Beta
×

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!

Niche Operating Systems

michael posted more than 12 years ago | from the help-i-have-too-many-programs-that-run-on-my-OS dept.

Programming 405

Eugenia writes: "So, you think that BeOS or AtheOS are niche Operating Systems? Well, you haven't seen anything yet. OSNews provides a list and short description of the most active and most promising Operating Systems written by individuals or small teams just for the fun of it or because they have a dream of how the perfect OS should be (is there such a thing though?). Some of them, like SkyOS for example, are even quite far down the line in terms of usability and advancements."

cancel ×

405 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

first post? (-1, Offtopic)

n1tr0g3n (515005) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392616)

Niche OS?
Very good.

Re:first post? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392768)

SUCK
8======D
onto
my
PENIS!

The more OS's the Better. (1)

groebke (313135) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392626)

This is what I like to see: choice. Althought there is something to be said for standardization, it is hell on choice and leads to entities like M$.
Although I have standrdized on MS for the dsktop, I still am a Solaris pig for the back end. After all, the less the end users know about the server room, the better.

Re:The more OS's the Better. (1)

i_am_nitrogen (524475) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392638)

It seems to me that you just contradicted yourself. [paraphrase:] "Standardization kills choice" ... "I have standardized on MS." So, you like to see choice, but you'd rather not use it? Interesting.

Re:The more OS's the Better. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392643)

He's into choice but only in secret.

Re:The more OS's the Better. (-1)

l00ny_bstrd (218467) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392680)

heh... good one, he's obviously just a first post fag who tried to say something quasi-intelligent so his fp wouldn't get modded down. Funny that he didn't get fp at all.

BTW, what's up with the "nitrogen" crap. Are you the same guy as n1tr0g3n (or whatever)? Or do you both have some sort of freaky nitrogen fixation?

Re:The more OS's the Better. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392689)

Hey, he was young and foolish, he was in college... it was a time of experimentation... he tried choice, but he didn't swallow.

Re:The more OS's the Better. (3, Insightful)

Junks Jerzey (54586) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392691)

Standardization kills choice" ... "I have standardized on MS." So, you like to see choice, but you'd rather not use it? Interesting.

_Everyone_ can make a choice. His personal choice is Windows, but he's saying that he wants lots of options available so each person has more to choose from.

Re:The more OS's the Better. (0, Troll)

Dufffader (164439) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392660)

All these OS and still no reason to dump Windows.

Anyone know something I don't?

Re:The more OS's the Better. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392697)

No. Just people doing their Comp. Sci Thesis.

Re:The more OS's the Better. (1)

i_am_nitrogen (524475) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392714)

Now, there's no reason to start a discussion on all the reasons to dump Windows. There are far too many, and would likely fill /.'s hard drives.

Re:The more OS's the Better. (0, Troll)

Mr. Slippery (47854) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392722)

All these OS and still no reason to dump Windows.
...so long as you don't count a complete disregard for security, lack of reliability, a desire to not support M$'s predatory business practices, and the trap of proprietary protocols and formats. Ignore all those, and sure, there's no reason to dump Windows.

Re:The more OS's the Better. (0)

Pinkeleph (449586) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392845)

"a desire to not support M$'s predatory business practices"

I don't see this as a valid reason to dump any OS. Although I prefer not to use MS product$, I feel that functionality will always win out over the company's business practices......

Re:The more OS's the Better. (2, Insightful)

Cato the Elder (520133) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392731)

Standardization shouldn't be "hell on choice"

It only is that way when some platform specific, propreitary method becomes the de facto standard. That's the whole reason for the IETF [ietf.org] standards process.

Standards should enhance choice by providing inter-operability for certain components while allowing customization of others. As the best and biggest example, TCP/IP is highly standardized and yet you can choose from a bewildering variety of stacks for different operating systems.

Choice is Hell (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392755)

Choice IS Hell!

To quote Sartre:

CHOICE. I am my choices. I cannot not choose. If I do not choose, that is still a choice. If faced with inevitable circumstances, we still choose how we are in those circumstances.

