of all OSS licenses. However, you don’t see nearly the close-knit community surrounding the BSD or MIT licenses that you see in the FSF and GPL followers.
SkyOS just happens to be majorly benefiting from the spirit while violating it. I doubt anyone is too upset, the boost of “hey look who needs us” is probably more flattering than “look who’s using us” is insulting.
Probably.
its a pitty it’s not an opensource OS.
And it’s a pity that junk comment like this is modded up to the max.
Wooo finally an update, can’t wait to actually try it this time around with my new ram
We are experiencing server configuration problems at skyos.org. Please bear with us until this is fixed. Check back in an hour or so. Thanks.
I cant seem to get to the forums to download the new iso. Now I’m just curious to know if its my work box or there site:)
The site is down currently, and the new beta will be released 16th July 2006.
Edit – here’s a screenshot http://img485.imageshack.us/img485/6051/scr10oj.png
and a screenshot of skyos.org main http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/5029/zrzutekranu10tg.png
Edited 2006-07-11 18:35
SkyOS is a good hobby OS even if it isn’t OSS. I bought a copy a year or so ago, it’s a decent price for a good goal. I don’t expect them to be my “everyday” operating system and I don’t expect them to continue development.
I feel as I was donating, to help a new OS. Robert is an amazing programmer and he does almost everything solo. For that he deserves everything he is getting.
I’ve noticed lately that they are keeping up with trends (desktop compositing, beagle/winfs like features) maybe these things will draw more users, if not it’s ok.
Native SkyOS apps are the only thing that for a long time were missing now there is Scribis (a XMPP/jabber messenger) based on Gloox, http://www.scribis.tk/ and many little games and such. Scribis release it’s self in a quasi oss license, you can look at the source and patch it but do no copying or forking.
Overall SkyOS is still in heavy development and that’s what makes it interesting to me, I’ll probably be using Windows or Linux at home at least for now, but I can always play with SkyOS.
SkyOS.org is up again.
Yes forums are up and running again! Unfortunately I have to wait to get the updates via .iso . I have had fun woth Skyos it reminds me of my early days of BeOS. I run it thru VMware and native (So I can have wifi support) Anyway if you consider yourself an OS enthusiast $30 isnt worth worrying about to play with a new one. Ive spent more on a laptop with generic hardware to run all my OS’s. I hope SkyOS takes off and flourishes, it has many great design ideas I hope to see become standard.
Rain, what ever happend to Casper ?
Dispite misgivings … I really think it needs a good BASIC language with no runtimes (thus rules out .NET and Freebasic …
) Pascal and C/variant is nice and all, however ….
sky os deserves it chance to be proud and show what true programmers can do unlike the hacks at microsoft(who for there life cant seem to program), apple is using the same tactics as they did with there ppc systems and that only certain computers can run it(and yes having a all-in-one system sucks) and finally linux. if a turtle can move any slower it would be in a comma. Personal i like linux alot but it stills feels incomplete in so many ways. as the old saying too many cooks spoil the soup. Sky os needs to get drivers for 3d and games that show case the speed of the system and applications that show off aswell. I would be happy to buy skyos and support there team but when they come out of closed beta, i will be one of the frist to buy it. And i am glad there really taking the time and working with the desktop features and making it user friendly(is there really a thing. I used to use dos to run windows
)
…I’ve paid for it twice because I lost my login id/pwd for BETA and they wouldn’t help me out. So now, as I said I have paid twice and in the meantime I have moved 2700 miles away, and now if it is EVER released (because part of being in the BETA program is that you will get the released version when it comes out) it will ship to my old address and be returned… and once again, yes I know, my own fault for being poorly organized, I have forgotten my u/p for the beta forums to inform them my address has changed.
HOWEVER… I don’t really CARE — because the two copies I have received (in various stages of development) never worked on my PC hardware, at least not well and not for long.
I have found the various linux distributions and BSDs to be 100% more reliable, and have run on every piece of hardware I have owned.
So, if you are thinking about plunking down $$$ for a copy of this software in its BETA form, I would suggest trying a mainstream linux or BSD first. And I am not an OS advocate or anything, I actually have 4 macs (all running OS X) right now and no PCs… I just think the work that has been done on them (linux/bsd) and the quality of them is nothing short of inspirational.
