Home > SkyOS > SkyOS Integrated Video System SkyOS Integrated Video System Submitted by Proph3t 2004-09-30 SkyOS 72 Comments New Integrated Video system and updated ISS has been completed for beta 8, with a focus on simplicity. Work has been done to integrate everything into the OS, and there are three new juicy screenshots showing it all off. About The Author Eugenia Loli Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker. Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli 72 Comments 2004-09-30 1:11 am Anonymous Does anyone else feel less excited by SkyOS lately? I mean, i’m still impressed as hell at the work Robert and company are doing, but i dunno. Lately i feel like linux is stepping up to the point where it might actually live up to the hype. The Xorg-6.8, Gnome 2.8, Cairo, Storage, Dashboard, Project Utopia, it’s all really starting to come together and i’m looking forward to that more than i am SkyOS. Don’t get me wrong though, you guys are doing brilliant work, maybe you should think about an actual release soon. Mike 2004-09-30 1:16 am Anonymous SkyOS is progressing fine considering its coded by just a few people. I find the new version 5.0 very exciting and in many respects its worlds ahead of many, older hobby OSes. 2004-09-30 1:23 am Anonymous This getting really nice I can’t wait for the final 5.0 and mike, I don’t want them to release 5.0 without testing the crap out of it and adding loads of stuff. I hate when companies/groups release when theres still numerous bugs to be ironed out. I’d rather have to wait and get a 99% bug free version. And please don’t start with the linux stuff….. 2004-09-30 1:39 am Anonymous First of all, SkyOS is one of the most exciting operating systems I can think of. I mean, I switched to linux because it was the only real alternative. I know and like linux alot, and I doubt i’ll make a major switch like this again, but if something exciting came along(somewhat like BeOS) such as SkyOS, I’d definitely think about it. I just recently got all my hardware to finally work on my Sony Vaio. Wireless, et al. So this pleases me. This new video system at work in SkyOS looks pretty robust to me, considering Windows didn’t have that kind of thing until what, WindowsME/2k? So kudos to the SkyOS developers. They’re plowing through at breakneck speeds. When 5.0 is finally released, I plan on buying it to give it a test spin. Who knows, maybe I’ll switch again. And as far as linux being hyped, what exactly are you smoking? I don’t think I’ve ever seen linux hyped. Nerds love it for its nerdiness, and thats about it. 2004-09-30 1:55 am Anonymous Above said that three screenshots, but I only can see two. I found one missing screenshot is mount/umount stuff at SkyOS offical website in news. http://www.skyos.org/images/mount.png 2004-09-30 2:13 am Anonymous “Don’t get me wrong though, you guys are doing brilliant work, maybe you should think about an actual release soon.” We’re getting there, but it is still going to be a while yet. 2004-09-30 2:30 am Anonymous I’m very tempted to buy the beta, but I’m just not sure what to do with it yet. There’s not many apps for it and I don’t like the API so coding isn’t an option. Unless python is available that is? Btw, is the C++ API ready for use yet? As for the looks. Some parts are really nice, but it doesn’t look very professional. I still think you should contact Ross Harvey(http://www.web9design.com/) and ask him if he wants to contribute to the GUI. 2004-09-30 2:40 am Anonymous i want the best quality posible…and if that takes time i can wait…. 2004-09-30 2:45 am Anonymous Its nice to see the rapid pace of progress. For SkyOS, it means a nice operating system. For *nix developers, it makes them twitch and hurry to implement stuff that should’ve been there years ago. We both win. Long live and prosper, SkyOS! 2004-09-30 3:06 am Anonymous I do not think the screenshots are that juicy. I can’t Wait to use this os for the first time when it is out 2004-09-30 3:19 am Anonymous And as far as linux being hyped, what exactly are you smoking? I don’t think I’ve ever seen linux hyped. Congratulations on waking up from the coma. 2004-09-30 5:18 am Anonymous the c++ api is very much ready to use and there is a python port for b8 (which is not yet out)…im very much looking forward to the next beta release considering how much has changed since b7. 2004-09-30 7:21 am Anonymous And let’s all not forget the new graphical mount, done in much the same way as BeOS does it: via the context menu . 