RESPONSIBILITY. Each of us is responsible for everything we do. If we seek advice from others, we choose our advisor and have some idea of the course he or she will recommend. "I am responsible for my very desire of fleeing responsibilities."

PAST DETERMINANTS SELDOM TELL US THE CRUCIAL INFORMATION. We transform past determining tendencies through our choices. Explanations in terms of family, socioeconomic status, etc., do not tell us why a person makes the crucial choices we are most interested in.

OUR ACTS DEFINE US. "In life, a man commits himself, draws his own portrait, and there is nothing but that portrait." Our illusions and imaginings about ourselves, about what we could have been, are nothing but self-deception.

WE CONTINUALLY MAKE OURSELVES AS WE ARE. A "brave" person is simply someone who usually acts bravely. Each act contributes to defining us as we are, and at any moment we can begin to act differently and draw a different portrate of ourselves. There is always a possibility to change, to start making a different kind of choice.

Please stop! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392828)

Please stop spreading despair and pessimism!

Even if things were as bad as you think, what right do you think you have to doom other people to the abyss of your own despair?!

In response to this mental poison, I offer Possibility Thinking [fast.net] !

Sarte was a fscking knob (-1)

l00ny_bstrd (218467) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392832)

and so are you

Re:Sarte was a fscking knob (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392855)

Really?

I bet you've never read Sartre in your life.

Too busy drinking beer, playing football and scoring with cheerleader chicks, eh?

Re:Sarte was a fscking knob (-1)

l00ny_bstrd (218467) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392863)

Too busy drinking beer, playing football and scoring with cheerleader chicks, eh?

Awww, poor little nerd, sitting at home alone, yanking himself to cheerleaderporn.com.

Re:The more OS's the Better. (1)

Mama's Family Troll (526669) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392756)

I don't know what you're talking about idiot. You're about as coherent as Eunice...

I want to stick the disk thinggie into the slot and have the damn thing work. If that means some idiot named Bill get's all my money, fine. He's standardizing the computer!!!

Damn it, my mouse is on the right side of the pad again. I can't move the arrow and more to the right... I guess I need to shut off the power strip again.

It's coming! (1)

Dancin_Santa (265275) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392631)

DancinSantaOS is coming!

Keep your flues open!

Dancin Santa

first post (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392637)

first post

Re:first post (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392704)

No, this is first post!

You couldn't troll you grandmother if you had an electrified trolling machine!

How about OS's that should be brought back? (5, Interesting)

sphealey (2855) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392642)

There's an old adage that every mistake that has ever been made with computers has been made three times. It originally referred to the mainframe, minicomputer, and PC eras. That could probably be extended to at least five times today by adding "client/server" and "web" environments. One of the strange aspects of computing is that everything has to be started from scratch and nobody seems willing to even consider the lessons learned in the past.

Given this, I would prefer to see a list of operating systems in which things were done RIGHT, but which are no longer in use or from which lessons are not being learned. Multics, TOPS-10, and TOPS-20 come to mind. Any others?

sPh

Re:How about OS's that should be brought back? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392671)

OS/9, anyone?

Re:How about OS's that should be brought back? (-1)

l33t j03 (222209) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392674)

Any others?

Windows 3.1; 95; 98; NT3; NT4

133t j03 (-1)

l00ny_bstrd (218467) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392813)

What a fucking 'tard....

Re:133t j03 (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392840)

I heard he sucks cyborg_monkey's dick.

Too bad monkeys in general have tiny dicks...

Three words. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392678)

Amiga, amiga, amiga.

Too ahead of it's time...

learning from the past (2, Insightful)

stego (146071) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392699)

>>everything has to be started from scratch
>>and nobody seems willing to even consider the
>>lessons learned in the past.

Except maybe Apple, who rewrote their entire OS based on Unix for its proven stability, ability to play nice with others, etc etc...

