AtheOS 0.3.5 Released 143
JigSaw writes "AtheOS 0.3.5 has just been released. Lots of changes to the core of the OS, but the most important upgrade is the port of the Konqueror web browser (the author had to wrap around X/KDE/QT calls in order to port it). AtheOS is a modern OS, written from scratch using OOP and C++, it features a 64-bit journaled/attributed filesystem and (surprise) it doesn't use X, but rather its native GUI system (screenshots). Changelog is here, while you can download it here (only around 23 MB for the basic installation). There is already a number of posix software ports and third party native software available."
Re:AtheOS and VMware (Score:1)
Q: How do I install AtheOS in a VMWare virtual machine? AtheOS boot from
the boot floppies but not from the HD after installed.
A: VMWare put some restrictions on the upper end of the address-space
that cause some problems for AtheOS. To make AtheOS boot you must
tell the kernel to don't use the last few megabytes of the 4GB
address-space by adding "uspace_end=0xf7ffffff" to the GRUB kernel-line
in "boot/grub/menu.lst". This is already added to the boot-menu
on the boot-floppies but not on the default boot-menu included in
the base installation.
Am I the only one... (Score:1)
--xxk
One changelog, coming up (Score:1)
Re:AtheOS is shaping up (Score:1)
Re:Oh Lord... (Score:1)
In your dreams, where the only application running is Adobe Photoshop optimized for Altivec.
The P4 *smokes* the G4 in integer and floating point according to spec.
(disclaimer - I didn't get these #s direct from spec.org)
g4@733
SPECint95 - 32.1
SPECfp95 - 23.9
p4@1400
SPECint95 - 54.4
SPECfp95 - 53.5
extrapolating:
g4@867
int - 38.0
fp - 28.3
p4@1700
int - 66.1
fp - 64.9
-Kevin
Re:Anyone else... (Score:1)
For the approximately 10 seconds I had access to the AtheOS site before the
-Kevin
Re:Anyone else... (Score:1)
nodes with DNS entries were in Norway.
-Kevin
Re:AtheOS is shaping up HURD (Score:1)
Check the HURD's architecture and you will know why.
The HURD has really interesting goals in mind... Multi-server OS is the key design keeping your comment from being correct.
I don't think AtheOS is multiserver.
TLD (Score:1)
Re:Atheist's OS (Score:1)
That's just a slight variation on the theme of him pissing on me.
Re:Watch out, goatsex link. (Score:1)
127.0.0.1 goatse.cx
Hmm... I should probably block the ip at my firewall too, in case this guy stumbles upon a clue.
Re:so many manhours, such a small impact (Score:1)
Mmmmm. (Score:1)
Do we now judge the merits of an OS based on how it was implemented? Rather than, say, what it does and how reliably it does it?
> it doesn't use X, but rather its native GUI system
Is its "native GUI" part of the OS?
--
Re:Mmmmm. (Score:1)
The C vs. C++ war is (1) a matter of opinion, and (2) a religious issue anyway. I've seen beautiful code written in both, and horrible code written in both. Personally, I prefer C, but that's because it's *still* more portable than C++ (I still have C compilers for MS-DOS lying about).
Funny Links (Score:1)
Re:AtheOS is shaping up HURD (Score:1)
Trying out the Hurd [gnu.org]
So, are you talking about the other HURD or the other x86 architecture?
Look again (Score:1)
_
/
\_\ sig under construction
Re:Uh... how bad was it before? (Score:1)
JOhn
Re:Mmmmm. (Score:1)
AtheOS and VMware (Score:1)
The supported hardware says that only the Matrox cards and VESA 2.0 cards are supported.
Any hints?
Re:Anyone else... (Score:1)
Re:What about drivers? (Score:1)
The only thing that's up there is a mailinglist, no files, no mirrored webpage, etc...
Re:What about drivers? (Score:1)
Sorry I clicked on the wrong post to reply. Disregard the above.
Re:Anyone else... (Score:1)
Re:Very nice but... (Score:1)
Re:Religion is myth-information (Score:1)
Electrolux? (Score:1)
Oh wait, that's LinuxOne [slashdot.org] I'm thinking of.. Sorry.