2004-09-30 7:49 am Anonymous I am really excited about SkyOS and would like to try out SkyOS (beta or whatever) but I don’t want to pay for anything. Is there a way? 2004-09-30 8:08 am Anonymous There is no other way. Becoming a beta team member costs 30USD/25E, and it will get you access to ALL v5.0 betas/RCs + v5.0 final, and the updates after that (5.1, 5.2 etc). Thirty bucks/tweny-five Euro’s isn’t too much to ask. However, if you’re used to eDonkey and free Linux distributions… Then paying for an OS might come on to you as a shock . 2004-09-30 8:23 am Anonymous Thanks for the info. Perhaps b8 will be something worth spending money on then. I’d rather do that than pay for some linux distro. I wish projects like Haiku and Syllable could show this kind of progress. I guess they could need a $carrot. 2004-09-30 8:51 am Anonymous sky os is shaping up to be a rather impressive system, like beos of old, but, dare I say it, almost better? I’m very much looking forward to seeing in action. I hope that when it finally goes live, they can afford to employ a marketing person to spread the word. 2004-09-30 9:22 am Anonymous I wish projects like Haiku and Syllable could show this kind of progress. What kind of progress are you looking for? Syllable 0.5.4 was released this week with a totally new desktop and supporting framework, one of the single biggest changes in any single release. If you mean media specifically, Syllable has had a complete media framework for a year now. We’re not showing progress in things like this because we’ve already done it. SkyOS has some things that Syllable does not (E.g. GTK+, a pretty GUI) and Syllable has some things that SkyOS does not (E.g. more drivers, a mature network stack). I don’t want to turn this into (yet another) Syllable v’s SkyOS flamewar so it’s probably best if this is modded down. 2004-09-30 10:48 am Anonymous I still do not see what is so exciting about SkyOS? OK, I bet it would load fast and the GUI would be more responsive if compared to some other systems ( ie. Linux or Windows XP ) but I guess this is only becaus there is only a small subset of features wanted by todays average user is already implemented. My XP was fast as hell after first time installation – now with all the things required for daily work, it is not so fast anymore… I also do not see any pretty GUI on the screenshots. Certainly this is subjective but I have not seen any improvement compared to others ( Windows, GNOME, maybe KDE ) on any SkyOS screenshots. With Linux and Windows heading to new things like OpenGL based compositing managers for the GUI which will give many chances to improve usability ( like MacOS X does ), how does SkyOS compare to that? ( I see that SkyOS might be able to render OpenGL but then again it will fail because of lacking accelerated drivers 🙁 ) This new ISS is not really an OS feature – some library can do just the same as advertised by SkyOS ( get video playback in some application in 5-10 lines of code ). It would be great if they wrote a portable library doing this stuff instead of implementing this as an “OS feature” and letting others reinvent this wheel for their systems too. I do not see any architectual innovation in this system. Once I was interested in writing drivers for firewire interfaces and asked where to get a developer version of SkyOS. I did not get any response and now I know why: I would have to buy a beta. Since I do not see why I should pay for something I want to contribute work ( and time ) to – I went for other ( Linux 🙂 ) projects but thus I unfortunately still do not now if their driver architecture is any better than WDM or Linux. So could anybody just say what it is with SkyOS that should be better than on other OSes? 2004-09-30 11:34 am Anonymous What SkyOS has that (some) others don’t have: – pure desktop design (like BeOS has); – speed; – responsiveness; – ease of use; – clean design, no bloat; – integration of various parts of the OS (so no heap of individually great pieces of software held together with duckttape); – leadership; – vision. What SkyOS does not have that (some) others have: – forking; – splintering; – chaos. And indeed, no SkyOS vs. Syllable flamewars. They’s both good. 2004-09-30 12:35 pm Anonymous So basicly it’s the same as AmigaOS ;D 2004-09-30 12:39 pm Anonymous any chance that this can one day turn into a BeOS replicant general feature? 