Samba 3.0.10 has been ported to SkyOS today. All configuration is done through a plugin in the System Manager, making configuration very simple, with just a few mouse clicks.Users can add shares one by one, or by using the “Quick Sharing” mode to immediatly make a common shared folder available to users on other computers running either SkyOS, Microsoft Windows, Linux and other operating systems. The entire SAMBA configuration file management, server starting and handling is done in the background, “hidden” by a nice configuration utility.
Furthermore, the first issue of Live Query, the new SkyOS newsletter, has been released and features a review of the most recent beta, an interview with Chris Marshall, of the SkyOS team, and a changelog of the changes since the last beta a few months back.
For more information, visit the SkyOS webpage.
The newsletter can be found right here in PDF format. An HTML version will be available soon.
SkyOS is gradually turning into another UNIX, just with a different GUI library. The vast majority of usuable applications are just ports – FF, TBird, Abiword, Gaim, etc, etc…
Are they going to get some NATIVE apps any time soon?
http://www.skyos.org/softwarestore/packages/share.png
Are they going to get some NATIVE apps any time soon?
If you read further down the page you’ll see someone has made solitaire
I think there are a few native apps, but it makes perfect sense to leverage the GPL *NIX stuff in places where there is a shortage of native apps.
to their credit i think skyos looks very good , but as kian posted, i think that they should stop porting and maybe getting some exclusive apps….
ps. except firefox… i love firefox… glad they ported that one
In short, yes, SkyOS has native applications. Robert listens to the users a lot, which is why Firefox (for example) was ported instead of continuing work on a native browser. Right now, it’s just easier to port software so that SkyOS is usable, and so that Robert (and Chris) can work more on the OS and SkyGI. There are people developing native apps, but a lot of us don’t have time to code much. A couple of people and I are working on a native word processor, but that will take some time to finish. Others are working on CD burner apps, FTP clients, games, etc. In due time…remember, SkyOS is still in beta.
Kian, can you kindly explain how SkyOS is turning into another *NIX just because it uses these apps? Windows has ports of them as well, but I don’t think you’d say Windows is turning into a *NIX, would you?
But Windows has native apps. LOADS of them. SkyOS, err, doesn’t.
Team Stylix is working on a native Office Suite for SkyOS, currently they are developing the word processor name Letters. There was a native IRC program in the works too, but I am not sure about the status of that program. There are a few more Native programs like Personal Organizer, Media Center, SkyPad, and Developer Center to name a few.
Have to remember this OS hasn’t been around as long as Windows, MacOS, and Linux.
But Windows has native apps. LOADS of them. SkyOS, err, doesn’t.
Neither does Linux. Linux apps are mostly dependant on a toolkit, and that toolkit is most often NOT specific to Linux. This would render Linux without native Apps, and therefore you should critisize Linux as well.
Oh and Kian, I assume you are KianD from Wikipedia? Glad to see you’re still here.
Who is going to write all these native apps? and how long before they are any good? Writing a modern web browser for example, is not a trivial thing. SkyOS has a small community with a smaller number of developers, native apps will come with growth. Right now it makes much sense to port stuff, instead of wasting limited resources reinventing the wheel.
I am currently coding hearts, yet another native app
Samba has been available for years and there still isn’t even a decent GUI configuration for Unix? (No, the gnome one is not even decent). And this guy pops out of nowhere with this!
Go SkyOS!
SkyOS is a Unix like OS for the following reasons:
High Level of POSIX compliance
UNIX like FS Structure
i dont think anyone tries to hide the fact skyOS is a NIX i personally dont, POSIX compliance makes it easier to port apps from one platform to another, so saying skyOS will become just a nix is wrong as it already is a nix!
webservers id SkyOS as “unknown Unix System”. yeah there are native apps in the works, but eventually all ports will be native anyways as they will be maintained releases for skyOS
firefox is already ported to skyOS.
Oh, yeah… SkyOS has A LOT of open source software that make the OS work. You see how useful OS software can be? used to help make a very good commercial OS
maybe i should download the betas again, had to stop beta testing before due to the box i was going to use dying on me
i was expecting a finished version 5 eventually though, now it is half a year later than the eta i was given when i bought it.
oh well
but which gui layers and toolkits do use for all that ported apps?
As POSIX compatibility itself allows only CLI and “daemon” apps to be ported.
