Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Operating Systems Software

New SkyOS 5.0 Screenshots Released 48

Posted by timothy from the eye-food dept.
Hexydes writes "After 3 months of waiting, the first round of screenshots showing off the new GUI for SkyOS 5.0 have been released. The three screenshots show various features of the new GUI, including the new WindUI theme, new Viewer window, and various window effects such as curves, shadows, and transparency. In addition to the new GUI, SkyOS 5.0 will have other additions, such as more support for hardware (just to name one, an ATI driver to go alongside the NVidia driver), speed and stability improvements, anti-aliased text, and Bochs support."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New SkyOS 5.0 Screenshots Released More

New SkyOS 5.0 Screenshots Released

Comments Filter:

  • So why should I use SkyOS, and not GNU/Linux? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Skuggan ( 88681 ) on Wednesday November 26, 2003 @02:54PM (#7571866) Homepage
    It looks just like all other spinoffs where someone begins to write a cool GUI, and then it becomes a not so cool OS.

    What am I missing if I run GNU/Linux, GNU/BSD or GNU/Cygwin/Windows?

    If it's only the GUI I guess it can be implemented in XFree...

    (GNU above is only to keep RMS happy...)
    • GNU/BSD?

      Unless your referring to the incomplete Debian/NetBSD, it most certainly is not GNU/BSD. BSD has it's own userland binaries, unlike Linux distributions which contain mostly GNU based userland binaries.

    • Re:So why should I use SkyOS, and not GNU/Linux? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by cgenman ( 325138 ) on Wednesday November 26, 2003 @06:59PM (#7573845) Homepage
      Actually, there really isn't a great reason to use Sky OS over Linux or BSD... and that's not the point. Sky OS is one of many smaller projects whose primary purpose is to satisfy the hobby needs of the creator... Kind of like where Linux was when Linus decided his schoolwork was too boring.

      There are many other examples out there. Contiki, [dunkels.com] Triangle Os, [chello.nl] and many others [osnews.com].

      There are also Open Source [sourceforge.net], commercial, [morphos.net] and potentially useful [reactos.com] hobbyist systems out there. However, if you are looking for the most comprehensive, useful desktop suite, look elsewhere. All of these Os's are unique and well-intentioned, but very few are actually practical.

      Practicality is not the point. Curiosity is the point. What would a different implementation look like? What if all the graphics subsystems were contained in the kernel? How would a real-time OS feel to the user? These questions can't be answered by just releasing a new X theme, and there aren't very many people curious enough to find out.

      These people are true geeks... Software for software's sake. Kudos to you all.

    • SkyOS sounds a lot like BeOs. An OS created from scratch that is not dragging around any legacy code. Great idea if there is software for it, but getting programmers to write for a new platform is a chore! Still BeOs would probably still be around if it weren't for the dirty pool Microsoft played in the marketplace.
      • Mabe you're right, but I think the real reason BeOS bombed was that they were the last company trying to charge for an OS without being a monopoly.

        One can only guess what would have happened if they had open sourced the OS an tried doing a Red Hat.

        Everyone has 20/20 vision looking backwards, but I think they were the last of a dying breed.

        And in case you're wondering, I used and loved BeOS.

        Cheers,

        • The reason BeOS died is the same reason OS/2 died. The parent company didn't care about it at all and didn't see it as very important.

          Be was so concerned about their BeIA portable decice system or whatever it was, that BeOS always too second place.

          • I don't see it your way.

            As I remember, BeOS was already a walking dead when they grasped the BeIA idea out of sheer desperation.
            They were at the end of the road, and hopeless.

            One can only guess what would have happened if they had Open Sourced BeOS (minus propietary bits) but the idea was too bold for them.

            Their loss, our loss.

            Cheers
  • I searched the web page pretty carefully, and found nothing at all on this topic! :'}
    • Didn't see anything either, /and/ I didn't see any links to source. Is this proprietary software or not?

      1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

      ;)

    • Re:So what's the license on SkyOS, anyway? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by sakyamuni ( 528502 ) on Wednesday November 26, 2003 @03:09PM (#7572022)

      There's some discussion of licensing in the project's forums [skyos.org]. The sentiment appears to be "open source bad".

      Also, in this thread [skyos.org], the project's author states in a message dated January 2002 that, "for now", SkyOS is freeware.

      Meanwhile, allegations of GPL violations [skyos.org] are already arising.

      • Re:So what's the license on SkyOS, anyway? (Score:5, Informative)

        by msuzio ( 3104 ) on Wednesday November 26, 2003 @03:59PM (#7572469) Homepage
        Wow. I can't believe the absolutely *ignorant* comments on those forums. And I do mean *ignorant*, because the assertions made don't make any sense to me from any bit of knowledge I have at my disposal.

        "Look at what happened to Linux"
        Umm... yeah. Linux is in a sad state indeed.

        "There's lots of closed-source OS's out there, like Microsoft Windows and Mac OS!"
        Well, duh. I think perhaps those are successful because they have large teams and large corporate forces behind them... how do you match those? Open-source is one way... one person doing development all by himself seems pretty well doomed to failure.

        I don't know. Sounds like a bad horse to bet anything on. Looks pretty, I'd even use it if it were open-source (or at least not being accused of GPL violations). But I suspect this isn't going to go anywhere unless and until the project opens up in some fashion. Linus tinkered with Linux on his own for quite a while, but I doubt it would have gone anywhere if he had never GPL'ed it. He himself has often said it was the pivotal decision he made in the development...

        • ROFL (Score:2)

          by pb ( 1020 )
          Oh man, that's the funniest thing I've read all day!