2004-09-30 12:52 pm Anonymous @Thom H.: I miss the pure desktop design. I can not even find some interface guidelines on their website. Isn`t the desktop just clean because it lacks features? I mean: I really like how GNOME is evolving. They have kind of a plan on how things should get more user friendly ( and try to achieve a lot of things that MacOS already has which is not bad ). But on SkyOS screenshots I see they start to integrate things like device mounting in a context menu…??? I thought nowadays no one wants to take care about device mounting anymore. Basically I only want to now what “vision” is it, that SkyOS follows? – I can not see one. Do not get me wrong: I do not want to say that SkyOS is bad or something. ( But I can not judge since there is nothing to test available ) -Arne 2004-09-30 1:30 pm Anonymous Where is the innovation, I can only see that you steal ideas from XP, MacOS X and BeOS… I heard that the GTK+ is not useable, its dogslow, and has rendering problems ( obviously they not shown when someone takes a screenshot). However the progress is nice, and its an amazing work thats done by a few members, but what I miss is innovation. To vanders and syllable team. Wasnt Arnos Dock includeed in 0.5.3? /Konrad 2004-09-30 1:43 pm Anonymous i agree that the concept is no more usefull. the only reasons to have manual mounting is to allow faster booting by not mounting unused part of a system, or in case of good power management, not wasting power on usused device. It need to be integrated into the whole HD format procedure automatically, need to be put in boot time speed option and power management etc.. Joe user don’t even know what mount mean. 2004-09-30 1:52 pm Anonymous Heh, cool, graphical mount… But unlike BeOS, Skyos is apparently unable to detect the FS type. And you are calling this usability? Still, having it in the context menu is the right place. I hated Gnome 2.6 for removing the menu and introducing the windows-ish “Computer” location, but with gvm this is not an issue any more. My main problem with SkyOS is that it is closed source. I am not an open source zealot, i have no problems with paying for software and i am uśing proprietary applications. But I definitely won’t rely on closed source products for something essential like the operating system – I guess some people here still remember the term “focus shift”… 2004-09-30 2:03 pm Anonymous But unlike BeOS, Skyos is apparently unable to detect the FS type. And you are calling this usability? I guess it won’t take too long before this will also be added. Remember that 5.0 final is still a long time from now. My main problem with SkyOS is that it is closed source. I am not an open source zealot, i have no problems with paying for software and i am uśing proprietary applications. But I definitely won’t rely on closed source products for something essential like the operating system – I guess some people here still remember the term “focus shift”… I’m afraid of that term too (I still use BeOS as my main OS on my x86), but there’s no reason to be afraid of that here. Open source practically only exists in the software industry. Practically every company in the world guard their secrets with their lives, and yet you don’t fear using products from those companies. Simply because one company made a bad business decision once, doesn’t mean every company will. 2004-09-30 2:35 pm Anonymous From the SkyOS website: Available software SkyOS comes with native applications as well as ports of well known software. The most popular available software for SkyOS might be: – AbiWord – GIMP – GTK – SkyKruzer (KHTML based WebBrowser) – GNU Compiler collection – Bochs – Perl – SDL – Quake I/II – VideoLan – SkyDeveloperStudio – … What would SkyOS be if most of these Apps where not OpenSource?? No Compiler, no video playback, no web browser, no compiler, no graphic editor, … Do I not have anything against a closed source OS but I really find it strange if something only can exist with Open Source but is closed source by itself and not even available to the public as a free beta 🙁 2004-09-30 2:36 pm Anonymous Whoops, compiler was mentioned twice… but it really is an important thing 😉 2004-09-30 2:38 pm Anonymous If this is a privative SO why they use GPL icons? Isn’t a violation of the GPL license? 2004-09-30 2:48 pm Anonymous What I want to know is, if they ported bash to SkyOS and had to make a lot of changes so bash would compile and work (since SkyOS is not unix-like at all), where can I get the changes they made so I can compile bash on my own? Bash uses the GPL license, so the SkyOS team MUST make their changes available to anyone that requests them; provided the SkyOS team distributed the GPLd product to that person. And that would be the case, as I am on the beta team, but there is no way to get the bash code and when I have asked for it, I’ve gotten no response. 