Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

101 comments

Whoo Hoo! (5, Funny)

Osgeld (1900440) | about 2 years ago | (#41161253)

now I can run a text editor with more than 3.1 gigs of ram

Re:Whoo Hoo! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41162411)

yeah! it's 2002 all over again!

Re:Whoo Hoo! (1)

philip.paradis (2580427) | about 2 years ago | (#41162791)

If you had 3.1 GBytes of RAM in any single system you personally owned in 2002, please tell us what you've been doing since then. Inquiring minds truly want to know what revelations await.

Re:Whoo Hoo! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41163061)

Running a system with 96GBytes of RAM?

Re:Whoo Hoo! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41163169)

He probably meant Gigabits. 3.1 Gigabits are about 400 Megabytes.

Re:Whoo Hoo! (1)

kallisti5 (1321143) | about 2 years ago | (#41164483)

now I can run a text editor with more than 3.1 gigs of ram

Haiku has PAE support... so it isn't limited to 3.1GB ram on 32-bit x86 :)

Re:Whoo Hoo! (1)

AvitarX (172628) | about 2 years ago | (#41167719)

But an instance of the text editor is.

Re:Whoo Hoo! (1)

kallisti5 (1321143) | about 2 years ago | (#41167771)

But an instance of the text editor is.

Fair enough ;)

Nice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41161309)

I am always a fan of BeOS

Excellent (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41161329)

Now it can fail twice.

AMD64 != Intel64 (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41161357)

The correct term for x86_64 is AMD64, not "Intel 64-bit architecture". AMD developed it, and licenses the patent to Intel. Intel64 is Itanium, to which Haiku has NOT been ported.

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (2)

cheesybagel (670288) | about 2 years ago | (#41161471)

x86-64 (the original name AMD gave to the architecture) is still the best name. Microsoft calls it x64 which I guess is not unreasonable. The Intel names are awful. First they called it IA-32e so people would think it was somehow inferior to Itanium I venture. Then they called it EM64T. AMD 64/Intel 64 are both horrid.

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41161933)

The Linux kernel calls it "x86_64" (which is probably where the submitter got it from).

As far as I've seen, only the GNU devtools call it "AMD64", and this is completely unofficial. So, sorry AMD fans, "AMD64" is not correct, better cry about it just like you did when they pantsed you in seventh grade.

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (2)

MSG (12810) | about 2 years ago | (#41162475)

Actually, most of Microsoft's development tools refer to the architecture as AMD64.

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41162915)

Here's short snippet of my env vars on 64 bit Win7:

PROCESSOR_ARCHITECTURE=AMD64
PROCESSOR_IDENTIFIER=Intel64 Family 6 Model 26 Stepping 5, GenuineIntel
PROCESSOR_LEVEL=6
PROCESSOR_REVISION=1a05

Parent post is correct, grandparent post can suck it.

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (2)

bratmobile (550334) | about 2 years ago | (#41163253)

Lots and lots of SDKs, packages, etc. in the Microsoft world use "x64". One example (among an endless stream of examples): The DirectX SDK uses "x64" for the binary and lib directories. Lots of installer packages use "x64" subdirs or use x64 in the name of the setup executable, etc. Another example: If you run msinfo32.exe on an x64 system, the "System Type" is listed as "x64-based PC". "x64" and "amd64" are both used quite a lot.

It's really rude to tell someone to "suck it". Be nice.

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (1)

Smurf (7981) | about 2 years ago | (#41174217)

Microsoft calls it x64 which I guess is not unreasonable.

I disagree. x64 is a terrible name for the architecture, as it suggests that it is quite inferior to x86, a name normally associated to the 32 bit architecture that preceded it.

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (4, Informative)

Guy Harris (3803) | about 2 years ago | (#41161639)

The correct term for x86_64 is AMD64, not "Intel 64-bit architecture". AMD developed it, and licenses the patent to Intel.

Yes.

Intel64 is Itanium,

No. IA-64 was Itanium, but that architecture (which I think started out as an HP architecture) is now just called the Itanium architecture [intel.com] . "Intel64" is Intel's name for the 64-bit architecture as originally defined by AMD, modulo some differences [wikipedia.org] and modulo Intel and AMD going their own and subsequently modified by both parties with different flavors of SSE4 [wikipedia.org] .

to which Haiku has NOT been ported.