Re:learning from the past (3, Insightful)

cpt kangarooski (3773) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392852)

Except of course, that this ignores the lessons regarding Unix's abyssymal UI; ignoring the lesson that OS demands on hardware have to be as minimal as possible (esp. wrt the graphics system); ignoring areas where Unix could stand improvement, e.g. security models, filesystems, etc., etc.....

Unix is not the end all be all of OSes. Reimplementing it means that EXACTLY the mistakes of the past will be made, as opposed to a random assortment of mistakes and successes -- including new ones -- by trying something different

Re:How about OS's that should be brought back? (3, Insightful)

Sloppy (14984) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392706)

A rather obvious answer to that would be AmigaOS.

Re:How about OS's that should be brought back? (1)

Troed (102527) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392723)

That's quite biased .. right? Where's the pre-emptive multitasking? I for sure don't want to go back to cooperative :)

Re:How about OS's that should be brought back? (2)

ChadN (21033) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392805)

The Amiga had (and always had, from first release) a pre-emptive OS. It was also a micro-kernel, and had many "advanced" features for its time.

Re:How about OS's that should be brought back? (1)

Sloppy (14984) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392849)

That's quite biased .. right?

Well... any suggested answers to the question are going to reflect some sort of bias in the values of the answerer.

Not sure I get your comment about PMT. Even the newer platforms have PMT like the Amiga. My only gripe with the newer platforms' multitasking is that they're dynamic, instead of using fixed priorities like the Amiga had. In terms of PMT alone, though, I think just about everything (even MacOS, as of this year, finally) has caught up with the Amiga.

Re:How about OS's that should be brought back? (1)

DahGhostfacedFiddlah (470393) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392717)

The OS's mentioned here are people who *want* to write from scratch. They want an OS to their own specifications. For mainstream OS's, Unix-style has seemed to work very well, and has been used as a base for numerous OS's.

Re:How about OS's that should be brought back? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392761)

bring back VMS!!!

MS-DOS 2.0! (2)

wiredog (43288) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392763)

Fits on a 5.25 inch disk and runs well in 128kb of memory! Fast and easy to use!

Re:How about OS's that should be brought back? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392772)

what the fuck?

Given this, I would prefer to see a list of operating systems in which things were done RIGHT, but which are no longer in use or from which
lessons are not being learned. Multics, TOPS-10, and TOPS-20 come to mind. Any others?


Multics done right? you are an idiot, sir.

Re:How about OS's that should be brought back? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392782)

macintosh system 6!
apple gs/os!

Re:How about OS's that should be brought back? (0)

The_Messenger (110966) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392795)

If they were done right, they would still be in use. UNIX came about in part because of the deficienies of Multics. We should instead look at OSs which have stood the test of time, OSs which have existed for more than two decades.

UNIX, S/390, and MacOS come to mind -- they have changed greatly in form, but the original intentions of the designs are still intact. Microsoft, on the other hand, decides to change their OS goals every five years. (Microsoft also has a history of good, iterative technologies; DDE led to OLE led to COM led to DCOM/COM+/DNA are the foundations of .NET. But even the goals of NT have changed in the last five years.)

Multics - Stratus VOS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392836)

Stratus machines usually run VOS, a descendant of Multics. Kind of an obscure niche, true, but it's alive.

Re:How about OS's that should be brought back? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392841)

Computing is just like any other science... and since only in its begining... it'd take like a hundred years to reach that status (where we feel we've already learned enuff) and then we'd feel we must evolve on to a next level (no more reinventing the wheel)...

And personally I think is a good thing, since the more we try the best the results will be.

Re:How about OS's that should be brought back? (1, Offtopic)

consumer (9588) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392851)

One of the strange aspects of computing is that everything has to be started from scratch and nobody seems willing to even consider the lessons learned in the past.

This might be partly due to the fact that employers insist on hiring the youngest programmers possible, preferably straight out of college, so that they can work the hell our of them. People who are old enough to remember how things were done before have all been relegated to management positions where they have little effect on the actual code.