2004-09-30 3:03 pm Anonymous Read the GPL, please, before commenting on it. Now, source-code must only be provided, at request, when the product goes final. Since SkyOS v5 is not final, they do not have to provide the source code for GPLd applications!. Secondly, having GPL applications doesn’t mean the whole OS must be GPLd. Complete nonsence. 2004-09-30 3:05 pm Anonymous And, as for the Crystal icons, Everaldo gave his permission. 2004-09-30 3:09 pm Anonymous “Does the GPL require that source code of modified versions be posted to the public? The GPL does not require you to release your modified version. You are free to make modifications and use them privately, without ever releasing them. This applies to organizations (including companies), too; an organization can make a modified version and use it internally without ever releasing it outside the organization. But if you release the modified version to the public in some way, the GPL requires you to make the modified source code available to the program’s users, under the GPL. Thus, the GPL gives permission to release the modified program in certain ways, and not in other ways; but the decision of whether to release it is up to you.” Taken from http://www.fsf.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLRequireSourcePostedPubl… 2004-09-30 3:16 pm Anonymous Anonymous, I’m sorry, but I must have missed your email. Do you mind sending it again? Nevertheless, of course you can have the Bash sources, but be aware that you will not be able to build them. 2004-09-30 3:20 pm Anonymous I just read the GPL, and it seems to me that making someone pay for the betas and (one day) for the final product, is a distribution to the public. Thus if any of the paying users of the betas would ask for the source of those pieces of software originated from GPL code (let’s say bash or GIMP), then the authors should make that available _to the paying user_ according to the point 2 and 3 of the GPL. 2004-09-30 4:07 pm Anonymous Practically every company in the world guard their secrets with their lives, and yet you don’t fear using products from those companies. I do actually. It’s one of those things I try to take into consideration when buying a product. “Will the company be there to support it for a long time?” “Will I be able to get it repaired in 5 or maybe 10 years?” “Does the product depend on future firmware upgrades?(very common these days)” “Does it depend on another product to work?” “Will the additional services be available in 5 years?” It’s not just a matter of desktop software. Especially not these days when companies continues to sell buggy products in order to keep up with the pace and smaller companies get bought by larger ones. 2004-09-30 4:14 pm Anonymous Anybody using SkyOS beta full time? Not being able to download the betas since I’m on dial up, I wondered if you guys ever consider releasing any betas on cd, even if it’s for a small fee? Also, it seems various features of SkyOS are discussed in these threads as well as who’s developing which parts, but it seems nobody ever talks about how SkyOS “feels”, the user friendliness, etc. Can somebody elaborate on that? 2004-09-30 4:21 pm Anonymous “Read the GPL, please, before commenting on it. Now, source-code must only be provided, at request, when the product goes final.” Where exactly does the GPL say anything about “final products”? If you distribute GPL binaries you also have to offer the full source code, whether or not you consider the product to be “final” or not. 2004-09-30 4:32 pm Anonymous robert has been in talks with the FSF before BETA program is not classed as public because you have to pay and its isnt a case of you can just go “http://skyos.org/5_0.zip“ and you have it. also crystal set arent GPL! you need everaldo’s permission to use them and you arent allowed to edit them so that isnt GPL. @zerblat: no where in the GPL does it say you have to distribute the source code with the binaries it only has to be available in some shape or form, technically if u can go roberts house and see it, it is available and conforms to the GPL. 2004-09-30 5:25 pm Anonymous Yup… I’d have to agree with their comments. Especially Konrad’s comments on innovation. 2004-09-30 5:49 pm Anonymous The source code for any of the GPL applications is available upon request (which is allowable under the GPL). We may not respond immediately to the request not because we don’t want to but because we have been very busy with different projects for SkyOS. 