XFree+Xft+GTK?
“making configuration very simple, with just a few mouse clicks”
Said like someone who has never configured Samba! Unfortunately, it goes a bit beyond just turning the service on and off and creating a file share.
There’s also Kerberos, Winbind, PAM and NTP to think about, to name a few dependencies. Unless the Samba “server” we’re talking about is just an old P-II in the closet that your kids store their MP3s on.
Like many of you I’ve tracked the progress of SkyOS from this page and in the beginning it seemed like a fun project for someone to try… people making their own OSes like Menuet, etc… My question is, why would anyone buy SkyOS? Linux and BSD are free, arguably more robust and with better support, and have more apps. The best part is, the source is freely available so you can play with it yourself. It seems like this OS, while it may have technical advantages over Windows, gives you many of its disadvantages (cost, closed source), while having none of its advantages (software galore…)
hobbyist interest? its what 50 dollars for a beta member ship and final version copy? its hardly breaking the bank.
then theres disliking some of the *NIX methods of doing things, i don’t know enough about *NIX or SkyOS to say exactly what but i’m sure they’re out there.
then there’s what brought me to linux in the first place trying to find that “perfect” desktop enviroment. SkyOS is hardly my ideal, but i’m sure some one out there thinks its better than the rest.
I agree with CharlieC. I used to freuently check out the skyos page in the early days, back when it still looked like a clone of windows (anyone else remember those screenshots of the registry-like folder heirachy?). The nice part about it back then was it was a hobby OS, almost unheard of, small, and free to download.
it’s always been closed source, but now you have to pay to dowload even a beta. Why should I pay $50 to someone who grabbed free code for things like OpenBFS, Firefox, gaim, samba, etc and made them run natively in some other system? I’d much rather give my $ to the original developers of these apps. Seems like greed and a rip off to me, the hard work of others profited by a third party. With all the GNU programs in SkyOS and the $ made by SkyOS (Aka Robert) by those foolish enough to purchase a beta I can’t help but wonder what if anything the open source community will get back from Robert/SkyOS.
for now I’ll just stick with Debian, free as in beer, and free as in speech.
Yes native apps are being written now at this time and its “$30 USD” to beta test NOT $50 USD to beta test. Why did I join the beta team and not run a linux distro…thats probably casue SkyOS feels more a full GUI OS then any Linux distro has and I don’t feel like putting time into something like linux cause I don’t like linux.
“With all the GNU programs in SkyOS and the $ made by SkyOS (Aka Robert)…”
Yes, you should see our fleet of Ferrari’s. We cart them around from continent to continent on our modified company B-52. You might ask “But when you’re on your modified company B-52, how do you watch television and use the Internet?” Well, luckily, with some of our leftover beta money, we were able to launch a private satellite into space, giving us television and Internet access while crusing around in our flying fortress.
Of course, we don’t spend all of our time on the plane. Sometimes we just settle in at one of our many medieval European castles…
I suggest retire the B-52 and purchase a C-5. Its better cut out for hauling stuff like your Ferrari’s. See
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/images/c-5_… and http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/images/c-5b…
I dunno, we’d have to get a few more beta testers….
SkyOS’s GUI is SkyGI, which closely resembles win32 in design, there is also a port of the GTK+ toolkit
Maybe the tone of the poster was a bit rude, but the point he makes is valid. It would be useful to address the issue without resorting to sarcasm.
Can you provide a good reason for somebody to pay even a penny for an OS with less features, support and ported apps to it? When one can download Linux of FreeBSD free of charge, OSes that are mature, been time-tested and have much broader support? From a collection of programmers who take from the open source community while keeping their best code for themselves? I am not an open source zealot, but it does seem unfair.
If somebody wants to pay you the money, they are entitled to…there was recently an ad on Ebay of somebody selling their soul and people were buying. But it doesn’t make it any less of a rip-off.