I am not saying that SkyOS is a dud, not at all! It seems pretty cool and has great appeal, especially for an ex-BeOS user (who hopes to return to it again triumphantly with Haiku), but at the moment, it costs money, is limited on hardware, WAS somewhat buggy (might be 100% better now), the official release is who-knows-how-far away… yet linux and the free/net bsd’s already offer everything they hope to offer and they are free. And by the time SkyOS IS released, the GUI’s and available software on them will only be better and getting better all the time.
I don’t know. I DO applaud the SkyOS team for its hard work in making their own dream come true… it’s just not for me I am afraid.
You don’t understand the term ‘hobby OS’ do you?
Oh I do. And I understand that means more lengthy periods of development. But… I am just saying that if you can have it all now…
How come no one talks of new unique features. This looks like any other operating system, maybe with a little better eye candy. This article tells me nothing… except maybe people only care about eye candy. I guess most people just browse the internet and do email. I hope the editors of osnews can offer a little more substantial articles than just screen shots.
Another Herculean work done…
Many we should thank Robert by doing the same for him as we did for google : turn Robert Szeleney into a verb !
“To robert something” would mean “to do something in a quick, efficient and unanticipated way, that would let people voiceless in admiration and disbelief”, etc..
As for the ignorant and spoiled OS-news people whining about the closeness of the SkyOS project or it’s “not-yet-ready-for-everyday-use state”,
maybee you should try roberting some actual work
for a change.
Szeleneying (indulging oneself) into a huge project is really hard and time-consuming. It’would be nice if you could understand that and if you stopped whinning childishly about SkyOS.
Thanks.
Lakedaemon
Doesn’t help. If the OS is not usable there can be hundreds of Roberts. Fact is that the software is beta (that as such is no problem), that you are supposed to pay for a beta of an OS you have no idea whether it works with you hardware or not (that is HIGHLY problematic), and – last but not least – that SkyOS has compete with operating systems that have set standards and that are open source (*Linux, *BSD).
My suggestion: give the beta away to anyone who might be interested. That way you get lots of necessary feeedback. After the beta period has ended you can then sell it. That’s the way it works. After all SkyOS is not Mac OS X Public Beta …
Once upon a time I cared about this. It seemed like a good project and likely to bear fruit… Then it went commercial, the author decided not to open source it ever (he was originally planning to release the source once he got it to a point he liked) and the whole thing lost its interest.
What hardware is supported by the OS? I didn’t see a supported HW list or HCL anywhere. Kinda stuck with a certain vid card and would like to see if it worked or not before helping fund it. Be and yT have yet to support my card, and it’s listed on the HCL. A link would be great, thanks.
It happens every time SkyOS is mentioned, the whingers and whiners come out. They’re like people who moan about crap programs on television. As with the TV – if you don’t like it, find something useful to do and look elsewhere.
Why don’t you apply your own policy on yourself? If you don’t like the whiners stop whining about them and look elsewhere.
Edited 2006-07-12 01:15
Seems to me that’s the point of this comment area; to voice your opinion(s) on the subject of the article and article itself.
Off topic:
Your post is a great example of why we need anchor voting on this site. I don’t want to vote you down, I just don’t think you should get a 5 for what you’ve said.
In a democracy, I believe it’s only the wannabe autocrats who denigrate and rubbish opposing views in order to undermine them (and either your are proud of being an autocrat, and will feel good about this term being applied to you, or you are not proud, in which case you will find that defending your views will be difficult. In neither case would I be denigrating you).
I really hates when FOSS zealots dismiss the whole code work of somebody because it is not FOSS.
Instead of commenting on the code works people keep ranting about licenses and politics… One thing people never told me, and that might be a good question for FOSS advocates out there. If you’re a single coder trying to make a living by creating your own operating system, even if you take care not to violate licenses of the libraries and support tools you use, how you’re suppose to make money? like eating, paying the rent and stuff. Remember you’re small and you decided to live out of your little project… I’d really like people insight on this and if anyone from the SkyOS Team can shed a word or two about how their beta support initiative is working…
@ soapdog
I can’t speak for everyone in this thread, but i’m certainly not dismissing the work. I am saying that for a developer who is using quite a large amount of open source software to get his propriatary project up, he’s really not giving much of anything back.