2004-09-30 6:00 pm Anonymous firefox is missing, where is he, will he be there? (to destroy your constructive GPL discussion ) 2004-09-30 10:23 pm Anonymous Come on, the GPL specifically says that if you distribute modified binaries, you have to provide the source code as well. Calling something a beta does not give you special rights. If it did, you could just keep your product in beta perpetually, and the GPL would be circumvented like an ordinary tax law. Of course, you still don’t have to make the source code available as long as it’s not requested. But I’ll quote from the GPL to make it clear: —– 3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following: a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or, b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or, c) [which is irrelevant to commercial distribution] —– So, Andrew Youll, it’s not considered available if you have to go to Robert’s place to ‘look at the code’. The source code also has to be distributed in machine readable form. 2004-09-30 10:37 pm Anonymous no where in gpl does it say that the source code has to be available on the internet just tht it has to be available and at roberts house it would be available. also technically the binary is the only machine readable form as a cpu cant understand code 2004-09-30 11:04 pm Anonymous This entire discussion is irrelevant. As Robert said, if you are on the beta team, and would like the code to some GPL’d application we have included and modified, contact us. Don’t try one time, one way, and if we don’t respond, say “Oh, well, you’re violating the GPL!”. Ok, sorry, we didn’t receive your message obviously. Attempt some other method of communication. My suggestion would be the beta forums, the thing that you paid to have exclusive access to, so you could have exclusive access to us. We check it daily, generally numerous times daily. For anyone outside of the beta test team, once SkyOS 5.0 Final is released, so will the source code to any applications that are required by the GPL be. We have not decided officially what medium the code will be available by, but there is a good chance we will simply include it on the main SkyOS disc. 2004-09-30 11:16 pm Anonymous >To vanders and syllable team. >Wasnt Arnos Dock included in 0.5.3? No, but when installing from a LiveCD you got Dock. If installing from the Install CD, you got the old desktop. 2004-10-01 7:01 am Anonymous Even if SkyOS does not violate GPL ( and I do not think they violate it ), it is a shame that someone relys so much on GPLed software in their product but release their software closed source only and want’s money even for their BETA product. But given that SkyOS not only lacks innovation but also drivers for most hardware, unique software and usability benefits, I do not think that too much people will ever care. I do not understand the idea behind this payment for the betas: Basically you are excluding developers so they could not port their software to SkyOS. I think this way SkyOS will just stay to be a “nice to have” for OS junkies. 2004-10-01 9:50 am Anonymous Even if SkyOS does not violate GPL ( and I do not think they violate it ), it is a shame that someone relys so much on GPLed software in their product but release their software closed source only and want’s money even for their BETA product. False logic. The product is SkyOS. SkyOS is completely free of any GPLd software or code. The whole package, on the other hand, contains some GPLd applications. And, in case you didn’t know, Robert puts a lot of his free time into this project, and it’s no more than fair to pay a very small fee to compensate for that time. In the real world, things don’t come for free. Besides, those 30USD/25E are used to improve SkyOS. For instance, Robert has bought an amount of USB hardware to improve support on those. Now, I find that a good use of the money we spend. And finally, there are more than 200 beta subscriptions, and it’s on the rise. In other words, there is enough interest. But given that SkyOS not only lacks innovation but also drivers for most hardware, unique software and usability benefits, I do not think that too much people will ever care. (…) Basically you are excluding developers so they could not port their software to SkyOS. First you say lack of unique software, and then that people won’t port their software…. Contradictio. Remember that serious developpers can be granted beta access, but only if they prove their seriousness. 