BeOS...? (3, Interesting)

joestar (225875) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392647)

I knew BeOS long time before Linux. So if after years of existence BeOS is not yet a mainstream OS, I don't see why I shouldn't call it a "niche OS"! AtheOS on the other part, is likely to become a mainstream. If only it could come with many more supported videocards...

Re:BeOS...? (1)

slashdot2.2sucks (516360) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392687)

The word nich doesn't distinguish between having a small following now but more later, and having a small following now but none later. It only means having a small following now.

However it does seem odd to group BeOS with all of these up and comming OSen, seeing as BeOS is as dead as OS2 and DOS.

Re:BeOS...? (1)

dstanley (244917) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392688)

I would assume they didn't consider Be a niche OS since it had a descent number of people actively working on it on a regular basis. Most of the listed OS were small groups of people. If there was a group at all.

Re:BeOS...? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392733)

Out of interest, what video card do you have?

AtheOS currently has drivers avaialable for:

Matrox cards

S3 Virge

nVidia

Vesa2.0

If you look on Kamidake [kamidake.org] you can also find a Riva TNT driver, and just recently, an ATI driver for a lot of cards.

More drivers are on the way of course, but thats most bases covered....;)

Re:BeOS...? (1)

DkY (444692) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392773)

why would you say atheOS is likely to become mainstream? I was just wondering.

Re:BeOS...? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392810)

Not the original poster, but quite possibly because it has & is being designed as a Desktop OS. Rather than deal with the "mess" of Linux on the desktop, most of the AtheOS community are hoping that AtheOS can replace Linux in the desktop role.

Saying that, I have to ask, would it be so bad if AtheOS did replace Linux on the desktop?

Re:BeOS...? (1)

DkY (444692) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392830)

fair enough but wouldn't it be harder to get developers who code in assembly?

Linux (-1)

l33t j03 (222209) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392650)

Linux is a niche OS. It is for technophobes who are afraid to step out of the past. It terms of usability, hardware support, functionality, UI, flexibility, stability, etc. it ranks well behind even the BSDs.

Windows is essentially the only OS anyone would ever need. In its various flavors (ME, Pocket PC, XP, 2000) it satisfies every possible need that a non-penniless computer user might have.

Troll OS (-1)

j0nkatz (315168) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392651)

When a first post just isnt good enuf!

Re:Troll OS (0)

Sir Richard Pump-a-l (526602) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392690)

You are a moron. Just like that faggot cyborg_monkey.

Linux! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392654)

Linux is a niche OS. It's only used by pimply, fat, anti-social, virginal geeks and college kids. Why isn't it listed?

Re:Linux! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392682)

A niche is a group smaller than your target audience. You don't want to insult your target audience, no matter how true it may be.

Clicker 32 is interesting... (2)

Sir_Real (179104) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392655)

I like the idea of setting up profiles that allow you to fire up all the programs necessary for "text processing" applications.

I don't know how easy it would be to use this system, but at least it's innovation. It's the most original OS interface idea I've seen since the virtual desktop.

Andrew

OS Standards (1)

alen (225700) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392656)

Why can't every OS be based on a set of common standards and have some proprietary extensions to differentiate itself from the others? And every OS should support a number of common API's for applications to run on them. If you buy an app it should run on most OS's. Some apps can be specific to some OS's because of their features.

Re:OS Standards (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392702)

What you speak of is called the "Win32 API". Don't blame Microsoft, they fully support it.

Re:OS Standards (1)

Mr. Slippery (47854) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392735)

Why can't every OS be based on a set of common standards and have some proprietary extensions to differentiate itself from the others?

I belive the word you're looking for is POSIX [pasc.org] .

POSIX. (1)

Sj0 (472011) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392752)

A lot of systems have POSIX compatibility, which is pretty close to what you are talking about. A recompile will make a lot of Linux apps (shell apps at least...) work under beOS, and BSD, but most of these apps are *recognised* by the OS, so if you were to perfectly port glib for linux to beos, you could run without a recompile.

Re:POSIX. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392781)

so if you were to perfectly port glib for linux to beos, you could run without a recompile.