As for your “good question”, i think you should go back and ask yourself how realistic it is for one coder to not only create his own operating system, but to also make a living on it.
Its one thing to have a hobby system, any code someone writes for their own purposes is good. But an OS created by one person is surely not going to compare to a collaborative project. No one is an expert in every aspect of Operating System design.
@Mike
Hi mike, thanks for the input. What I am thinking for example is that Windows Mobile is horrible (I have an iPaq so I can tell), Palm OS is pretty much dead so there’s an oportunity for some enterprizing coder to try to build something on that market, or a group of coders (most likelly). I know about Linux kernel versions and some distros targeted at PDA but it seems overkill and like shrunked to the tiny screen and pen…
I don’t know how realistic would be to try that, but I for one, would certainly erase my windows mobile for something usable.
@ soapdog
i’m not really sure where this new Palm/WinMobile topic is coming from.
Are you seriously considering starting this project yourself in the hopes of making a living off of it?
I think your view of what “Linux” is is a little bit small. Linux is just a kernel. If you’re concerned about a “shrunken” UI, it would be far easier to start with the kernel and build a new UI or adapt an existing UI than to write the whole system from scratch.
There are two sides to this, one side is that an amazing amount of code has been written and this is a cool and interesting piece of work and kudos to Robert, and rightly so.
The other side points out that they are probably not going to pay their hard-earned cash for a hobby operating system, and also rightly so.
The issue that I see is that people have to remember that ones desire to use a product and ones respect for its technical merits are separate and the people who are not going to use SkyOS because of its license, myself included, must remember that that in no way detracts from the feat that writing an operating system entails and the coolness factor of doing so. There are many operating systems that I will probably never use, but I still wish them well and am excited that they exist because more choices and options in a market-space is always a good thing. Plus, projects like this are just plain cool.
In closing, if Robert gets his kicks out of lots of people anonymously trying his product then FOSS would be the way to go, but if he wants to make a little cash from his work and have more controlled feedback, I don’t see the issue. Lets not dis his baby because his priorities are a little different than those of some people who would like to use it as an FOSS desktop. If you insist of FOSS, there are plenty of other projects, eg. Syllable to fill the niche.
–Seth
He should be working on the drivers more,but SkyOS’s iCandy rivals Aqua.
Even though SkyOS is a good project, i hate the asshole robert for stealing most of the GPL stuff and rebranding it in skyOS.
He even stole Mono. If you are a true programmer, right your own code or share it. Don’t be a leecher.
He even stole Mono. If you are a true programmer, right your own code or share it. Don’t be a leecher.
Where ? When ? Wow, there’s Windows port of Mono and nobody whines.
——–
I think that the only reason for such comments is that some whiners want to force Robert to release SkyOS source code.
I’m sure that 99.(9)% of average users don’t care about the source.
I think that the only reason for such comments is that some whiners want to force Robert to release SkyOS source code.
That’s not the issue. He needs to respect various licenses for different open source software about source code availability, because he’s distributing a lot of open source software. Certainly, if he’s modified the code of these open source applications then he’s clearly obligated to release it, depending on the license. The LGPL certainly requires it. He needs to do this regardless of whether people have paid or are part of the beta or not.
Many are trying to turn the tables on this and claim that people are trying to get him to release the SkyOS source code. That isn’t the case at all.
All you have to do is ask…
I’m sure that 99.(9)% of average users don’t care about the source.
Wakey-wakey. You’re on OSnews, a site where most people do care about the source. And most of the 99% don’t even know what source and Linux are.
please say “source code” if you mean that, otherwise, I’m not sure you know what “source” is.
One of the worst things about SkyOS is that they *HAVE NOT* released the sources for the GPLed programs they have modified (for example Firefox ot GTK+).
See this : http://www.skyos.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=20802
There is a statement in GregV’s comment:
“When the final version of SkyOS is complete (aka SkyOS 5) the source of all modified applications will be downloadable, at least to those who own the system.”
What does this mean? This is a clear violation of the GPL. The current versions of SkyOS ship with GPLed Apps so their source should be available *NOW* to the customers of SkyOS.