I really don’t get the vindication some people are looking for. The reason skyos exists is very admirable, they want to create a useful desktop. The direction that the team is moving is the right direction, the time frame that they are getting stuff accomplished in is unprecedented and honestly incredible. Now to address the issue of native software (which has beaten worse then a dead horse that would need to be beaten… or something). Software is transient. Software IS NOT the OS, and is not a reflection of the usefulness of the OS. Some people really cannot grasp this. To me, I want (read: need) certain applications. First of all a decent web browser (and like most people I prefer Firefox), so the existence of Firefox meets one of the basic needs of a desktop. The major question is “would it be reasonable to write a native browser from scratch?” Well, it already happened. SkyKruzer was decent browser but would require too much maintenance and most people would prefer Firefox anyway. Most of the open source software that is in skyos should be in every desktop OS. For example GAIM is clearly the best choice (for me) to use on any OS for IM/chat. It works the same in every OS, and is being maintained by a great group of people. Samba is also very important, for obvious reasons. The level of complexity needed on skyos for samba is not to it’s potential but a average desktop user doesn’t want to concern themselves with all the features of a program.
Anyway, this post is torpid with digression, so I will try to cut it short. You pay $30 for Skyos Version 5.0 final (to be available upon completion). In the interim you receive access to the beta program. It is not the teams astute desire to have an unmanageable amount of beta testers who are apt to post the same bug 40, er, 90 times in a row then goto the forums and post three threads begging for ‘help!!!111!!11111! ‘.
To sum up what I’m to tired to write:
a) The OSS in skyos should be available in all operating systems. (FF, Gaim, samba, abiword, etc)
b) Software is independent of the OS. Native software isn’t. Software (posix) depends on dependencies not operating systems.
c) I’m to tired for this. The days are five hours too short, of which I had preallocated for sleep, leaving me in a bad position.
d) Think before you whine about a closed source OS. What do you want the source for. 99% of the people who complain about skyos being closed source have no clue what do do with source code and don’t give a crap. To them, open source means FREE. (beer)
SkyOS needs native apps that is true, I admit that. But saying that Linux has so much native apps is something I don’t think is right to say. Most basic apps for Linux are GNU apps…starting with Bash and so on. Linux is just a kernel and a collection of tools delivered as a package deal. Other than the kernel it doesn’t really have an own identity. X-Windows, Gnome, Kde are just implementations that can run on the Linux kernel and the ported GNU tools.
SkyOS has it’s own Windowing system…that’s already more than Linux has if I ain’t mistaken. Not too burn down Linux…it’s a great OS. But it just filled in the hole where the GNU kernel (Hurd L4 by now) should be.
Porting apps to a OS doesn’t harm in any way…it just raises usability with less effort.
I paid for to join the SkyOS beta program because I am interested in the project, and although it is buggy it is making really good progress.
It didn’t exactly cost a fortune, and the guys who develop this thing will need some money. Someone as talented as that, should not sit and work for nothing, so why shouldn’t they charge for the OS.
What’s the problem with including OSS? I bet MOST of you use OSS and wouldn’t contribute a penny back, so quit moaning about it.
d) Think before you whine about a closed source OS. What do you want the source for. 99% of the people who complain about skyos being closed source have no clue what do do with source code and don’t give a crap. To them, open source means FREE. (beer)
Shortsighted and inaccurate. While for free is undeniably a nice thing for an end-user, it is not the most important thing. The Free in Free Software is Freedom. It is not about being able to use the accompanying source code, development wise. It is about equal control over the software. With FOSS the developer and the end-user are on equal footing.
There is no way in the world that a FOSS developer can exert unjust control over his end-users. They are Free to take the code and let it be serviced by someone else if a developer goes gaga and chooses to try and force unwanted and unilateral limitations on his end-users. That is why FOSS for the knowledgeable people is the better choice, even if they can’t write a bash-script to save their lives.
You pay $30 for Skyos Version 5.0 final (to be available upon completion). In the interim you receive access to the beta program. It is not the teams astute desire to have an unmanageable amount of beta testers who are apt to post the same bug 40, er, 90 times in a row then goto the forums and post three threads begging for ‘help!!!111!!11111! ‘.
Translation: We are not keen on providing end-users software that works for them. We are in it to write our own toy and we are not shy to take your money to give you the priviledge of using a piece of software that is not written with the customer as the central focal point. We are the Lord and Master of our Creation and you will abide by our Laws.
It nicely sums up the problems with proprietary software. I can glean the reason for negatives about SkyOS from this. SkyOS is a fringe proprietary OS that enables you to run FOSS applications. For a mere $ 30 you give up equal control as an end-user to run software that is readily available on truly Free OSes. SkyOS from an end-users perspective is just another for pay proprietary OS, with no inherent benefit other than it is cheaper than most proprietary OSes, but it comes sans the ability to run brand name proprietary applications like Dreamweaver, Wordperfect, Photoshop, Premiere.