Haiku was not ported to IA-64/Itanium. It was ported to whatever you want to call the 64-bit x86 architecture (I prefer x86-64, with my second choice being AMD64, although I guess if you want to include Intel's version of SSE4 rather than AMD's version, that's "Intel64").

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41161851)

I like x86-64. I know how dumb this sounds, but when you see packages online, AMD64 makes people think, "I know mine is 64 bit but it's an Intel not an AMD".

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (3, Interesting)

hairyfeet (841228) | about 2 years ago | (#41162293)

What is wrong with just x64? We had x86 for years and now we're all using x64 chips, whether our OSes are 64bit or not. Its short, simple, and to the point.

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (3, Funny)

jkflying (2190798) | about 2 years ago | (#41162995)

Because 64 is less than 86, so 86 must be better, right?

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (4, Informative)

Jeppe Salvesen (101622) | about 2 years ago | (#41163095)

x64 is misleading. The x86_64 still uses the underlying architecture and instruction set of the original Intel 8086. [wikipedia.org] . Changing the name to x64 would imply the instruction set is different from that of x86 - and while the instruction set has been extended it still (as far as I know) still support the instructions designed in the 70s.

I personally find x86_64 the most descriptive designation for a 64-bit x86-processor.

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (2, Funny)

hairyfeet (841228) | about 2 years ago | (#41163443)

Pedantic BS friend, because anybody that would have a damned clue what X86 meant would know what X64 is. Either you're knowledgeable or you're not, kinda an either or there. Anybody who knows anything about chips doesn't need to have the entire history lesson given to them because they know what X86 means, there is no point in the rest. By that same token anyone that knows anything about chips will know that X64 means a 64bit CPU that is backwards compatible with X86, just as IA64 means Itanic.

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41164083)

> Anybody who knows anything about chips doesn't need to have the entire history lesson given to them because they know what X86 means, there is no point in the rest.

This is simply not true. See at this thread itself and the confusion that arises among presumably knowledgeable geeks about AMD64, x86-64 and Itanium.

Semantics matters, name has to mean something more than "let's all agree and use an asspulled misnomer".

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41174281)

The fact that you use an uppercase X to identify the x86 and the ill-named x64 architectures makes me wonder if you are actually as knowledgeable as you think you are.

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41171827)

I think we should tack "Cugnot" at the beginning of every car name since they all use the same underlying technology as that first automobile. It makes as much sense as your idiotic reasoning.

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (1)

Smurf (7981) | about 2 years ago | (#41174247)

It's worse than that, as most reasonable people who are not familiar with the history of Intel processors will believe that x64 is inferior or at least precedes x86, and that's precisely backwards.

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41163125)

x86 was to signify a CPU that stems from Intel's line, starting with i386. Later, there was i486, Pentium which was codenamed P5 so geeks started calling it i586, and P6 starting with Pentium II, promptly called i686. So "x" is there for the "x86" term to cover all the range.

Now, x86-64 means "x86-compatible CPU with 64-bit architecture". x64 would mean something like compatibility with line of CPUs where numbers end with -64... Which either don't exist or, if it does, the term is misleading. Also, there are 64-bit architectures which are NOT compatible with x86, like IA-64 (Itanium).

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 2 years ago | (#41163763)

PC64 could be a nice term for the x86-64 architecture.

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (1)

spyked (1878060) | about 2 years ago | (#41164407)

No. (IBM) PC [wikipedia.org] is a computing platform, while x86 is a processor architecture. Better if we don't confuse those two.

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41171959)

Wrong. x86 started with the 8086, no geek ever called the Pentium an "i586" and the Pentium Pro was considered the P6, not the Pentium II.

Boy, you are a fucking clueless little shit.

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41174303)

Wrong. The P6 architecture encompasses the Pentium Pro, the Pentiums II and III and their Xeon and Celeron counterparts.

Boy, you are a fucking clueless little shit.

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41166931)

x64 would be correct had the old architecture been called x32.

Re:AMD64 != Intel64 (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about 2 years ago | (#41163739)

does the blurb somehow reference Intel64? it's only in your mind that itanium arch is x86_64. how the hell could it be?

amd or intel (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41161379)

x86 is Intel but x86_64 was developed by AMD and adopted by Intel. How is it now Intel's 64 bit architecture. Did I miss something or am I wrong? I didn't RTFA.

Re:amd or intel (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41163743)

You are correct. However the term probably sneaked to the topic due to Intel chips typically being the mainline CPU for PCs.