--
PaxTech
Re:We have the complete lineup (Score:1)
As a matter of fact, I do use Mandrake Linux as the fact that "having fun" has meant a much higher productivity level among myself and my coworkers. Having a commmand line interface and saying that using Mandrake as "playing" neither impresses anyone nor gives the illusion of you having big balls. In fact, it makes you sound like an idiot.
Re:We have the complete lineup (Score:1)
Actually, I completely disagree with you. Apple created a GUI as an integral part of the OS for a good reason. Without Apple doing this, we would still have DOS and have to type WIN to start Windows. I am not sure why people are obsessed with having to create more work for themselves by typing anything to start their GUI, when the main 2 reasons people purchase a computer/OS is for its ease of use and its applications. Apple wasn't the only one to do this...anybody remember OS/2 or BeOS? Nobody wants to see a command line at all if they can help it. Why do you think 99.9% of Linux distributions today load a FB picture at startup, use something graphical to hide the boot sequence, and then autostart X into either KDM or GDM? Because people are visual creatures by design. When I can start my computer, have it completely GUI from boot to shutdown I have a more "complete implementation" feel to my computer than when I have to mess with anything that looks like a command line. When I can change a directory by clicking on a folder icon, dragging my favorites 100 MP3's to my CD-ROM drive, let go of the mouse button, and have it all taken care of I not only save time, I feel like I am actually interacting with my computer, I actually feel like I "moved" it, and once I let go of the button, the MP3's burn the the CD, I hit the eject button, click on "Shutdown" and everything is fine. Would you like to tell me how to do that with a command line without it being a major pain in the ass? Nobody I know wants to use Linux, specifically because the command line gets old really, really, fast. Humans are visual creatures. When a person feels like they are looking at something "real" and they intereact with it in a "real" way, then they are visually and mentally satisfied that something was done...visually done. People don't like to know a "command line" exists at all. Point-->Click...Point-->Drag-->Drop. Simple and effective.
If we can make Linux *completely* GUI without any command line at all, people..."the masses"...with begin to accept it. You can't "brute force" Linux onto people. They will simply begin to hate it and just go back to what is comfortable. I bought my Mom a laptop specifically because she wants to keep in touch with me and save on long distance after I moved. I didn't and will never introduce her to Linux. All she wants to do is send me email and write a letter or two. In Windows, all she has to do is click on Outlook...Windows autodials her ISP, brings up the email client, and when she is done sending me an email, it hangs up for her. That also goes for when she just gets on the internet in general. If she wants to buy some little Create-a-Card program or something, there is no stupid rpm -Uvh foo or anything of that nature. She pops in the CD, it Autoplays for her, and in 10-15 minutes she is happily sending out Christmas cards on her new computer. No shell scripts, no command line, no bullshit whatsoever. And that is just how I like her to be...Happy. And that is how everyone would like to be, including myself. I also know how much I enjoyed BeOs and OS/2 and Macintosh. And in all but the *OLD* MacOs not including MacOS X, you could still get to a command line if you really *needed* to...but with a productive, effective, visual, and elegant GUI, a command line is completely pointless. Without people understanding that *needing* to make things overly *non-visual* such as 90% of Linux, then people are just not going to use it as a Desktop OS.
Re:It's Good to See Alternate-OS Coverage (Score:1)
Possible, but no one is yet interested in doing it. Kurt spent his time porting khtml away from Qt, rather than port Qt for khtml.
If it has POSIX emulation (which ISTR it does nto yet)
AtheOS is POSIX.1 compliant. POSIX isn't an emulation layer by the way, it's a defined API for UNIX systems.
it can run GNOME and KDE, which is the sine qua non of a modern OS, unfortunately.
While we're at it, we could replace libatheos with X. Then we'll dump the kernel and replace it with Linux. AFS, well we may as well just use ResierFS.
Why should AtheOS have to use KDE or Gnome? I sense much trolling in you. Either that, or you are seriously misguided.