To both proprietary and FOSS OS users this OS can be summed up with one word: superfluous.
p.s. The superflous thing is ironically very well illustrated by the poll on their own frontpage:
Yes, and I would be willing to spend up to $500. 19.9 % (1144)
Yes, and I would be willing to spend up to $800. 7.2 % (412)
Yes, and I would be willing to spend up to $1000. 3.5 % (201)
Yes, and I would be willing to spend up to $1500. 5.1 % (295)
Yes, and I would be willing to spend over $1500. 1.9 % (109)
No, I would rather just use my current system 62.3 % (3576)
http://www.skyos.org/survey.php?voteindex=9
p.s. The superflous thing is ironically very well illustrated by the poll on their own frontpage:
Yes, and I would be willing to spend up to $500. 19.9 % (1144)
Yes, and I would be willing to spend up to $800. 7.2 % (412)
Yes, and I would be willing to spend up to $1000. 3.5 % (201)
Yes, and I would be willing to spend up to $1500. 5.1 % (295)
Yes, and I would be willing to spend over $1500. 1.9 % (109)
No, I would rather just use my current system 62.3 % (3576)
“
You do know that this poll is about a complete COMPUTER, right? It’s about a prebuilt computer, including SkyOS. In other words, you are completely ripping this poll out of context to use it at your own advantage– something not uncommon for OSS zealots.
It is a choice for some people to, as you say, “give up” control over the OS or apps. I did that, by paying for SkyOS, because I am not interested in looking the sourcecode or whatever. Also, I don’t think SkyOS will ever replace my OSX as my main desktop; not because SkyOS cannot be become “better” for me personally, but merely because SkyOS runs on x86. Not my arch. of choice, as some might know.
However, and this is far more significant, most people don’t make a choice at all about this. They simply don’t give a damn.
I don’t think anybody is looking for a sense of vindication here. I also agree that everything the SkyOS team is doing is perfectly legal. I am also very impressed at how far they have gone so fast. These points are agreed on and are moot.
The SkyOS rubs many people the wrong way because of a basic issue of fairness and “following the original intentions.”
1) Fairness: The SkyOS team takes the best software from the open source community. However, they keep their best software closed, nobody else can take advantage of it.
Haven’t you ever had a relative or friend that shamelessly took things, but never gave anything? Didn’t it annoy you to heck? The same principle is at work here. People expect fairness. If you take, you should give. Of course, you are not legally required to, but it is the right thing to do.
2) Following the author’s intent: Again the SkyOS team is doing nothing legally wrong, but they are not following the intent of most of the writers of the softwares they take. Let’s give an example: Suppose that you were Darwin, and you find that some guy called Hitler has distorted your theories to justify mass murder. Wouldn’t you be repulsed? This is of course an extreme example, but I am trying to illustrate a point. Most of the people who wrote the softwares that SkyOS uses are passionate believers in open source and free software. Wouldn’t you agree that they can’t be to happy about some guys using their creation to bolster a closed-source, paid-for software, the antithesis of what they believe in?
It’s ok that Robert charges for SkyOS. I support it. Developing an entire OS and buying new hardware costs a lot of money. You surely don’t expect someone to work for free now do you? Money don’t grow on tress you know and this is not Linux. If you don’t like it, don’t buy it and stick with Linux. Nobody forces you to buy it. You would buy this OS if you were an OS fanatic and you want to experiment new stuff or you want to help someone build a better OS for our future or just to show your appreciation for someone’s hard work. I am sure all the money Robert and the team has gained are wisely spent.
SkyOS is being written in 2004, with desktop in mind… Unlike so called Unixes…
That is enough to make it different than Unix and not call it Unix.
Leo.
Sorry Leo You are 100% wrong. IRIS created maaaany years ago by SGI was nice UNIX born to hold the nice desktop for creating graphic. UNIX is standard, not text mode OS…
Will there be a port of Wine?
bb
I believe Youlle has been trying to port Wine to SkyOS.