Edited 2006-07-12 10:18
If I’m not mistaken, GregV isn’t a member of the SkyOS development team and I have read somewhere that if you want the source of the Gpled apps included in SkyOS, you just have to ask to robert.
On a side note (this is speculation), if I correctly understand what “Factory” is, the sources for all ported applications should be included in the SkyOS system as “Factory” should allow you to build them.
(Robert, I think that you never explained what Factory really does, you know…:D)
On the other hand, with my very very very limited understanding of the legal GPL terms, I believe that you don’t have to release the sources of GPL apps that you don’t release publicly/that you use only internally…
And as the beta programm can be (arguably) considered as an in house use of the GPL software, the SkyOS shouldn’t have legally to release the sources for the GPL apps before the first official SkyOS public release (but they said they would for anybody who would ask, which is nice of ’em).
Please notice that I’m no part of the SkyOS Team, so please, don’t flame them…you are welcomed to bash me though
Cheers,
Lakedaemon
Well actually this is a public beta which they sell for $30. This is not an internal alpha or something. So they must release the sources to those who have bought the beta license.
As far as I see this factory thing is a kind of like portage on Gentoo or more correctly apt-source on Debian.
But the sources should be available in a more convinient form.
This is slightly off-topic but I think the SkyOS team doesn’t give the open source apps their due in SkyOS. The majority of the usable apps are open source. SkyOS is really just the kernel and libraries.
If you are a beta tester, all you have to do is ask. Even if you aren’t a beta tester, I’m sure Robert will have no qualms with making it available. It’s not like we’re trying to keep it a secret or anything.
Yeah, as Lakedeamon pointed out, I am not a member of the Development Team (I havn’t been on a SkyOS-run team since the 4-alphas).
Now, to answer your question:
What does this mean?
What do you think it means? When SkyOS FINAL is released people can download the source to the modified versions.
As far as my understanding of the GPL goes: Robert doesn’t have to release the sources of the modified applications until the final version of the program is released. Also, concerning the “internal” release, maybe thats why Robert has people *join* the beta programme, so they become part of the SkyOS internal community… dunno just a thought…
Edit:
If you read THE POST BELOW MINE Chris Marshall clears things up… Lazy zealots :/
Edited 2006-07-13 04:32
I don’t care how brilliant this Robert is when it comes to software engineering, because he seems to completely lack basic marketing knowledge. Why would anyone want to pay for an unfinished product that doesn’t add any real value compared to free and finished products? Heck, even Microsoft release their Vista betas to the public.
You don’t have to read books about marketing to realize that in order to attract potential customers, you need to offer FREE betas. When your product is finished, charge for it if you want. Hopefully, by then you will have a big enough user base to make a profit. But charging for unfinished beta software is, simply put, insane.
Of course, the fact that the OS is of beta quality is not the only reason why no one should be willing to pay for it. Here are other reasons:
1. It doesn’t have a development roadmap. SkyOS 5.0 has no release date. You don’t know where the author of this OS is going, what the intentions are, and where it might be in the future. There’s absolutely no guarantee that the OS will still be available tomorrow. You simply pay for testing an unfinished product that lacks a development plan.
2. It doesn’t offer any compelling advantages over other (free or commercial) OSes. There’s not even an easily available list of basic features of this OS. The website doesn’t even try to sell the product by convincing the visitor why he/she should pay. What do I gain as a user by paying for this beta OS? Newest copy of SkyOS Programmer’s Book? Earth to Robert: This should be available to anyone who would like to support your work and develop programs for the OS!
3. It doesn’t have a defined target audience. The FAQ mentions the “average home desktop user”. How on earth are they going to attract such users when no part of the website speaks their language? Most of the FAQ (which by the way is the only place where you can find some actual facts about the operating system) uses a highly technical language and talks about Linux, *nix, KDE, XFree86, and GPL. Good luck attracting Joe average user with that technical mumbo jumbo.
I could probably go on, but I think you get the point. The only reason why anyone would like to pay for SkyOS at its current state is to support the work. And the only sane thing would be to add a PayPal button and encourage people to do so, instead of forcing everyone with a remote interest to pay.
If people vote [-] because they don’t agree, so be it.