Eeehhhh, not always. Yes you can, sometimes, get binary portability for pure POSIX applications, or applications that use a small part of glibc, if your OS is POSIX compliant and glibc. Of course thats no garuntee, and rarely works in practice.

New direction for slashcode (1)

Hostile17 (415334) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392661)


How about we start the SlashdotOS project, to go along with it SlashdotOffice and who would want to miss the Slashdot.NET development package which includes the Slashdot# c compiler.

Re:New direction for slashcode (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392710)

How about we start the SlashdotOS project, to go along with it SlashdotOffice and who would want to miss the Slashdot.NET development package which includes the Slashdot# c compiler.

We'd rather just complain. Thank-you.

Niche - and quixotic (3, Interesting)

kingdon (220100) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392662)

My vote for the most obscure goes to FreeVMS [panix.com] . Warning: very little code got written and there hasn't been activity in years. But the way in which it failed was interesting: no one wanted to do anything unless it had the blessing of Digital ^W Compaq ^W Hewlett Paqard. The biggest leverage of the proprietary OS was over the minds of the users/enthusiasts/etc. One could argue about whether the legal issues were real, but the free unices managed to get around legal issues with Unix including the setuid patent [164.195.100.11] .

Re:Niche - and quixotic (1)

i_am_nitrogen (524475) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392695)

Wow. A patent on the SetUID bit? And I thought patents were getting weird now... This was in 1973. Next thing you know people will be patenting the number 4 or something...

What about VSTa? (2, Informative)

i_am_nitrogen (524475) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392663)

VSTa [vsta.org] is a very promising upcoming OS, with a microkernel architecture and very modular design. Why wasn't it mentioned in that list? Development seems to be active. I know of someone at MontaVista who spends all his spare time working on VSTa. It's supposed to be similar to Plan9 in a few ways, very advanced, research-based, designed by people experienced with kernel and OS programming... It already supports SMP.

yeah like Vx-works is niche (3, Insightful)

johnjones (14274) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392668)

wake up vx-works and Itron are some of the most deployed O/S's in the world so what do you call niche ?

ones that the general public uses ?
(ever thought about the O/S in a mobile phone)
or even yourt Set Top Box pluged into your TV

just because it doesnt screem the version and who made it does not make it less of a O/S

regards

john jones

p.s. oh and linux need to sort out threading I found out today (-;

Re:yeah like Vx-works is niche (1)

Miles (79172) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392692)

Taken to an extreme, aren't all OSs niche OSs? After all, couldn't you say that Windows X is a niche product since they have to make so many different versions for different markets? Similarly, doesn't IBM use different OSs for different markets?

Re: linux need to sort out threading (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392865)

Linux threads suck. Linux threads and signal handling don't mix at all. Oh, and the i18n support sucks too, at least with less than the absolute newest glibc. At least the i18n stuff is getting fixed. I understand there are strong ideological and religious reasons for leaving the thread support as-is. Sigh.

Different types of niche operating systems (5, Insightful)

adadun (267785) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392679)

In my (somewhat limited) experience with niche operating systems for PCs, they can roughly be divided into two categories:
  • "Toy" systems that are written by a few hackers "just because they can". Those are typically written in (x86) assembler and even eary versions can produce a nice looking GUI. (Note that "toy" systems can very rigid and functional, despite their name.)
  • "Research" systems that are written by researchers to prove a point. The rarely have a GUI (unless the research involve real-time graphics as for Nemesis [sourceforge.net] ).
Both kinds are extremely hard to install, only run on a very carefully selected set of hardware, and don't really gain much appreciation other than from a very small group of followers. Followers from both groups often look down on eachother.

Lately, the operating systems research has come to a slowdown, but the operating system hackers (that produce the "toy" systems) are gaining more and more momentum. The latter can most likely be contributed to the success of Linux. Can the former be explained by that operating systems now is a fully explored area?

Re:Different types of niche operating systems (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392792)

The latter can most likely be contributed to the success of Linux

Woo hoo! Enjoy your two percent.