I have a small issue. My computer which I play around with has had problems with alternative operating systems before (especially due to GF4). And even if that is solved, some other stuff usually bugs out. So what I’d like, before I go out and spend my cash, is like a HW detector program checking whether my box is supported by SkyOS is not. Because if it is, I’d gladly pay.
this maybe a silly question,
but is skyos GPL’d? if not then how comes they can use all this GPL’d software and not give back ?
well, isn’t it obvious. some guy named Richard Stallman who wrote the license has claimed that what is GPLed is free… so I guess SkyOS just like most others do what they want with it. After all it is free…
For starters, this just shows how much determination the “anti-skys” have to destroy the reputation of this OS. They refuse to recognize the facts and take partial quotes to help their cause (or maybe its they cannot read). As Thom stated its for a SkyOS branded computer which Kelly was putting together months back.
Concerning the GPL, How come windows users can use GPL software and not give back? Its simple, Robert simply ported the applications to a different system. There is nothing wrong with that, and if anything it is promoted by most GPL advocates (not the script kiddie kind, those people are more for personal gain instead of advancement of computer technology). Also Robert has given back to the GPL community he has developed OpenBeFS further, aiding both projects.
i jus paid the 30$ becuz i thought it was cool looking. heck i know peeple who spend 200-300$ on a computer case becuz its ‘cool looking’ when a 30$ alternative is there. yes part of the software is gpl’d from what i understand it still is and the modified code has been sent in. the core OS is not gpl’d though. big deal even on my debian box i hav no desire to look at the code for the OS itself. and if u guys dont wanna spend 30$ and buy a beta then DONT! i thought it was a fair price for sumone to charge who has spent a good deal of time working on it. though it would b neet if they had a free live cd for a demo or sumthing though.
“1) Fairness: The SkyOS team takes the best software from the open source community. However, they keep their best software closed, nobody else can take advantage of it.”
Actually, beta testers (and when the product is released publicly, everyone else) have access to the source code of all the ported applications, as per their respective licenses.
“2) Following the author’s intent: Again the SkyOS team is doing nothing legally wrong, but they are not following the intent of most of the writers of the softwares they take.”
If I understand correctly, this point is moot once you realize that no code is being stolen, as described above.
I started to quote other people who posted similar statements and questions, but I got tired of it. SkyOS isn’t stealing anything. If you take anything from this thread, let it be that.
Q: What is a major reason Linux hasn’t gained “traction” on the desktop (hint: it’s one of the reasons BeOS went away)? A: It can’t run a large number of applications people want, including titles from Macromedia, Adobe and Intuit, as well as M$ itself (Office). If, hypothetically speaking, there were a significant demand for SkyOS, sooner or later the masses would want these apps and someone would try to come up with a Windows emulator which may or may not run them (how many years have they been grinding away at Wine and there are still a lot of name-brand apps it can’t handle?). If this sounds familiar it’s because it’s the exact same course Linux is on, and Linux has a vastly larger user and developer base.
ReactOS looks like a much more interesting endeavor. When you shoot for Windows compatability you open the door to a galaxy of mature native applications. You bypass the entire “Linux(SkyOS)-will-never-gain-traction-on-the-desktop” debate. If all you need from your computer is email, a web browser, a word processor and some games (native or ported) running on a hobbyist OS, be my guest and use SkyOS. If you want a serious alternative to Windows, it’ll have to be able to run major titles and at the moment SkyOS doesn’t sound like it’s on track to do that.
Here’s another question: When did it become OK to charge money for beta versions of software? The whole idea of beta testing is to work out the kinks BEFORE you start charging money.
think of it this way, u pay 30$ to preorder SkyOS 5.0 and u get to beta test until it comes out.
Here’s another question: When did it become OK to charge money for beta versions of software? The whole idea of beta testing is to work out the kinks BEFORE you start charging money.
Its been okay for a long time. YellowTab does it, Apple has done it, IBM has done it.
the FSF has said that the pre-order based beta program does not constitute a “Public” release and as such no changes need to be released as of yet, but SkyOS improvements have already been released for OpenBeFS the FS that SkyFS is based on.
OpenBeFS is under the MIT license, do you not know the difference?
Besides this doesn’t answer the question so often asked but never answered. How do you intend to give back to the community?
“How do you intend to give back to the community?”