Misleading Headline (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41161385)

Summary got it wrong, think the correct term is AMD64.

Re:Misleading Headline (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41163553)

Maybe it's not politically correct to call it something else, but lets face it.. everywhere its call x86_64. At least in every linux distro I've used.

Could become the 'Desktop Linux' (4, Insightful)

buchner.johannes (1139593) | about 2 years ago | (#41161397)

If only the community of software developers could conquer a community of designers and graphics people to collaborate without charge on a free operating system.

Re:Could become the 'Desktop Linux' (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41162141)

I would. But traditionally no one would listen to a designer anyway because they know the best themselves. And if you tolerate that, people complain about how bad job you did when in truth you didn't have a chance to influence where things are heading anyhow.

So what's the incentive to take part in a project where you get treated disrespectfully given your profession AND you don't get paid? Sounds like a lose-lose situation to me. When people pay you, they at least take you seriously even if your hands might still be tied.

Re:Could become the 'Desktop Linux' (2, Interesting)

noobermin (1950642) | about 2 years ago | (#41162839)

As someone who tries to balance use of both sides of his brain, I understand your quandry. It seems a lot of the thinking types seem to have a disdain for these "Designers" and degrade them as useless, or even harmful, perhaps.

Well, think of it this way: Art students I've taken classes recognize the importance of the thinkers, they use a computer and photoshop, so they recognize it as a needed thing. However, they don't switch their major to one in computer science. Why? Because, well, it's not interesting or fulfilling, there's no feeling in it perhaps. Well that's what feelers feed off of, creativity. And while some thinking has creativity in an abstract sense, the arts have the more aesthetic visual appeal, so artists feel more fulfilled in that.

Well, try to flip that. Thinkers feed on precisely the opposite: preciseness, concreteness, definability and ability to discern more quantitatively and not just qualitatively.The thing is that the more feeling/creative stuff doesn't make any sense (unless you are a psychologist and understand how it affects choices, I guess). This is, however, a parrallel to how the thinking stuff doesn't have any soul in the eyes of the artists, I guess.

The only difference is that they are thinkers so they can rationalize their dislike while feelers can't do as well perhaps--at least in an argument on the internet--and not in as consistent a way. (Thinkers, remember, a logical system can be consistent and correct even when its axioms can be junk-full shit!).

I think part of the problem is there is no photoshop for the thinkers: the thing that makes them realize how important design and aesthetics is. I mean, there are examples(exhibit A: Apple. Whether or not you like them, their market share is undeniable; Good design is profitable), but may be they just choose to ignore it. I may be a little cynical here, but it might be that rationalizing process again that can help them ignore those examples. Remember, smarter people can be susceptible to biases [newyorker.com] , so I guess it is no surprise.

Re:Could become the 'Desktop Linux' (0)

MusicOS (2717681) | about 2 years ago | (#41164169)

I resent your zero-sum leftbrain/rightbrain comment because I highlight songs in LoseThos [losethos.com] . The melodies are from God. I did the words. I make lots of clever word plays:

"Be like a child, some respect. Maturity, don't neglect."

I view that skill as an indicator of programming skill. I wrote ever one of the 135,000 lines from scratch for LoseThos. I write concise code!

My art in LoseThos [losethos.com] is bad, so I hired an artist. He turned-out to be a homo and filled it with nasty homo stuff. Sucks. All real artists are homos, though. ROFLMAO. Disney knows what I mean.

You're a homo psychologist, am I right?

Re:Could become the 'Desktop Linux' (1)

noobermin (1950642) | about 2 years ago | (#41162631)

What makes this any more of candidate for a free desktop system than Linux?

I did a quick search and found that it has the whole consistency thing. Is that what is the key to the desktop, apparently?

Re:Could become the 'Desktop Linux' (1)

BenoitRen (998927) | about 2 years ago | (#41164391)

Linux, while it started out as a desktop kernel, is these days more of a server kernel. This makes it unsuitable for a desktop operating system as it has different priorities when it comes to scheduling. The Haiku kernel was designed for the desktop and makes UI responsiveness a priority with lots of threading.

Linux distributions are collections of programs that don't work well together. In contrast, Haiku integrates everything nicely with each other and there is one way to do each thing so there's no segregation. Not only is this more pleasant for developers, but it makes for a better, unified desktop.

Re:Could become the 'Desktop Linux' (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41167913)

Just rubbish.