          Yeah, man, you sure wouldn't want SkyOS to go the way of Linux, and accidentally become wildly successful and widely used by people.

          On the other hand, I'm sure development would be *much* slower if they didn't have all this open source code to ste^H^H^Hwork from in the first place...

          Interestingly enough, Linus GPL'd Linux out of respect for GCC, a fact that these SkyOS people (and RMS) should probably consider.

      • There's some discussion of licensing in the project's forums. The sentiment appears to be "open source bad".
        Also, in this thread, the project's author states in a message dated January 2002 that, "for now", SkyOS is freeware.
        Meanwhile, allegations of GPL violations are already arising.

        you practically need a rosetta stone to understand what they're talking about... according to one of your links,

        GPL == freeware,
        BSD'esque licenses == simply open source.

    • IIRC there's a post on the SkyOS forum which tells about the license. It is _not_ open-source. Users don't get access to the source-code. I'm not even going to try it out.

  • It looks like the shadow code needs some more work. Windows with rounded corners have that same square shadows as windows whose corners are not rounded.

    Take one of the screenshots from the front page, for example. Look at the lower-right corner of the window with the clock, at the top of the screen. Doesn't look right.

  • OK, can anybody speak up for this? What's to like about it? Why's it cool? What's it got that I should drool over?

    It looks pretty dated and derivative. It's also non-free. So - make me care...anybody?
  • After talking to an ATI representative, they said that they were unwilling to donate a video card for us to use to implement our driver. This is unfortunate, as we have great support for NVidia's cards, but currently only support ATI's cards via VESA 2.0 mode.

    If anyone has any ATI contacts, call them up and ask them to support the project with some hardware and any documents they can provide.
    I bet there are a dozen ATI developers that read slashdot, why dont you guys/gals help out. Sometimes we can bypass

    • SkyOS is not a charity. (Score:3, Insightful)

      by jbn-o ( 555068 )

      If anyone has any ATI contacts, call them up and ask them to support the project with some hardware and any documents they can provide.

      Why would I want to help a non-free OS get support? Can't the SkyOS team spend money on the parts they need to build their business (after all, they charge money for their system)? Can't they learn what they want to know from the XFree86 source code? That source code is licensed under terms that allows proprietary derivatives (unlike the GNU General Public License w [skyos.org]

      • Why would I want to help a non-free OS get support? Can't the SkyOS team spend money on the parts they need to build their business (after all, they charge money for their system)? Can't they learn what they want to know from the XFree86 source code?

        Its a free OS, they just dont give the source code. Check your facts.

        Sometimes people ignore real issues (like software freedom) to pretend they're irrelevant. Abiding by copyright law has serious consequences. If the SkyOS team is found liable for copyright
        • **Its a free OS, they just dont give the source code. Check your facts.**

          so "it's freeware for now", it's free as in beer not free as in freedom. the author could say any day that there's a 1000$ fee for every installation of it. there's no guarantee that the license will stay as it is(non existant). you can hardly blame him for assuming that it's for sale as you can't find any hardly licensing facts or information on the webpage.

          cool project but you really need to think about licensing issues even if you

        • Its a free OS, they just dont give the source code.

          Actually, I was referring to software freedom. However the proximity of the word "free" to a cost reference may have been misleading.

          Even OSNews had an article about the using GPL'ed tools doesnt open the OS.

          Using GNU GPL-covered programs (in the US) doesn't compel one to ship source code for the OS because merely executing a program is not an activity regulated by US copyright law. The page I pointed to referred to an "ES1371 driver from Li

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Yet another 23 year old implements an OS. I like that very cool squinting sideways glance on Robert, though, so maybe I should try his OS after all.
    • A guy in my graduating class wrote a simple protected mode ia32 OS called HalOS [christopherdeguise.com] for his senior project. Took him a couple of months to get something together that booted and ran a few simple text mode apps.

      There's no black magic involved in writing an OS. It's mostly about implementing documented standards. Although it can also be about implementing undocumented standards, thats a bitch. It's especially easy when you don't have things like backwards compatibility to worry about.

      Of course, writing a GOOD

  • *sigh* (Score:1, Insightful)

    by OptimoosePrime ( 612749 )
    It's not you, it's me. I just don't have time for another OS in my life right now. I'm so sorry, really.

  • SkyOS' developers have (probably inadvertantly) deleted their only copy of the source code which corresponds to the GPL-covered binaries they distribute as part of SkyOS versions 3 and 4. This means they are incapable of complying with the GNU GPL because they cannot supply the necessary source code. This is disturbing because they continue to distribute infringing binaries as I write this. This is not an unfixable situation. This is a situation SkyOS' developers have chosen not to fix until some indete

    • I would just like to add on to JBN's statement, because he is not altogether speaking the truth.

      He failed to mention that we (the SkyOS developers) have been in contact with a number of developers whose code we used in a few of the apps we include in SkyOS. None of them had an issue with our plan. This plan includes us making available source for the GPL apps upon release of SkyOS 5.0. Robert did not delete the source code, he is using the source from SkyOS 4 to build the applications for SkyOS 5.0. He di

      • He failed to mention that we (the SkyOS developers) have been in contact with a number of developers whose code we used in a few of the apps we include in SkyOS. None of them had an issue with our plan.

        I didn't mention it because it's not relevant. This does nothing to address how you are denying the users the software freedom they deserve. It's unfortunate the programmers you've contacted told you it was okay to deny users their right to complete corresponding source code. I'm going to go out on a

Slashdot Top Deals

To stay youthful, stay useful.

Close