6 ms·

I decided to try out Haiku last week. I was positively surprised how fast the whole process was. Installer loaded, system was installed and rebooted in about 20

by MawKKe 5y ago

I decided to try out Haiku last week. I was positively surprised how fast the whole process was. Installer loaded, system was installed and rebooted in about 20-30 seconds (not accounting for human I/O latency). And this was in a VM with SATA disk backing. Makes you yearn for simpler times.

qwerty456127 5y ago
> Installer loaded, system was installed and rebooted in about 20-30 seconds This was my experience with QNX 6 two decades ago. Installing and booting into its beautiful Photon desktop environment took less time than it took to just boot Windows 2000. > And this was in a VM with SATA disk backing. Believing virtualization always makes things slower is a mistake. Windows XP always booted and worked a lot faster in a VirtualBox under Linux than it did directly on the same machine.
- drclau 5y ago
  Oh, QNX [0]! That was such a great OS, and quite advanced for the times (microkernel, realtime, userland was POSIX complaint etc). I remember I tried QNX Neutrino sometime in the first half of the 2000's, and it literally booted from a 1.44MB floppy into a UI (Photon), and had a working browser and everything needed to setup an internet connection (back then, this included dialup related stuff). Of all OSes that could have been, this is the one I am most upset about not succeeding. I know it still exists in some forms, but it's pretty much fringe. Refs: [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QNX https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QNX
  - qwerty456127 5y ago
    What is worth additional mentioning is PhAB (Photon Application Builder). It was a visual (like in Visual Basic) RAD C++ GUI app builder which came bundled with the OS and accompanied by a great tutorial. It was so great, I bloody wish its clone was available for Linux (and Haiku perhaps). I also miss Photon's visual style. Subjectively, it was the best I've ever seen (and Haiku feels somewhat close to this taste actually). If somebody would offer a bundle of Linux (XFCE, GNOME, KDE) and Windows (10) themes resembling QNX 6 Photon I would buy them for some real money.
    - anthk 5y ago
      There was a KDE3/QT3 theme for Photon, and I am sure for QT4 and QT5.
  - sho_hn 5y ago
    I'd say QNX isn't quite "niche". It continues to be very successful in automotive, with most modern cars sold probably running at least a few instances on different computers throughout the in-vehicle network. Also other industries. It has safety certifications that are so far difficult to achieve with anything else able to support the required use cases.
    - detaro 5y ago
      I think niche is fair, especially since they are almost entirely driven out of the non-safety use cases, and even in them many look for alternatives (although they are hard to find). It's a shame really, QNX has some really nice parts, but it's kind of being kept on almost-life-support and isn't getting the support it needs to flourish. QNX seems to have decided that they'll ride down the almost-captive audiences they have for a few decades and collect the money until then.
      - pjmlp 5y ago
        Safety use cases have always been its main target audience, the others were the niches from QNX point of view.
    - qwerty456127 5y ago
      I don't really understand why not use it on desktop though (besides the fact there are not much relevant desktop apps available). According to my feel QNX 6 was by far the best OS I ever ran on my desktop. Fast as hell, ubreakably reliable, visually beautiful and featuring an awesome Visual RAD C++ app builder out of the box. Ok, there are not much apps and games - that's a wicked circle. But what seems really weird to me is why do nuclear power plants and critical oil infrastructure (as hacked recently) use Windows when there is QNX.
- arghwhat 5y ago
  > Believing virtualization always makes things slower is a mistake. Well, virtualization does make everything slower. It's just that the boot process ends up quite fast as the virtual machine usually has a much less (and simpler) hardware to initialize at boot, has a simpler BIOS/UEFI, and shorter if any power-on self test. A physical machine can be made to those specs - Intel has done <2s boot from power is applied till a graphical application is visible and fully interactive for automotive back in 2019.
- Abishek_Muthian 5y ago
  > Windows XP always booted and worked a lot faster in a VirtualBox under Linux than it did directly on the same machine. Then it could probably boot even faster under QEMU/KVM.
- phlakaton 5y ago
  BeOS (Haiku's emulant) and QNX were close cousins and competitors at that time, both staking out territory in the high-performance RTOS space. IIRC QNX offered hard realtime guarantees that BeOS did not, but was more limited in what it supported. I gather it was more successful in scaling down to embedded devices, too; BeIA pulled a number of tricks to get its image sizes down, but was still targeting pretty fully-featured multimedia-capable devices.