Just like Linux distros give back to the community by releasing the modified source code of the open source programs back to the original developers, the SkyOS team will do the same. They are(or have?) releasing documents on how to port firefox/thunderbird to a non-supported OS. Like stated above they gave the OpenBeOS project some bug fixes to its OpenBFS. Just because they don’t make a public scene about it doesn’t mean they are not giving back.
Unix is slowliness and intuitive-paradox standard, yes.
If that’s what you call “aimed at desktop”, I must admit I’m wrong, yes…
Leo.
Sun gave us OpenOffice, RedHat gave us SourceNavigator, and I could go on with other examples. Unix vendors and Linux Distributors as well as GNU and the BSDs give more then just patches to preexisting code. That is what I and other are talking about when we say contributions.
Sun gave us OpenOffice, RedHat gave us SourceNavigator, and I could go on with other examples. Unix vendors and Linux Distributors as well as GNU and the BSDs give more then just patches to preexisting code. That is what I and other are talking about when we say contributions.
Dude– you are being delirious. Even though Robert might be flattered that you compare SkyOS to Sun and RedHat– but it’s like comparing a pebble to Mt. Everest. Sun can permit these kinds of stuff- but remember that Sun is a HUGE Company– and a hardware company for that matter.
As for RedHat– if RedHat could get away with closing the tools and apps they made, they surely would’ve. Of course I’ll now piss off the entire OSS community (RedHat is sacred in those groups), but I’m used to pissing them off.
what’s up with you? d’ya have some thorns in your butt?
Man, is this necessary to spoil each and every skyos thread with this ‘gpl this and oss that’ filth.
You canna live with a closed source operating system? Deal with it, not my problem. Being not content with soemthing doesn’t give the right to hang on mutilated statements and what so ever to make a rather advanced project look bad.
Thank you *SO* very much for being a fair and but so acceptable discussion partner. Really. Thank you for spreading filth and FUD without thinking back at least a bit about what you’re doing.
grow up. learn some manners.
I know you are used to piss of people, you pissed me of often enough and I’m sure I did likewise. That is to be expected if you don’t share the same view. RedHat has not closed any source up until now but has open more then a hand full of projects. They do this because they know they are part of the community. But that is not the point. I used the comparison because mister Anonymous stated something I know to be incorrect. What I want from the SkyOS community is to define their relationship with FOSS in a formal mater. It would be nice if something would come back from SkyOS, for example the SkyOS compatibility layer for Win32 systems that the ReactOS team developed. Some help getting it in better shape would have been a nice thing to do. Would make testing Apps easier too since you don’t have a native SDK yet. Consider that Trolltech was able to quiet the noise around QT by it licensing strategy and by the Trolltech trust (or whatever they call it again).
P.S. @ distantvoices : Did you read the entire thread? I doubt it.
I bought the beta. Why, because I wanted to. Why don’t I use Linux or FreeBSD? I don’t like them, period. Oh, and it is my money. I am free to do with it as I please. It would seem that I am not the only one as quite a number of people are on the beta team. Don’t know how many but woun’t be surprised it was in the hundreds. Why did I do that. I like the idea of what Robert and the rest of the team are tying to do and to give some financial support is my business. So, if you would rather use Linux or FreeBSD then please do so.. If you don’t “understand” why someone would pay for the this beta then fine. That doesn’t mean that you have to “belittle” those of us that have.
Erm you can perfectly well develop software inside of SkyOS.
Robert has talked with all the maintainers of the ported programs and they are happy that their pieces of software now run on yet another platform (the SAMBA port will be announced officially on the SAMBA website, for instance). Who should we pay more attantion to; a unch of OSS zealots, with no understanding at all of how OSS works; or the developers of those OSS apps? Easy choice for me.
For example the SkyOS compatibility layer for Win32 systems that the ReactOS team developed.
Why? Nobody asked those people to make a SkyOS compat. layer; it’s nice work, but should Robert then work on all projects concerning SkyOS? That’s insane! I don’t see Linus Torvalds wokring on every Linux-related thing either! And remember that Linux makes a kernel; Robert writes the whole OS.
RedHat has not closed any source up until now but has open more then a hand full of projects. They do this because they know they are part of the community.
And that’s where you make the wrong assumption. RedHat works on Linux, so the must be good people. That’s flawed logic. RedHat opens up their projects because they have no choice. If they didn’t, say buhbye to RedHat sales’ figures.
