4 ms·

I tried haiku back in 2011, it was a fun 2 hour then I forgot about it. Since that short experience, every other year news find me that it reached a new milesto

by croo 6y ago

I tried haiku back in 2011, it was a fun 2 hour then I forgot about it. Since that short experience, every other year news find me that it reached a new milestone. It does sound like fun to write a new os... but this project is at least 10 years old. How and why did it survive and reached beta? Why does it still exist? What practical applications does this OS has (or will have) over the commonly knowns?

azinman2 6y ago
Why do people work on old cars? For the love of it.
- vvpan 6y ago
  So you are saying Haiku is a hobby project with no goal of being um... "production"? Are you sure that people building it feel the same way?
  - azinman2 6y ago
    Considering it's a small set of developers who all work part time re-implementing an OS from the 90s that failed when it was a commercial entity fully staffed, it's hard to imagine that they're super serious about it being a "production" OS.
    - chipotle_coyote 6y ago
      A couple quick comments: (1) While Be, Inc., failed, it's debatable whether it failed because the OS wasn't good enough. It was certainly being used in commercial production in certain places already -- not just by hobbyists. Steinberg was selling a BeOS version of their (very high-grade and expensive!) audio production system, Nuendo, and I actually saw Level Control Systems' CueStation, an "audio automation system" for Broadway-grade live performance systems, running on BeOS in the wild -- it was running the control booth of Cirque de Soleil's permanent installation at Disney World. BeOS was doing shockingly well in attracting commercial applications in 1997-1999 given its tiny user base -- what they were failing at was attracting hardware companies to ship pre-installed systems. Be's management was dead set on the idea that "steady and slow growth as a niche OS" just wouldn't do, and they needed to either be the next Apple or die trying. And, when they punted on desktop BeOS in favor of a custom version for what turned out to be the absolutely imaginary market for internet appliances, they pretty much chose "die trying." (2) I think it depends on what you mean by "production". I mean, it's probably never going to be competing with Linux servers. But is it possible it could be competitive with Linux as a desktop OS? Maybe. A few years ago I wouldn't have been that optimistic, but they've done a tremendous job with ports.
      - city41 6y ago
        > what they were failing at was attracting hardware companies to ship pre-installed systems. Microsoft told hardware manufacturers that if they ship machines with BeOS they would charge them more for Windows licenses. https://web.archive.org/web/20131109045719/http://www.internetnews.com/ent-news/print.php/3073811/ https://web.archive.org/web/20131109045719/http://www.intern...

by croo 6y ago

azinman2 6y ago

Why do people work on old cars? For the love of it.

vvpan 6y ago
So you are saying Haiku is a hobby project with no goal of being um... "production"? Are you sure that people building it feel the same way?
- azinman2 6y ago
  Considering it's a small set of developers who all work part time re-implementing an OS from the 90s that failed when it was a commercial entity fully staffed, it's hard to imagine that they're super serious about it being a "production" OS.
  - chipotle_coyote 6y ago
    A couple quick comments: (1) While Be, Inc., failed, it's debatable whether it failed because the OS wasn't good enough. It was certainly being used in commercial production in certain places already -- not just by hobbyists. Steinberg was selling a BeOS version of their (very high-grade and expensive!) audio production system, Nuendo, and I actually saw Level Control Systems' CueStation, an "audio automation system" for Broadway-grade live performance systems, running on BeOS in the wild -- it was running the control booth of Cirque de Soleil's permanent installation at Disney World. BeOS was doing shockingly well in attracting commercial applications in 1997-1999 given its tiny user base -- what they were failing at was attracting hardware companies to ship pre-installed systems. Be's management was dead set on the idea that "steady and slow growth as a niche OS" just wouldn't do, and they needed to either be the next Apple or die trying. And, when they punted on desktop BeOS in favor of a custom version for what turned out to be the absolutely imaginary market for internet appliances, they pretty much chose "die trying." (2) I think it depends on what you mean by "production". I mean, it's probably never going to be competing with Linux servers. But is it possible it could be competitive with Linux as a desktop OS? Maybe. A few years ago I wouldn't have been that optimistic, but they've done a tremendous job with ports.
    - city41 6y ago
      > what they were failing at was attracting hardware companies to ship pre-installed systems. Microsoft told hardware manufacturers that if they ship machines with BeOS they would charge them more for Windows licenses. https://web.archive.org/web/20131109045719/http://www.internetnews.com/ent-news/print.php/3073811/ https://web.archive.org/web/20131109045719/http://www.intern...