Actually, the price of FREE is more of a turn off than a nominal fee. Most people will go by the saying “if it sounds too good to be true it probably is” and won’t mind paying a few dollars to beta test some good stuff. They at least feel that the producer has some measure of responsibility since they’re charging for it.
And, TMK, they give you the release when it comes out, so you’re buying the release a little cheaper and supporting a guy developing his own OS.
Obviously they don’t hope to attain mass appeal at this point.
djst,
I completely agree with you. I have a huge issue with paying for beta software for many of the reasons above. However, to comment on point 1 specifically; a few months (maybe years) back SkyOS had an alias off of their main site called http://nvidia.skyos.org which was basically a pitch to Nvidia to buy(?) the OS… So lets say hypothetically that Nvidia buys skyOS then 5.0 would be released and future support would be canned because another company now owns the rights.
JG
Can you provide any evidence of this?
I ask because I’ve never heard anything like this before.
mattst88: I can not as the site has been down for a while and it was not made public knowledge. What I can give you is my word
But if your word is based on in-accurate information….is it worth anything?
You should probably try to gather facts before making bold claims.
The site in question (http://nvidia.skyos.org) was not a pitch to NVIDIA to purchase SkyOS. At no point in time have we ever attempted to sell SkyOS to NVIDIA, nor any other company. This website was more or less a marketing website showing off the features of SkyOS to representatives at the NVIDIA corporation, in an attempt to gain interest from them, allowing us to support their hardware. Unfortunately, it did not work out.
I’m afraid that your example does not go very far in proving your intended point (that we would simply pack up and stop developing SkyOS). This is why it is so important to do research before making bold claims.
Kelly: It was hypothetical guy.
It was hypothetically based on nothing. You might as well have said that if Walt Disney was indeed frozen at the time of his death, if scientists somehow found a way to revive him, there is a chance that he would buy SkyOS.
We haven’t ever shown any interest in selling the rights to SkyOS, so I don’t see why you are trying to create hypothetical situations to demonstrate that scenario (based on false information, no less).
Walt Disney bought SkyOS? Get out!
And no part of my post was I making it a solid point that SkyOS was for sale to Nvidia… It’s just what it looked like, and I was stating my view. That is all. No need to get teary eyed guy.
> I don’t care how brilliant this Robert is when it comes
> to software engineering, because he seems to completely
> lack basic marketing knowledge.
Well, basic marketing knowledge tells me that if he makes money this way (which he does, otherwise he’d have changed direction), then he does something right, at least in the short run.
Thanks for the suggestions, your advice is much appreciated. However, we are doing just fine with our beta program (which has been much, much, MUCH more successful than we ever imagined it would be a few years back).
according to matt turnr and tomas d, there’s a bit over a thousand registered beta testers.
skyos 5 has been around for 3 years.
in 3 years you’ve managed to get 1000 users (not even users just registered testers), if thats much, much, MUCH more succesful than you ever imagined it would be you must have set your sights damn low.
> in 3 years you’ve managed to get 1000 users (not even
> users just registered testers), if thats much, much,
> MUCH more succesful than you ever imagined it would be
> you must have set your sights damn low.
Just a question. If you started a desktop OS project from scratch, that tries to compete with Windows, Linux, OSX and similar giants… what would *your* expactations be?
a late comment but I wanted to clear some things up about factory…
Factory is indeed something similar to portage in the way that is downloads the sources from the official location, applies patches which are included with skyos (in standard patch files) and compiles it with the necessary option to get it to work in skyos.
Some of these patches have been reported to the developpers but until they are included in the official releases they are still used.
So for those who payed for the beta, all changes to software are available immediately and anyone who wants them can get the patches if they just make the effort to ask for them.
concerning gpl and skyos sources, the kernel and GUI system sources are not using gpl software as far as I know (hell, even microsoft could be using gpl software in their closed source software)
You can mix different licenses in a software project, including gpl. gpl clearly states that you have to use gpl for your software if you use or link against gpl software. Ported gpl libraries and applications are available to extend the bare skyos system in userland without linking it to kernel or gui stuff.
there are a lot more comments that might need a response but I doubt it will make any difference
(I’m not part of the skyos team, just a contributer)