2004-10-01 10:27 am Anonymous False logic. The product is SkyOS. SkyOS is completely free of any GPLd software or code. The whole package, on the other hand, contains some GPLd applications. I do not say SkyOS contains GPLed code, I say that they rely on Open Source. How will you develop code for SkyOS without using gcc? Can you do image manipulation on SkyOS without GIMP? What do you contribute back to the Open Source community for the benefits you gain from them? First you say lack of unique software, and then that people won’t port their software…. Contradictio. I can not see your point. I would think an OS will require a large amount of ported software to cover the basics. Eg. you need a ported firefox so that people can use the same browser at work and at home. Likewise the email client and office suite. Most people prefer a consistent environment over native apps. ( Only think of the use of the native camino port to the generic firefox port on MacOS X ). Then native applications which exploit the very special features of an OS would be very nice to have. These apps would make the OS unique. Since I can not see any architectural benefit with SkyOS, I can not currently give an example what applications would better run natively on SkyOS than on other OSes. Also I do not think that architectural differences on OSes will matter that much in the future. If users would care on how clean the design of the OS architecture is, Windows would not be the leader of the OS market by now. ( I refer to past window versions like 95 and 98, not the XP design here ). 2004-10-01 11:43 am Anonymous >I do not say SkyOS contains GPLed code, I say that they rely >on Open Source. How will you develop code for SkyOS without >using gcc? Can you do image manipulation on SkyOS without >GIMP? What do you contribute back to the Open Source >community for the benefits you gain from them? oh my… AS I’m sure that some part of microsoft’s products are built upon open source (BSD, MIT…), I would just love to watch you ask MLicrosoft to gpl windows because it was built upon open source ….or because you can install gpled apps in windows. Yes, you can use Gimp, GTK+, GCC, open office and lots of open source on the windows platform too… So…….let’s gpl windows ! (Wo)Man, you are funny. 2004-10-01 11:55 am Anonymous For the people who demand inovation in SkyOS… Asking for things is easy….answering with inovation isn’t. I would bet that when your teachers at school asked you to do your homework, 1/4 of you wouldn’t do it 1/4 of you would copy the work of others 1/4 of you would do a bloated work 1/4 of you would do the work but only a tiny fraction of these ones would answer with an original and inovative work So, please, don’t DEMAND inovation from others… Robert is just one man (though he codes like 10). I’m sure he does his best. Besides, there are a few inovations in his work… you just have to look harder. 2004-10-01 12:21 pm Anonymous >Yes, you can use Gimp, GTK+, GCC, open office and lots of >open source on the windows platform too… And Bash and Grub and……. So, what is “skyos” giving back to those people that wrote 99.9999% of the code they are selling? Or maybe you want to be compared to MS? Besides, closed source ain’t getting anywhere nowadays, especially not kernels. 2004-10-01 12:41 pm Anonymous Robert, Kelly, chris…give back the gpled code of the apps they port/modify and the patches of the bugs they discover in the gpled stuff. In doing so, they help to improve the gpled stuff. What more do you want ? My mother uses daily firefox and other open source software (that is codes written 100% by other people), will you ask her to contribute back to the open source movement too ? Man, I would like to see that…. Besides… open source is good because it can be used by the whole humanity (under certain legal conditions). Because you are critizising/denying the right of the skyos team to legally use open source stuff, you are going against the freedom of use that you cherish so much… Nowadays, you buy a new pc game for 50€. It lasts you like what 2 intense gaming weeks at best… For 25€, you have much better than that with the beta membership of skyos….you can play longer and the game becomes better with each beta…. Last but not least : > Besides, closed source ain’t getting anywhere nowadays, > especially not kernels. Well…let them have a go at it…Who knows ? 2004-10-01 1:15 pm Anonymous Would you please just read the section of the GPL I quoted, instead of shouting off nonsense? You have to distribute the GPL source code in machine readable (IE: as a colletion of files) form, and you have to give the recipient the same rights as you have yourself. Giving someone permission to just look at it isn’t enough. They have to be able to modify and redistribute the code and the binaries created from it. Now, that doesn’t mean it has to be available for everyone on the internet, and the SkyOS team seem to comply. But your comment and many others were wrong, and may confuse the public, ultimately hurting the SkyOS developers. 