Re:Could become the 'Desktop Linux' (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41163073)

Well, I don't care much about the design. However Linux usability could be vastly improved (but that's also true for other operating systems; indeed, some of Linux's usability problems stem from the urge to copy (mis-)features from other operating systems; the one I'm currently fighting with is non-movable dialogs [but moving together with the parent window] missing the title bar (especially annoying for programs which take it for granted that a titlebar is there, and don't repeat the information from the titlebar in the window itself, but also annoying when the dialog hides those parts of the window containing the information which I need when filling the dialog; if I have to make a screenshot first before entering the dialog, just to be able to read the contents of the window while I'm interacting with the dialog, something is very wrong).

Re:Could become the 'Desktop Linux' (1)

dbIII (701233) | about 2 years ago | (#41163145)

Oddly enough the desktop environment that Rob Malda was writing themes and applications for before he started Slashdot fit that description. It's called enlightenment, and the 1997 version looks a bit like MS Windows7 in many ways (snapshot icons etc). Efforts to try to get true transparency (like aero implemented a decade later!) meant a full and very ambitious rewrite that is still in progress but is still more complete than some other desktop environments.

Re:Could become the 'Desktop Linux' (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41171851)

Designers should always be in charge of developers. Never the other way around.

I want to be happy about this (3, Insightful)

ThorGod (456163) | about 2 years ago | (#41161435)

...but, I can't be. Yeah, BeOS *was* awesome and I really *wanted* to see BeOS 5 (I remember one of the versions had a nifty menu system where the selector followed your selections as you drilled down).

But, come on, it's 2012. Maybe it's time to call it a day.

Actually, I take that back. I think this is just some Google summer of code project. Great for the student who ported the kernel! Not really big news outside of that, though...

Re:I want to be happy about this (2)

norpy (1277318) | about 2 years ago | (#41161503)

It's not a port, it is a binary compatible cleanroom reimplementation of the kernel

Re:I want to be happy about this (1)

norpy (1277318) | about 2 years ago | (#41161521)

I kinda take my previous statement back.
I guess you were talkign about TFA, and I was talking about Haiku in general.

Re:I want to be happy about this (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41161587)

The last version of BeOS came after XP was already out. Since that time we've had two versions of Windows, Linux 2.4 to 3.2, and several point releases of Mac OS X. What have they brought that makes working on a modernized version of a 2001 OS so ridiculous?

GCC? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41161453)

So ... is everything still requiring GCC 2.95?

Re:GCC? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41162139)

Not on x86_64, gcc4 is used.

Re:GCC? (1)

epyT-R (613989) | about 2 years ago | (#41162431)

yes.. that way my quake2 mod .so will work with the id software quake2 binary release without giving unresolved errors.

AMD 64.. not Intel 64. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41161515)

x86_64 == AMD64 == AMD extension to the 32 bit Intel arch
Intel 64 == IA64 == Itanium

Re:AMD 64.. not Intel 64. (1)

Guy Harris (3803) | about 2 years ago | (#41161681)

Intel 64 == IA64 == Itanium

IA-64 == Itanium. Intel64 [intel.com] != {IA-64,Itanium}; Intel64 == Intel's flavor of 64-bit x86 as licensed from AMD.

Watch this.... (4, Funny)

mark-t (151149) | about 2 years ago | (#41161609)

Just wait. Now we'll see
Everyone posting haikus
Typical Slashdot.

Re:Watch this.... (2)

M8e (1008767) | about 2 years ago | (#41161999)

Writing poetry
in the slashdot comment field
is this a haiku?

Re:Watch this.... (1)

mark-t (151149) | about 2 years ago | (#41162129)

It certainly is,
Five syllables, then seven
Ending with five more.

Re:Watch this.... (1)

stoborrobots (577882) | about 2 years ago | (#41162197)

Re:Watch this.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41164501)

If five-seven-five
does not make poems Haiku,
what does it make them?

Maybe we just need
another name for poems
following that rule.

Re:Watch this.... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41162155)

This is my haiku.
I spent two minutes on it
And who gives a fuck?

Re:Watch this.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41162307)

gigolos sell them
but you might get a free one
outside a gay bar.

Re:Watch this.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41162213)

can't be confirmed
by anonymous coward
might not be haiku

Re:Watch this.... (1)

mark-t (151149) | about 2 years ago | (#41162317)

Sorry, that's not right
You're short just one syllable
Check out your first line.