Your post once again confirms the total split between people actually working on OSS projects, and the people who only whine about OSS.
I’m getting tired of this.
Before you comment do you read and/or think about what you are saying?
GPL?
By Youlle (IP: —.range81-153.btcentralplus.com) – Posted on 2005-02-08 17:45:46
the FSF has said that the pre-order based beta program does not constitute a “Public” release and as such no changes need to be released as of yet, but SkyOS improvements have already been released for OpenBeFS the FS that SkyFS is based on.
Re: GPL?
By johnlein (IP: —.dip.t-dialin.net) – Posted on 2005-02-08 18:11:24
OpenBeFS is under the MIT license, do you not know the difference?
Besides this doesn’t answer the question so often asked but never answered. How do you intend to give back to the community?
*sigh* Youlle clearly states that SkyOS has made enhancments to OpenBeFS…… And you continue to ask questions on how that betters the community… Maybe your only thinking about linux, but, there are more communities then the linux one, such as BeOS for example. The improvements for the OpenBeFS greatly helps them in security and other areas…
Maybe you should be more open minded and less ethnoconcentric about linux the “linux culture”….
There are over 400 beta members, currently. The number is rising.
Have you read my posts? I’m not really posting for my self. Personally I don’t give a shit. Do what you want. Still I think it would be wise to formalize the relationship with FOSS since SkyOS is now a commercial entity. I don’t like the wining either and want it to stop, by formalizing the relationship between SkyOS as commercial entity and its relationship to FOSS I hope for this to stop. It did with QT.
I’ve stated that the patches are not enough for those that bitch about SkyOS and the GPL, and that there are other ways to get them to quiet down, like giving some of yours away. The SkyOS compatibility layer was mentioned as one such possibility.
Pleas give me a link to where it is mentioned that the SDK is now SkyOS hosted. Last time I used it, it was with Cygwin and sucked (thank you RedHat for Cygwin).
Your opinion about Linux and FOSS is not very flexible, that is your loss. I don’t know in what camp you threw me but I’m sure that you’ve got me all wrong. I’m trying to bridge the gab between SkyOS and some of the FOSS people on OSNews. Thanks for not noticing.
Are we clear or do you want some more info?
You really seem to have no idea what you’re talking about. Red Hat has no obligation to release their tools to the community. They never have. Companies like SuSE existed without a problem by providing closed tools (Yast for example). Red Hat, on the other hand, has not only opened all of the tools they wrote themselves, they’ve either opened or disbanded all of the software they’ve purchased. One big example is eCos which they acquired from Cygnus, and they’re working on releasing the Netscape Enterprise Server product they just bought. Their executive staff has also repeatedly stated that they are 100% open source and that they feel no need to deal with closed products.
Unless you’d like to explain your theory that Red Hat’s income somehow depends on their buying and open sourcing software, please leave your rediculous theories at home.
I would also suggest that if you don’t want to piss off members of the open source community you should provide at least the smallest amount of backing to your statements. Otherwise, you’ll simply be written off as a troll (which, honestly speaking, your post certainly seems like).
the SDK is now used inside skyOS but can still be used on win32 using cygwin, the compatibility layer reactOS made is extrememly basic not supporting all SkyGI functions. skyOS team once the requirement to release code is there or they decide to release it which ever occurs first, then the projects it is hoped will carry on with the skyOS versions.
also skyOS has some Open Source native apps like Personal Organiser i cant remember its exact name, you cant expect a developing OS to OpenSource parts of it when there is a chance those parts will be overhauled dramatically and not work anymore, once 5.0-final is released maybe we’ll see some OSS from skyOS team but they’re concerned with the OS after that point.
the openning of software source code to alot of ppl makes them seem like nice guys and is good publicity, but then for some software they charge you for a guy at the support line to help you out, which is extremely hard to do as you probably guessed no Linux install is the same, i mod the hell out of my SuSE install as soon as i’ve installed it.
I fail to see what your post has to do with what I said. Dropping support for Red Hat Linux made them look like bad guys but they did it anyways because it made business sense. So they obviously don’t just make decisions based on what makes them look good. As far as charging for support, that’s their entire business model; give away all of the software as open source, charge for support.