How about this for a niche OS (4, Funny)

Tim Macinta (1052) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392685)

When I first looked at the title I mis-read "niche" and thought somebody had created a "Nietzsche" operating system. Now that would be a niche OS. What would such an OS do? I supposed it could complain about Jesux [geocities.com] users.

Re:How about this for a niche OS (5, Funny)

gowen (141411) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392758)

I suppose it could complain about Jesux users.


Jesux's webpage hasn't been updated for two years, so it looks like development may have stopped. I wouldn't rule out the whole distribution suddenly rising from the dead though...

Re:How about this for a niche OS (2)

shorti9 (307602) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392817)

didn't you hear?

Jesux's Developer is dead.
-- Nietzsche

(another bad pun brought to you by jbm)

Re:How about this for a niche OS (1)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392765)

"That which does not kill a task makes it stronger"?

Another resource (3, Informative)

Z4rd0Z (211373) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392709)

FreeOS [freeos.com] is another good place to find out about these kind of operating systems.

Dare I mention... (2, Interesting)

Crusty Oldman (249835) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392719)

Dare I mention that the Forth language IS an operating system in its own right? Damn good one too!

Re:Dare I mention... (1)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392779)

FORTH LOVE IF HONK THEN

I have a certain fondness for Forth-like languages because they were so easy to boot-strap on 8-bit micros.

beOS is NOT a niche operating system. (1, Troll)

Sj0 (472011) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392720)

beOS is a great consumer OS which was crushed by the infernal machine(MS). Don't forget it.

Re:beOS is NOT a niche operating system. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392776)

Bah! BeOS was crushed by Linux desktops and OS-X, if anything. Are you trying to tell me that they started giving away the OS because MS was giving away their OS? I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you...

They never stood a chance. (1)

Sj0 (472011) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392808)

Microsoft has convinced idiot users that somehow if it isn't windows it's inferior, which was NOT the case with beOS. The move to release a free version sold them at least *one* copy of it(I have a copy of R5 on my laptop, and I use it regularly). Linux users in paticular seem to have an inferiority complex when it comes to comparing themselves to windows (not all of them, but I always hear about 'why linux will never beat windows', when in reality, MS is a business company, not a software company, and that's why they dominate (I don't think they've ever released anything that wasn't somebody elses code)...

Business tactics don't dictate the quality of an OS. be made some mistakes, but they didn't deserve to go out of business. MS is brutal, but they do deserve to go out of business.

Re:beOS is NOT a niche operating system. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392862)

Damn right!

I enjoy using BeOS when I can. It had the *potential* to beat the stuffing out of MSes offerings, if only the owners of the OS hadn't goofed (and goofed badly I might add.)

Ah well, such is life.

DV editing with Mac OS (1, Offtopic)

green pizza (159161) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392725)

in my neck of the woods Win32 variants are on the desktop and Linux and Solaris are in the server room. Though we do have a few Apple G4 machines running Mac OS 9.2 for video editing of MiniDV and DVCAM. The OS and software have been working great and we're looking foward to seeing what will come about with Mac OS X. Our local VAR has been showing off some HD video work (Sony HDCAM source through a Cine card with Ciprico 7000 fibrechannel RAIDs via an ATTO FC card). Looks neat, but a bit kludgy compared to doing the same thing on, say, an SGI Octane2. (Plus I'd take IFX Piranha over FinalCutPro any day).

Re:DV editing with Mac OS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392744)

While that's a hell of a story, what, if anything, does it have to do with the topic at hand? Absolutely nothing, that's what, aside from more fucking chest beatingh around this place.

Having said that, it, of course, deserves a +5.

Re:DV editing with Mac OS (2)

green pizza (159161) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392785)

Mac OS is a great OS for some tasks, but it is far from mainstream. Even Apple admits the fact on this page [apple.com] . With 5% of marketshare, they have even fewer users and new adopters than Linux. This doesn't make it any less of an OS. We've had no problems thus far with our OS 9.2, Final Cut Pro 2.02, & DVD Studio Pro 1.1 setup. It's no SiliconGraphics machine, but it doesn't cost nearly as much either.