Honestly, AtheOS has the potential to beat out KDE and Gnome. libatheos is (IMHO) a better toolkit than Qt, certainly better than anything GTK+ has to offer. It's being written almost entirely by one guy, so everything is consistent, and integrates nicely.
I'm hoping to be able to replace my current KDE2 setup with AtheOS for my every day web/email/IRC/coding before the year is out. Give AtheOS 12 months, and lets see.
Re:We have the complete lineup (Score:1)
What you're looking at are basic widgets that any GUI provides, including any and every toolkit for X. How do you think those scrollbars and menus get on your applications? They're high level, yes, but they need to be.
I would much rather see an interface that reliably and quickly does "draw a rectangle here" and "format this UTF-8 text here" would be more powerful, as it would allow variation in the GUI design.
Many of the low level constructs are available in libatheos, although the lower level 2D graphics primitives are weak to non-existent. That doesn't mean you can't create a bitmap and draw to it yourself, or write a library to do that for you.
Why would you want to allow "variation in the GUI design" anyway? It sounds as though you want to do exactly what X has done, and provide only the low level stuff and then end up with seven diferent toolkits on top. GUI diversity on the same platform is not a good thing, it confuses users and adds redunduncy. If Kurt wanted to do it this way, he could just be running Linux with X and be done with it. The end result would be the same.
Sorry if this seems like a flame, it is in part I guess. I would seriiously suggest you get hold of AtheOS and try out libatheos though, its a nice little system.
Religion is myth-information (Score:1)
Re:This is good (Score:1)
The BeIA has come out to mostly negative reviews, "Too slow", "Overpriced", "Too Big" and at $500 US is unlikely to beat the low end PC market.
Be Inc itself has hired a bank to sell the company and is due to be delisted from the NASDAQ on the 20th August unless it can pull its share price above a dollar.
After all this, BeOS stands a whelks chance in a supernova of ever being updated.
Be Inc jumped ship first, but didn't tell anyone, the developers have been slowly catching on, the users somewhat later and all thats left are a hard core of fanatics.
"BeOS isn't dead until they pry it off my cold dead harddrive"
---
Re:Actually, Phillipians is a book in the bible.. (Score:1)
I memorized the entire text of Phillipians once. (a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away.)
It's only 4 chapters. Correct spelling is Philippians -- but hey, this is slashdot.
--
Re:AtheOS is shaping up (Score:1)
There is.. (Score:1)
Re:Konqueror screenshot mirrored (Score:1)
Is it just one guy who did all of this, from the kernel up? The GUI? The journalled file system? The graphics? The porting of Konquerer? How come he's not everyone's hero? He seems like a uber-genius-hacker to me. Can anyone else even touch him?
I wish I could help out with the remaining programming. In any case, I want to say that I think he's got the right idea in dumping X, and I think that someone should be looking seriously at some sort of a migration path from Linux + X to this.
Hardware support will come when the community is behind this. I think we should be.
Re:It's Good to See Alternate-OS Coverage (Score:1)
It would really be a coup if KDE ran on AtheOS, because we'd quickly notice just how much X is holding back Free software. It would also fix the currend dearh of applications that AtheOS suffers from and make it much easier to get real work done on AtheOS. This would bring more developers, which at this stage are necessary if AtheOS is to go further.
Re:Hey... (Score:1)
Well the fact is that the server has never crashed due to the slashdot effect. It is always bogged down by the heavy load though and being hooked to the net through a 2Mb link there is no way it can handle the incredible load created by such a slashdot article.
The reason it lost it's uptime today was that I took it down to add another 128MB of memory to be able to increase the maximum number of simulatnous HTTP connections allowed (it is mentioned on the news-page but as you probably have noticed having anything on the atheos.cx right now doesn't mean that it is accessible to everybody :)
PS: This is my first /. posting with the AtheOS web-browser so please be kind with
me if it end's up all screwed :)
Re:AtheOS is shaping up (Score:1)
Actually, Phillipians is a book in the bible.. (Score:1)
Freedom of speech won't feed my children
Re:AtheOS is shaping up HURD (Score:1)
Re:Anyone else... (Score:1)
Very nice but... (Score:1)
Re:Oh Lord... (Score:1)
you obviously never did
few who did ever came back, and that's for a reason
Re:Religion is myth-information (Score:1)
Not exactly - The name hints that there's just not enough people who believe in it yet.