by MawKKe 5y ago

qwerty456127 5y ago

> Installer loaded, system was installed and rebooted in about 20-30 seconds This was my experience with QNX 6 two decades ago. Installing and booting into its beautiful Photon desktop environment took less time than it took to just boot Windows 2000. > And this was in a VM with SATA disk backing. Believing virtualization always makes things slower is a mistake. Windows XP always booted and worked a lot faster in a VirtualBox under Linux than it did directly on the same machine.

drclau 5y ago
Oh, QNX [0]! That was such a great OS, and quite advanced for the times (microkernel, realtime, userland was POSIX complaint etc). I remember I tried QNX Neutrino sometime in the first half of the 2000's, and it literally booted from a 1.44MB floppy into a UI (Photon), and had a working browser and everything needed to setup an internet connection (back then, this included dialup related stuff). Of all OSes that could have been, this is the one I am most upset about not succeeding. I know it still exists in some forms, but it's pretty much fringe. Refs: [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QNX https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QNX
- qwerty456127 5y ago
  What is worth additional mentioning is PhAB (Photon Application Builder). It was a visual (like in Visual Basic) RAD C++ GUI app builder which came bundled with the OS and accompanied by a great tutorial. It was so great, I bloody wish its clone was available for Linux (and Haiku perhaps). I also miss Photon's visual style. Subjectively, it was the best I've ever seen (and Haiku feels somewhat close to this taste actually). If somebody would offer a bundle of Linux (XFCE, GNOME, KDE) and Windows (10) themes resembling QNX 6 Photon I would buy them for some real money.
  - anthk 5y ago
    There was a KDE3/QT3 theme for Photon, and I am sure for QT4 and QT5.
- sho_hn 5y ago
  I'd say QNX isn't quite "niche". It continues to be very successful in automotive, with most modern cars sold probably running at least a few instances on different computers throughout the in-vehicle network. Also other industries. It has safety certifications that are so far difficult to achieve with anything else able to support the required use cases.
  - detaro 5y ago
    I think niche is fair, especially since they are almost entirely driven out of the non-safety use cases, and even in them many look for alternatives (although they are hard to find). It's a shame really, QNX has some really nice parts, but it's kind of being kept on almost-life-support and isn't getting the support it needs to flourish. QNX seems to have decided that they'll ride down the almost-captive audiences they have for a few decades and collect the money until then.
    - pjmlp 5y ago
      Safety use cases have always been its main target audience, the others were the niches from QNX point of view.
  - qwerty456127 5y ago
    I don't really understand why not use it on desktop though (besides the fact there are not much relevant desktop apps available). According to my feel QNX 6 was by far the best OS I ever ran on my desktop. Fast as hell, ubreakably reliable, visually beautiful and featuring an awesome Visual RAD C++ app builder out of the box. Ok, there are not much apps and games - that's a wicked circle. But what seems really weird to me is why do nuclear power plants and critical oil infrastructure (as hacked recently) use Windows when there is QNX.
arghwhat 5y ago
> Believing virtualization always makes things slower is a mistake. Well, virtualization does make everything slower. It's just that the boot process ends up quite fast as the virtual machine usually has a much less (and simpler) hardware to initialize at boot, has a simpler BIOS/UEFI, and shorter if any power-on self test. A physical machine can be made to those specs - Intel has done <2s boot from power is applied till a graphical application is visible and fully interactive for automotive back in 2019.
Abishek_Muthian 5y ago
> Windows XP always booted and worked a lot faster in a VirtualBox under Linux than it did directly on the same machine. Then it could probably boot even faster under QEMU/KVM.
phlakaton 5y ago
BeOS (Haiku's emulant) and QNX were close cousins and competitors at that time, both staking out territory in the high-performance RTOS space. IIRC QNX offered hard realtime guarantees that BeOS did not, but was more limited in what it supported. I gather it was more successful in scaling down to embedded devices, too; BeIA pulled a number of tricks to get its image sizes down, but was still targeting pretty fully-featured multimedia-capable devices.