We already have it with linux (1)

famazza (398147) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392726)

There are plenty of specific kernel patches for specific tasks, like high security [slashdot.org] , and graphics enhancements, or even an experimental enhancments patch, we all know them and hear about them every week here in /.

The big advantage of these patches is that the resulting OSs have full compability with GNU/Linux. Wich is very good, because then developers don't need to offer basic support, and can focus only in the OS funcionality.

Maybe this is the way for Nich OSs.

new operating system (1)

donabal (116308) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392736)

There should be a new operating system that is wholesome, healthy and comes in various flavors, from plain to sugary to apple-cinnamon-y.

CheeriOS.

--donabal

Eunice??? (0, Offtopic)

Mama's Family Troll (526669) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392738)

Eunice?? Where the sam hell are you?

it's all well and good... (3, Redundant)

hajmola (82709) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392739)

but an OS is nothing without applications - and only until there are applications for an OS, can its usability and robustness be truly measured.
-raj

Hey, America! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392750)

From /bin/laden with love:

SUCK
8======D
onto
my
PENIS!

Re:Hey, America! (1)

Mama's Family Troll (526669) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392769)

That's just wrong...

I'm calling my congressman.. Jesse Helms.

Thank you Linux/BSD/etc (3, Insightful)

MattW (97290) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392753)

The fact that there's all this open source driver code helps make other OS's possible, and also helps make them more usable (in case you need a new driver for the niche OS). The contribution of a device driver writer for linux is obvious when you get your linux distro and have the device; but there is a big secondary benefit in the way they help contribute knowledge that can be used by others on other projects.

one way to (1)

Hadlock (143607) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392815)

one way to show off your girlfriend. not too shabby. incase you're wondering what i'm talking about, take a look at SkyOS's latest screenshot. Not the most flattering picture, though, lol.

as a side thought, there's a lite version of mozzila called gecko...it's designed for easy portability (i think), which basically is why kmeleon [sourceforge.com] exists....but how much effort is involved in porting gecko over to a new OS? from my POV, what really makes or breaks the popularity, or even someone bothering to download/test out an OS is a working psudeo-graphical web browser, no matter how buggy. MinuetOS was neat from my standpoint, b/c i could load it from a floppy, but after about 10 minutes of playing with it, it lost my interest. yes, i'm sure someone'll reply saying 'hey, why don't *you* volunteer to rewrite gecko to work on SkyOS? i would, but i'm not that much of a software hobbyist. i'd be more interested in writing up some sort of tutorial on how to convert gecko for your OS's needs, however contradictory that is to my previous statment. just a suggestion. as a side question, are there any tutorials like that out there? i haven't looked at the mozzila code myself, so i'm not sure how userfriendly the code is to need a tutorial in the first place.

My favorite Niche OS... (2, Informative)

Ortado (89074) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392818)

By far has to be FreeDOS [freedos.org] . Although development is slow, and the user base pales in compairason to others like Linux or FreeBSD, it's really amazing what they've done. The developer's list has 500+ people on it (most inactive) and recently the system is getting pretty good. Back 10 years ago, DOS was by far not a niche OS, but today it has become. Sad it is, but glad that some people accually understand that for such a simple OS, it's quite extendable.

Oh, and of course, by favorite GUI to go ontop of FreeDOS: DWin [sf.net] . Not much to use yet, but i really enjoy it.

You mean to tell me.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392826)

...that linux isn't a niche operating system?


Come on, people, who are you trying to kid?

I'm a developer for ReactOS (WinNT Clone) (1, Interesting)

isolation (15058) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392831)

Check it out at www.reactos.com

Goatse.cx OS better than windows NT?! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2392837)

is there a goatse.cx OS? can somebody post me the direct link to the picture for the goatse man?! my friend andrew wants it! NOWWWWW!!!!!!

The SkyOS site is /.ed (1)

MacBrave (247640) | more than 12 years ago | (#2392867)

I want an OS that is immune to the /. effect. Commodore C-64 anyone?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>