2004-10-01 1:18 pm Anonymous >Robert, Kelly, chris…give back the gpled code of the apps they port/modify and the patches of the bugs they discover in the gpled stuff. Ok, one point given to the skyos team. >My mother uses daily firefox and other open source software (that is codes written 100% by other people), will you ask her to contribute back to the open source movement too ? Man, I would like to see that…. It’s possible. She could go whining in a forum when she hit a bug. >Because you are critizising/denying the right of the skyos team to legally use open source stuff, you are going against the freedom of use that you cherish so much… There is no freedom in porting OSS code to a closed kernel. I don’t see it anyway… >> Besides, closed source ain’t getting anywhere nowadays, >>especially not kernels. >Well…let them have a go at it…Who knows ? I still think it’s against the spirit of OSS. I don’t mind paying for an OS, but I havn’t used closed source for a very long time and are not planning on starting again. Who’s the target buyers of skyos anyway. It’s said that it will be a very easy to use OS and in that case they should be going after OEMs. And OEMs don’t sell an OS that are not tested by thousands(millions) of people. How many “beta” testers do they got? Thom and Youlle, that’s only two, it’s not enough. 2004-10-01 1:18 pm Anonymous Xerxes, may I remind you that the majority of software used by end users are closed source? Windows, MS Office, Internet Explorer, Mac OS X, …, … Linux still holds only about 2-3 % of the desktop market, so your claim that closed source ain’t going anywhere is based on hot air. 2004-10-01 1:19 pm Anonymous How many “beta” testers do they got? Thom and Youlle, that’s only two, it’s not enough. Over 200 paid beta team mebers, thank you. 2004-10-01 1:35 pm Anonymous >Xerxes, may I remind you that the majority of software used by end users are closed source? Windows, MS Office, Internet Explorer, Mac OS X, …, … Linux still holds only about 2-3 % of the desktop market, so your claim that closed source ain’t going anywhere is based on hot air. Dear Thom, OSS code revenues/use are rising and closed source revenues/use are sinking or rising slower than OSS. >Over 200 paid beta team mebers, thank you. It’s not much. If it were a GPL OS it could’ve been much, much more. 2004-10-01 1:40 pm Anonymous gpl this, gpl that. god im *sick* of hearing about the almighty GPL……. 2004-10-01 1:57 pm Anonymous I Agree with john blink… So, let’s talk about something more constructive… With SkyOS 5 beta 8 about to be released tomorrow, we can begin to speculate about beta 9’s content (which should be USB). Robert, if you read this post, I reiterate my past offer (last time I suggested that, you told me to wait for beta8 to be released) : If you are interested, I can give you my spare alcatel usb speedtouch modem and send it to you in austria by mail. I’ll try to contact you through the skyos forum and irc too… Lakedaemon ps : I wrote some of the previous anonymous posts 2004-10-01 1:58 pm Anonymous My mother uses daily firefox and other open source software (that is codes written 100% by other people), will you ask her to contribute back to the open source movement too ? Man, I would like to see that…. So your mother selles software which one of it’s main parts is firefox???? 2004-10-01 2:02 pm Anonymous Over 200 paid beta team mebers, thank you. Only 200? I really thought that there would be more than 200 OS freaks on the world. It really surprises me that SkyOS does not attract more people – but on the other hand I find it pleasant to see that almost no one would pay for a closed source beta. 2004-10-01 2:11 pm Anonymous sighs…. Microsoft, apple and sun sell softwares that use open source stuff too… Despite this fact, I bet that you bought and/or use their os, right ? Man…. even linux use open source code… what’s wrong with an os built legally with open source code ? I don’t understand why you hate Skyos so much. If you don’t like it, don’t use it and that’s it. Or, is it that you find it an interesting piece of software and that you would like to use it for free and you can’t ? Is that the reason why you want it to be gpled so much ? Last thing….Believe me, you really DON’T want my mother to come close to a computer. Damnit, she is a walking force of destruction… ^_^ 2004-10-01 2:41 pm Anonymous Okay. I would like to make it perfectly clear that this discussion is about SKYOS not gpl or