If it prospers, it may grow up to become embroilled in some OS 'holy wars' some day.
Liquor
Atheist's OS (Score:2)
Re:AtheOS is shaping up (Score:2)
Of course, the HURD still lives on as long as someone has interest in it. That's how Free Software works. But there's no GNU vs. Linux or RMS vs. Linus competition going on. For the foreseeable future HURD is an experimental system, of interest mostly to OS developers. At one point Linux was in a similar position. Many OSes have never gone past that. So it goes.
Re:AtheOS is shaping up (Score:2)
Re:AtheOS (Score:2)
Re:We have the complete lineup (Score:2)
Putting the toolkit into the system and you are frozen into a design that may seem modern right now, but may seem massively outdated and obsolete just a few years from now. The best example is why we are even able to use X now when it was designed in 1983? If X had had the toolkit as part of it it would have an Athena-style toolkit, and MicroSoft could have quite rightly laughed us off the planet.
The overhead of X is due to stupid graphics primitives, not the fact that graphics primitives are used. There is no reason a round trip is needed to select a color or a font. Unfortunately the interface to widgets can easily become much more complex than the graphics needed to draw them, obvious examples are X window managers.
And I certainly do want a dozen different toolkits on top! GUI diversity is a good thing, it might mean, dare I say it, "innovation" could happen!
Also everybody says users are "confused by different toolkits". I think this is a myth, I have worked with a lot of users and have seen no sign of this. People recognize buttons and scrollbars and menus with an enormous variety of appearances, and put up with keys not doing any thing with remarkable ease. Otherwise computer game designers could never get away with the designs they do.
It is true that huge differences cause problems, for instance Athena scrollbars were a stupid design. But these are solved quickly by competition between the toolkits. For example all the Unix toolkits quickly migrated to a Windows-style of key bindings, this would have been impossible if Unix had an enforced toolkit.
The "confused user" is a figment of the imagination of the people who are trying to force these toolkits down our throats. These people should get out of their theoretical ivory towers and examine exactly what the real programmers and users use and expect from their computers.
I do want to check out AtheOS, though. I suspect the necessary lower levels are there, because implementing a toolkit like they describe is impossible without them.
Re:We have the complete lineup (Score:2)
It does sound like AtheOS, although it implements the GUI as part of the system, implementes it as another task in user space using the microkernel=like communication mechanism. This sounds like an ok approach.
Although I do find the fact that there are "scrollbars" and "text edit" things in the interface (see the change log) indicates that he has made the GUI interface way too high level. I would much rather see an interface that reliably and quickly does "draw a rectangle here" and "format this UTF-8 text here" would be more powerful, as it would allow variation in the GUI design.
I still need to study the design and try it out to really get an opinion, though.
Re:AtheOS is shaping up (Score:2)
Heh. I think that's the coolest thing about AtheOS:
they're doing something NEW, not just cloning UNIX.
C-X C-S
Re:AtheOS (Score:2)
--
Re:Mmmmm. (Score:2)
Yes, I didn't intend to dis AtheOS for immaturity. It is, after all, version 0.3.5. When I mention features, I mean things like "what is its security model?", "what kind of system calls does it support?", etc.
> It has a very modular design (microkernel based?), allowing new components to be added without core modifications.
Yes, that's a legitimate OS design feature. But notice that it doesn't have anything to do with the choice of language.
> Perhaps the most important quality of any new OS is how easy it is to develop and extend and the quality of the core system design. I haven't looked at the source yet, but it seems to score very well on both those fronts. It's done in C++, which I personally find much more pleasing and useful than C.
Yes, if I had other reasons to create a new OS, then I would consider my choice of language very carefully. But to push an OS to users on the grounds that it's written in $LANGUAGE is, IMO, just silly.
Also, I trust your comment has to do with the ease of maintaining the OS. Please, please, please don't tell me that AtheOS requires you to program applications in C++. An general purpose OS should be agnostic about what language an application is written in.