It would be nice if Robert made some of SkyGI available to extend the SkyOS compatibility layer, but it is up to him. Some good will can go a long way. (At least that’s what I make your stuff out to mean, you’ve got some gargled grammar there)
Question @ Youlle: Weren’t you once involved with Seal?
i appologuise about that my english skills arent particularly brilliant, as i’ve always struggled with written english even at school.
do you mean the GUI Shell SEAL?
Yes, I think I remember you from back then.
Well, we made it a few pages this time…
http://osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=9297&limit=no#319255
“It does not provide more than Free OSes and the developers DO restrict the rights of the SkyOS users and they have a nasty attitude to boot.“
Excuse me, but where have I displayed a “nasty attitude” to you? Or Chris or Alex? I don’t even think Robert posted in this discussion. We are the four “developers” (by that I mean official representatives for SkyOS), and I don’t think any of us has conducted ourselves in a manner that deserves us being labeled as having “a nasty attitude”.
I have to tell you that myself and Robert are just about the least interested people in the OSS/closed-source debate. I’ve said time and again that there are places for both in the world. We do what we feel is best, others do what they feel is best. I don’t see how that makes any one person wrong or right.
Seriously, can we please stop having philosophical discussions about various software licenses in every SkyOS news discussion? It’s all been played out. There is nothing new to add. Some people hate OSS. Some people hate CSS. Some people don’t care. The one thing we all have in common is that not one of us ever brings anything original to the table. With that in mind, why don’t we just not bicker about it at all? If you hate SkyOS, and don’t like anything surrounding it, please just don’t post. If you hate OSS, and anything surrounding it, wonderful, that is your right, but you don’t have to tell everyone about it.
Thanks for your time.
r_a_trip: It does not provide more than Free OSes and the developers DO restrict the rights of the SkyOS users and they have a nasty attitude to boot.
Until someone like r_a_trip grows up, seeks professional help, and realizes that nobody has the right to software except what is stipulated in a software license then there is really no hope.
At some point you have to stop living in a fantasy world and join the real world.
I just happened to notice your comments on Aaron Sergio’s blog about KDE on windows.
I’m curious what caused you to become such a hate-filled person? It seems that every person like you that tries to politicize software like you do is filled with hatred. The irony is you accomplish the exact opposite of what your political goals are.
“I am not concerned that it exists. It doesn’t affect me, but when OS developers post crap like this: ”
Good one, but I have nothing to do with developing anything.. thanks for using me as one of your benevolently impudent responses though.
Good one, but I have nothing to do with developing anything..
Not Mike, developer on SkyOS team? Sorry, my bad. Incorrect assumption.
It seems that every person like you that tries to politicize software like you do is filled with hatred.
If you really want to know. I think it is necesarry to be filled with hatred to become an unreasonable, predatory person with unhealthy political views. Healthy people don’t take to extremes.
The irony is you accomplish the exact opposite of what your political goals are.
Is the goal really to promote Software Freedom? It looks more like “My way or the highway.”
I’m curious what caused you to become such a hate-filled person?
Probably a long series of misperceptions about human interaction over several years.
Looks pretty schizophrenic, doesn’t it? It probably is too. Does it matter? No. Vitriolic comments cannot exert force on people to do something they don’t want to do. They are just a nuisance, nothing more.
Until someone like r_a_trip grows up, seeks professional help[…]
I’m most likely beyond all help. Just ignore my ramblings, it’s cheaper than wasting good money on treatment.
well, isn’t it obvious. some guy named Richard Stallman who wrote the license has claimed that what is GPLed is free… so I guess SkyOS just like most others do what they want with it. After all it is free…
Idiot. Free software has a precise definition on the FSF’s web site, specifically that it provides the four software freedoms to users. Whenever the FSF talks about free software, it is in this context. Like Open Source software has to be software that meets the OSI definition of Open Source in order to be able to use that trademark.
kudos to r_a_trip for phrasing things a lot better than i could regarding FOSS, and other who mentioned GPL< MIT and giving back to the community.
to thors_hammer123 who wrote:
haven’t you ever had a relative or friend that shamelessly took things, but never gave anything? Didn’t it annoy you to heck?
Interesting that you use that analogy for people who don;t want to pay for skyos. That is an analogy I would use about SkyOS not giving back to the open source community. They take the GPL/other free/open liscenced program, and they give back what exactly? it’s been hased over here in this thread.