opensource, seeing as skyos is neither. Sooo, shut up about GPL it only draws for you zealots cause. Zealot: One who is zealous; one who engages warmly in any cause, and pursues his object with earnestness and ardor; especially, one who is overzealous, or carried away by his zeal; one absorbed in devotion to anything; an enthusiast; a fanatical partisan. from dictionary.com 2004-10-01 3:44 pm Anonymous Dear Thom, OSS code revenues/use are rising and closed source revenues/use are sinking or rising slower than OSS. Linux has been holding the same percentage for ages. Let me remind you we are talking desktop here, not server (the place on which Linux should focus). Secondly, Office and Office:Mac (the latter is what I use) are still firmly in the lead when it comes to Office Suites. It’s been 9 years since Windows 95. Still, Linux only holds 2-3% of the desktop market. And you claim it’s on the rise? I’ve been hearing that since ’99. Not much has changed, marketshare-wise. “Over 200 paid beta team mebers, thank you.” It’s not much. If it were a GPL OS it could’ve been much, much more. Yes, and we would’ve seen forks, people stealing SkyOS code to put into other OSs, we’d see Robert losing control, we’d see incompatibilities, etc. etc. etc. In my opinion, open source is at its best when it comes to applications and programs. For something such as diverse and complex (in functionality) as an OS, open-source simply sucks. Desktoplinux is the ulitmate proof. It’s a heap of individually great pieces of software, but there’s no one guiding those projects, they all have their own agenda. Integration in Desktoplinux is shoving all those applications/programs onto a CD, tie them together with ducktape (mostly the cheap type) and then say it’s an OS worthy of the desktop. I’m starting to suspect that you are just to cheap to pay, that you have become too attached to eDonkey and Free distro’s. 2004-10-01 5:02 pm Anonymous hey wait a sec. John copied what I posted Unfortunately mine was modded down… Thanks for copying/pasting John 2004-10-01 5:03 pm Anonymous “Anybody using SkyOS beta full time? Not being able to download the betas since I’m on dial up, I wondered if you guys ever consider releasing any betas on cd, even if it’s for a small fee? Also, it seems various features of SkyOS are discussed in these threads as well as who’s developing which parts, but it seems nobody ever talks about how SkyOS “feels”, the user friendliness, etc. Can somebody elaborate on that?” Um, so I guess people would rather argue about the GPL then answer any of my questions. You know, SkyOS people, you don’t have to argue with these GPL and Linux people that always come into SkyOS threads just to give you a hard time. 2004-10-01 5:26 pm Anonymous Ancient chinese proverb. He who critisizes most, creates(contributes.. *cough*linux zealots*cough* little. 2004-10-01 6:31 pm Anonymous We most likely will not make SkyOS available on CD until 5.0 Final. It simply costs too much. Its kind of hard to explain how something “feels”. I’ll let the community take a shot at that one. 2004-10-01 7:34 pm Anonymous Well how does SkyOS feel? As of beta7 the responsiveness was very nice. I would not put it on an equal with BeOS but it is mighty close. Things seem to be laid out well, as I dont’ have a problem finding what I am looking for and dont’ usually need “instructions” on where to find settings and things. The main control pannel is easy to navigate and responsive. It boots fairly fast and overall has a nice look and feel. There are a lot of things still missing and not complete so a real good anwer to the “How does it feel?” question is hard to answer. Beta8, I think, should start to show just how SkyOS is going to be. Personally I love it. If feels better put together than any Linux distro I have tried, personally. As for all this GPL (the spirt of OOS) and all that stuff. I don’t care. I want an OS that is fast, un bloated, easy to use and doesn’t require days or weeks to get setup completly. So, far SkyOS is looking like it will be all these things. If the trend between each release continues I will be a SkyOS user/supporter for a long time. It is well worth the $30 and I feel good about supporting this effort. It isn’t about buying a “beta” it is about showing support for a project I am very, very interesed in. I would never, ever work for free and I don’t expect these people to either. I am interested in what they are doing and willing to give up my some money for them to continue. So, far it has been well spent. 2004-10-01 10:38 pm Anonymous And that would be why I left it up to the community.