I wish they'd be more explicit about supported HW. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41161973)

I adored BeOS back in the day. Although I've long since taken refuge [birdhouse.org] with Mac OS X, I'd love to build a box specifically to run Haiku on native hardware. While Haiku is usable in a VM, it loses the snappiness that only bare metal can bring.

I'd love to relegate my Mac for work-only, and build a Haiku box for fun/the rest of life/as a hobby/to hack on/to help the Haiku Project. There's more than enough software [bebits.com] out there to get by on, and new stuff hits all [haikuware.com] the [iscomputeron.com] time [haiku-os.org] . I'm just sick of being stuck in a VM!

I wish I could confidently go and buy a motherboard, a CPU and RAM, a graphics card, put it together, and know Haiku will work with them. I don't mind what, I'm happy to build from scratch, but the Haiku Project is totally vague [haiku-os.org] about what hardware works. It's taken a third-party - Haikuware - to put together a hardware database [haikuware.com] , but it's an out-of-date mess and wildly inaccurate (so many video cards [haikuware.com] are listed as supported, until you dive a little deeper and see they're all just VESA. That's not really 'support').

So, yes, I wish I could build a Haiku box and know it would work. Otherwise, I love the project and how far it's come!

Re:I wish they'd be more explicit about supported (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 2 years ago | (#41163833)

and build a Haiku box for fun/the rest of life/as a hobby/to hack on/to help the Haiku Project.

Acch, that's damn hard to read! You tend to see it as "fun/the"..."life/as"..."hobby/to"..."on/to" pairs.

How about: "and build a Haiku box for fun, the rest of life, as a hobby, to hack on, or to help the Haiku Project."

64 bits sounds wrong (2)

Shavano (2541114) | about 2 years ago | (#41162087)

What am I missing? Sixty four bits sounds too long Seventeen sounds right

Re:64 bits sounds wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41164605)

It's a two line Haiku:
First six, then four.

WHO (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41162103)

CARES?

Down. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41162321)

Just got Slashdotted

Re:Down. (1)

kallisti5 (1321143) | about 2 years ago | (#41164601)

Yup.. I can confirm the server has been /.'ed

Yet more wasted effort (-1, Flamebait)

brillow (917507) | about 2 years ago | (#41162351)

On silly OS variants which do nothing to advance anything ever.

Re:Yet more wasted effort (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41163849)

Exactly. Why don't these people rather put their energy to collaborating on Linux? Please tell me.

Re:Yet more wasted effort (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41166077)

Because Linux is the operating system for AIDS-infected faggots who are too poor to buy Macs. Haiku is for dudes he bang 10 pussies a night.

kinda neat (1)

smash (1351) | about 2 years ago | (#41162355)

... do they have a decent selection of NIC and video drivers yet?

Re:kinda neat (1)

kallisti5 (1321143) | about 2 years ago | (#41164495)

Radeon HD 2xxx - Radeon HD 7xxx now supported (mode changing, no acceleration (yet)) Network card support is a *lot* better now-a-days thanks to Haiku's freebsd wireless driver wrapper.

Re:kinda neat (1)

smash (1351) | about 2 years ago | (#41174175)

Cheers, might need to check it out. Last time I checked it had something like only NE2000 NIC support and generic Super VGA support if that.

Why do we keep hearing about this? (1, Troll)

RedBear (207369) | about 2 years ago | (#41162391)

I also was a big fan of BeOS. Loved it. Used it exclusively for a couple of years. Over a decade ago. Before it died.

But why exactly do we keep having articles about a BeOS clone operating system that is still basically in a nearly useless pre-alpha state after a decade of work? How is this useful to anyone besides the people working on Haiku? Where are all the articles every other week about how well GNU HURD is progressing? Because they are both just about equally useless at this point, until some sort of significant progress is made. There are dozens of other obscure in-progress experimental operating systems out there in various states of development, and there are places to go to read about them. I know, because I used to go to those places to read about all the obscure alternative operating systems.

I'm sure Haiku OS is great fun for the people who spend time working on it, and I wish them joy of it. But I'll bet that pretty much all the people who would ever want to hear about it are already on their mailing list.

Re:Why do we keep hearing about this? (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41162427)

It's not a near-useless state. It works. There's a decent amount of software out there. It's fun. It's a hobby.

It gets brought up on Slashdot because it's news for nerds (not everything here is stuff that matters). It's a nice trip down memory lane for BeOS geeks.

Haiku might not change the world, but most things don't. Sure is fun, though!