BTW, I'm not trying to dis C++. FWIW, in circles where my favorite language is discussed, the suggestion comes up about once a quarter, "Why don't we write an OS in $LANGUAGE?" My response there is just the same: "What a stupid reason to write a new OS!" I certainly wouldn't switch to a new OS if the only thing it had to offer was that it was written in my favorite language.
If someone wants to push an OS, let them push it on the basis of what it is, not what language it's written in.
--
Re:We have the complete lineup (Score:2)
Why does Linux need to concetrate on an application? An operating system is just that: an operating system. It needs to provide services and referee access to resources. It shouldn't care what is layered on top of it.
I haven't got anything against the Mac, but with the Mac Apple introduced an evil paradigm: the UI is part of the OS. Microsoft picked up on that paradigm and actively worked hard to weed out the underlying OS (or at least to hide it). That's a move in the wrong direction.
The reason Linux is doing well everywhere from mainframes to superclusters to servers to desktops to embedded devices, is that it doesn't try to be anything other than an operating system. It provides some basic services. Other people decide what to do with those services.
Lots of other OSes have done the same in the past. Let's don't rush to give up the good ideas.
--
It's Good to See Alternate-OS Coverage (Score:2)
From what little research I've done, AtheOS looks to be the most promising up-and-comer thus far (the *BSDs have been around, IIRC, longer than Linux, and thus don't qualify). It has some very nice features. A GTK+ port would not be out of place; neither would a full Qt port. If it has POSIX emulation (which ISTR it does nto yet) and can run those two toolkits, it can run GNOME and KDE, which is the sine qua non of a modern OS, unfortunately.
It's good to see coverage like this. Perhaps this will help attract developers.
Look before you leap (Score:2)
Re:I respect AtheOS, but i wouldn't use it. (Score:2)
>>>>>>>
Neither is Linux. Of course, they're both POSIX complient.
2. No text console.
>>>>>>>>>>
Didn't you see the terminal in the screenshot?
3. Everything in the kernel, particularly video drivers and GUI. That's a bad design. PC video hardware is too crappy to stake your OSes reliability on them or the video drivers.
>>>>>>>>>>
Did you bother to read the documentation?!! The thing is a hybrid-type kernel, and has an app_server that does the GUI bit. If the low level architecture is anything like BeOS's (it doesn't say exactly) then it should run the bulk of the video driver in the context of the app_server, and then use a kernel driver to bang interrupts and registers and whatnot.
Re:This is good (Score:2)
PS> No offense, of course.
Re:Why AtheOS over BeOS? (Score:2)
Re:AtheOS is shaping up (Score:2)
PS> Don't think that I am defending X in any way. For a desktop user, almost every GUI system out there is better than X. For a network user, QNX Photon is quite a leg up on X. The only thing that X has is support, and that can be said of Windows as well...
Potential (Score:2)
PS> Why do windowing system designers never use the X11 driver API as their standard, so drivers can be ported easily? It's not *that* bad!
Re:What about drivers? (Score:2)
We have the complete lineup (Score:2)
Think about it: Linux would no longer have to try to be both a server OS and a desktop OS (and an embedded OS too, now, it would seem), but could concentrate on being the best server OS out there. AtheOS, meanwhile, would become the best client. Where it makes sense, you share the source. (Heck, we've already got Konquerer running on AtheOS; if that's doable, then moving other stuff shouldn't be hard at all.) But we'd suddenly move from having just a single product that competes pretty well with Windows 2000 Server and kind of well with Windows 2000 Professional, and end up with two products: one which clobbers the Server (Linux), one which clobbers the Professional (AtheOS).
Maybe this isn't necessary just yet. I'm almost certain that, eventually, Linux can become just as easy, possibly easier, than Windows (though what sacrifices in power may be necessary to finally truly achieve that goal I don't know). But I still think this is something we should really look at.
Re:Mmmmm. (Score:2)
Re:Anyone else... (Score:2)
Re:AtheOS and VMware (Score:2)
Drivers are coming along (Score:2)
Re:Mmmmm. (Score:2)
I guess all those watchdog boards that my next office neighbour sold in 1992-1994 for Linux systems were actually unnecessary.