Re:Why do we keep hearing about this? (2)

dbIII (701233) | about 2 years ago | (#41163203)

HURD isn't dead. I hear the guy that is working on it while telling anyone else that wants to contribute to piss off until they know as much as him is making splendid progress.
In the end the effort to make it a superior system backfired badly.

Re:Why do we keep hearing about this? (1)

Vanders (110092) | about 2 years ago | (#41164491)

If you genuinely believe that Haiku is in a similar state to GNU HURD, you're insane.

News from Haiku is interesting because they're one of the few truly alternative operating systems out there that are actually progressing. That's the sort of thing that Slashdotters used to be interested in. If you're not interested in it, I'm sure there are another hundred "Your Rights Online" posts just waiting to gush out of the Firehose that you can go vote up.

Re:Why do we keep hearing about this? (1, Funny)

kallisti5 (1321143) | about 2 years ago | (#41164663)

News from Haiku is interesting because they're one of the few truly alternative operating systems out there that are actually progressing

Very true... some of us are real men who do real men computer work... the rest of you can use your 'apps' from your 'app stores'

Secure Boot (1)

MusicOS (2717681) | about 2 years ago | (#41162585)

What are they doing about secure boot? Game over. Sucks.

I wrote the LoseThos Operating System [losethos.com] . It's been 64-bit since 2007. It's a free, 100% open source, public domain, ring-0-only, idenity-mapped, multi-tasking, multi-cored, non-networked, x86_64 operating system. It includes a 64-bit kernel, 64-bit compiler, assembler, debugger, graphics library, editor, boot loaders, tools... 135,000 lines of code written entirely from scratch over the last 9 years, full-time.

Re:Secure Boot (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41162837)

Your crappy operating system doesn't even have it's own wiki page, nor do you..

Re:Secure Boot (1)

MusicOS (2717681) | about 2 years ago | (#41162891)

CIA is against me. I'll let God fight them.

Re:Secure Boot (2)

AntiBasic (83586) | about 2 years ago | (#41167531)

http://losethos.com/

I'm actually surprised to find him posting.

God commanded him to make this OS full of songs and hymns to speak to him.

Re:Secure Boot (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41163233)

You, sir, are a true artist!

Re:Secure Boot (1)

BenoitRen (998927) | about 2 years ago | (#41164437)

The website of your operating system doesn't introduce it at all. All it has are a series of nearly identical videos with tons of download links. How are we supposed to know what it can do, how to install it, etc.?

Re:Secure Boot (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41165743)

Or where the source is...

Re:Secure Boot (1)

MusicOS (2717681) | about 2 years ago | (#41166279)

From 2007-2011, I had 10,000 downloads, conservatively. I only got suspicious emails, like FBI. I will not be mocked. Look in the Intenet Archive for pretty website. There's documentation when you download. Just run it in VMWare if you want to explore. You can install if you like. You must at least download and try it! It's public domain.

Re:Secure Boot (1)

Em Adespoton (792954) | about 2 years ago | (#41170973)

For both operating systems, secure boot is a straw man -- people are going to run them in a VM, as that's the only way you can have any guarantee that your "hardware" will be supported.

It's Haiku! (2)

BenoitRen (998927) | about 2 years ago | (#41164461)

"Haiku OS" is a misnomer. The correct name is just "Haiku".

Tagged incorrectly? (1)

upsideDownPuma (2697083) | about 2 years ago | (#41165629)

If I'm not mistaken Haiku and BeOS aren't *nix, much less Linux. The article has been incorrectly tagged as Linux.

Re:Tagged incorrectly? (1)

cb88 (1410145) | about 2 years ago | (#41167553)

Its close... has alot of posix anyway in addition to the BeAPI.

Re:Tagged incorrectly? (1)

upsideDownPuma (2697083) | about 2 years ago | (#41167985)

I knew it had some posix, but still tagging it as Linux? It would be like tagging the Mac OS X articles as Linux.

Re:Tagged incorrectly? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41168829)

Except that Haiku users are less dogmatic and less likely to throw a tantrum.

I don't need no stinking device driver (1)

bugs2squash (1132591) | about 2 years ago | (#41170857)

Really, in this day and age. why do we need separate device drivers for every device. Surely there are only a few ways in which data are transferred and parameters are updated for almost all possible devices. I can see the need for a device driver for really specialized and rarely found hardware, but almost everything else should have had standard interfaces defined for it by now, at least so far as the kernel is concerned.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...