Re:chmod -beast (Score:2)
chmod 666 *
The Evil Files contain the Mark of the Beast!
J
Anyone else... (Score:2)
...panic for a microsecond when you saw the ".cx" domain?
--
Re:TLD (Score:2)
Re:This is good (Score:2)
Wrong... Computers are too hard for the average user to understand. Windows included (remember Linus's comment about no one understanding NT? I think that you mean that it is too hard for the average user to use.
I disagree here too. My parents, both in their fifties, use Red Hat Linux (and are even asking me to migrate their other Windows system to Linux ;). They use their system more and ask me for help less than when they were using Windows for most of their work. Oh, and they are pretty computer illiterite as well...
OTOH, I have met sub-average users who could not use it. One comes to mind. This is a fellow who really liked Windows 3.11 because after 8 hears, he was able to do things like save a file (something he struggled with on Windows 95 and Linux). Bear in mind, this person bought a mousepad for his trackball... But this sort of thing aside, most people can use it quiclky and easily, as long as someone else handles the really technical stuff...
Sig: Tell all your friends NOT to download the Advanced Ebook Processor:
Re:He who needs atheos, (Score:2)
For those without religious studies, Phillipians is unlikely to be a book in the bible ;)
Sig: Tell all your friends NOT to download the Advanced Ebook Processor:
Re:Religion is myth-information (Score:2)
The Lottery:
Re:He who needs atheos, but cant get it (Score:2)
The Lottery:
What about drivers? (Score:2)
I might try it, but it has very low chance of recognizing my hardware, so I can't event try.
--
Two witches watched two watches.
chmod -beast (Score:2)
Re:chmod -beast (Score:2)
Re:Oh Lord... (Score:2)
Re:Oh Lord... (Score:2)
You can install Linux on a Power Mac. Other OS's have been ported too.
And for open-source fans, what if you want to customize your OS?
With OS-X being FreeBSD based, the source for it is included. I don't know of anyone actually making changes to this and having it work, but I suspect it's possible to make some changes to the non-proprietary portions of the OS.
As for hardware, who says a company cant stock up on spares? You can buy hardware components from Apple. Power supplies, CD ROM/RWs, video, audio, etc. You can buy that stuff from them just as easily as any other vendor or architecture.
I do agree that being tied to Apple hardware sucks, but I find the OS-X I use at work very useful. My co-workers also do. We have 3 Macs with OS-X on them in our lab. And one guy uses Mac hardware with Linux OS.
Like I said earlier, you pay a lot, but you get results. With some x86 hardware, the line "You get what you pay for" often applies. You don't see many Mac people saying that.
For software, many companies (MS included) are porting softare apps over to OS-X. Just about any GNU tool will also port, thanks to a FreeBSD base. Someone mentioned problems for guis. QT is developing a library for OS-X that will allow porting of apps written for other platforms over to OS-X. Bottom line is that there is plenty of software available for OS-X.
As for those benchmarks, see the keynotes from the MacWorld Expo from a few weeks ago. MacWorld Expo [macworldexpo.com] should have them.
Yawn... (Score:3)
Kurt: (Score:3)
Re:AtheOS is shaping up (Score:3)
I think you're confusing that with Be's "we're trying to make some money and survive, so kiss our ass" approach.
But I could be wrong.
So much for server up-time. (Score:3)
Sever timed out while trying to access www.atheos.cx.
Sorry, AtheOS, we just zeroed your uptime counter.
Re:Potential (Score:3)
Using X11's driver API is a good idea, but if you're gonna write a whole new OS and API from scratch, you may as well break the driver interface while you're at it...
He who needs atheos, (Score:4)
Re:Why AtheOS over BeOS? (Score:4)
1) AtheOS is being actively developed, BeOS is not.
2) AtheOS is opens source (see (1) for results).
3) AtheOS has better POSIX complience.
4) AtheOS has better development tools (more modern GCC).
Of course, BeOS is still technalogically more mature, but given 1-4, and Be's lack of lifesigns it won't be for long.
No, the irony of this post is not lost on me.
Konqueror screenshot mirrored (Score:4)
Re:Mmmmm. (Score:4)
One impressive factor is SMP support: already! OpenBSD still doesn't support SMP and NetBSD just added it recently (not a flame of the BSD folks -- obviously, they're focusing on different goals. But I still think it's an impressive feature to have this early in its development).
Oh Lord... (Score:4)
What about it? Apple has released their BSD core OS, but the GUI, which most users consider the computer, is still strictly proprietary. How many times do we have to trot this old dog out before we realize it's the same old dog that's been given a shearing and a flea-dip?
I, for one, don't feel like spending $1500-2000 for the same bang-per-buck I already have in my Athlon-based PC for under $500 just to use MacOS.
Re:/. the change log? (Score:4)
Re:AtheOS is shaping up (Score:4)
AtheOS and HURD also had very different goals. HURD was designed to be a scalable, clusterable microkernel-based OS with lots of advanced features, while AtheOS was designed to be something that works, here and now. Albeit heavily inspired by BeOS's "multimedia OS" idea.
I do admire Kurt for getting so much done, almost all on his own, but I wonder if AtheOS is ambitious enough to survive in the future, or whether adding new features will be like flogging a dead horse.
AtheOS is shaping up (Score:5)
The best part about AtheOS is that it is everything that the HURD tried to be but hasn't become yet. AtheOS is an object-oriented microkernel OS that is already up and running - something that the HURD should have been about six years ago. RMS is stuck playing catch-up to the newcomer now, and it's anyone's guess as to whether he bows out of the race or starts making good on the HURD's promises. Only time will tell.
-vort3x
(posting anonymously to preserve my precious karma)
HURD != Vaporware (Score:5)
The HURD is certainly far from "finished" but it is by no means vaporware. Nowadays development is happened under the Debian HURD project [debian.org]. It does boot, it has networking, it's got X11, it's got install disks (Linux based at this time). The last month has seen the first PPP support.
At present there are over 1000 hurd-compiled packages [zork.net] - 25% of the Debian archive. (a full list of packages with statuses here [debian.org] (big page))
For more information, check the afore mentioned Debian HURD pages, Kernel Cousin Debian Hurd [zork.net] (mailing list summaries) and the HURD Documentation Project [sourceforge.net].
Re:AtheOS is shaping up (Score:5)
Does anyone other than me see the irony in that statement?
Re:Konqueror screenshot mirrored (Score:5)
Actual text (Score:5)
New version. There has been a long time since the last release of AtheOS but finally V0.3.5 is ready for release. There is several reasons for the long delay like the fact that I have been rather busy at work lately and that we have had a great summer here in Oslo so AtheOS have not always been at the top of my priority list. Also quite a lot of work have gone into this release and quite a lot of new features and improvements have been made.
Many of the changes are additions and modifications to the various API's and toolkits but also a few user-visible aspects are improved in this release. Many bugs are fixed in the text editor and list-view widgets. The scrollbar have got a totally new look and a few new features like "paging" (jump one page when clicking beside the knob) and small arrow buttons that can be used to move the know.
Some crash-bugs have been fixed and the general robustness of the application server has been improved. Also several kernel crash-bugs have been fixed so the general stability of AtheOS have improved quite a bit. The uptime on my heavily stressed developer machine is 34 days when I write this (the time since the last HW upgrade).
This version also have two new keymaps (German and Sweedish) and support for a wide range of nVidia graphics adaptors.
The main focus for V0.3.5 however has been on the KHTML based web browser [atheos.cx]. I have ported the HTML parser/renderer used in the Konqueror [konqueror.org] web browser (KHTML) to AtheOS. KHTML is a very capabel HTML parser and renderer that support both CSS and javascript and so does the AtheOS web browser. Finally a high-quality web browser for AtheOS! The browser is part of the 0.3.5 base install and the 0.3.4->0.3.5 upgrade archive. Take a look at the changes [atheos.cx] list for a more detailed list of changes since V0.3.4.
Re:Potential (Score:5)