6 ms·

Seeing this and the other day about SerenityOS I have the feeling from checking the home page that focus is on certain graphics experience, and so I wonder why

Seeing this and the other day about SerenityOS I have the feeling from checking the home page that focus is on certain graphics experience, and so I wonder why build a OS from scratch instead of a window manager over Linux, apart from the coolness factor. My question is what things can impact the user experience if you are allowed to start from a fresh design?

armchairhacker 5y ago
#1 reason is probably nostalgia, and just the idea that you have a simpler, older-style OS. vs a modern OS just reskinned to look old. Personally i think speed: I see a 90s UI and I expect stuff to happen almost instantly on my modern Desktop. Also expecting less bugs because it’s a simpler OS. But in practice even though Linux is much larger and more complex it’s probably still faster and less buggy. So probably just the idea. EDIT: Should also add, probably because these OSs do some core things differently than Unix and Windows. Those OSs are constantly updated but the core features are still old, so the niche OSs could possibly implement them “better”.
- anthk 5y ago
  > Also expecting less bugs because it’s a simpler OS. That's not my experince on late 90's. You sneezed, and w98se BSOD'd.
  - somewhatbetter 5y ago
    You probably cannot add 1+1, that person meant the 90's style desktop means there is no unnecessary cruft in it, therefore it won't try to amaze the user with eyecandy, so operations will happen instantly. And less code means less chance for bugs.
    - anthk 5y ago
      > And less code means less chance for bugs. The OpenBSD bug on Xenocara which allowed root needed more code, not less. So this is the case with pledge(4) and unveil(4), you need (a little) more code in onder to sandbox setuff properly. NT4 was much more complex than W98SE, yet NT4/w2k was much better on multitasking (by a huge margin). I've seen w98se crawl even with a Pentium 4 and 512MB of RAM with just 3 IE windows open back in the day, while 2k flied.
      - somewhatbetter 5y ago
        >The OpenBSD bug on Xenocara which allowed root needed more code, not less. X was considered and still is a "hack". >So this is the case with pledge(4) and unveil(4), you need (a little) more code in onder to sandbox setuff properly. You don't write a graphical subsystem and then tries to sandbox it. Sadly nix advocates won't ever understand this logic. >NT4 was much more complex than W98SE, yet NT4/w2k was much better on multitasking (by a huge margin). I've seen w98se crawl even with a Pentium 4 and 512MB of RAM with just 3 IE windows open back in the day, while 2k flied. Let me compare apples with pears, i mean two different approach for OS development which have almost nothing common except the w32 stuff, and let me conclude the newer is better. I don't really see your point.
        anthk 5y ago
        I woudn't say "newer" is better, but sometimes you need a bigger and more complex codebase to get more performance, stability and security.
        somewhatbetter 5y ago
        And bugs.
zozbot234 5y ago
Linux plus the PREEMPT_RT patchset would make a nice low-latency kernel for multimedia and UX-focused workloads. It would still need quite a bit of user-level work compared to most distros, however. Some other OS projects have legitimate reasons for starting from scratch, e.g. Redox being written in a memory-safe language. I suppose you could class Haiku's compatibility with original BeOS software as reason enough.
- renox 5y ago
  Not really, it's a social reason not a technical reason: those who are 'hardcore enough' to build a 'BeOS shell' like to 'own' their kernel too.. From an 'time to release' POV it'll take much longer, but it's not like they're expecting to earn money from the release.. Haiku is still here while all the BeOS clone projects on top of Linux/BSD kernel died..
swerner 5y ago
Linux 20 years ago wasn’t what it is today. Low latency audio for example, that was something that BeOS in the late 90s could do out of the box, a similar experience on Linux required special kernel patches and some compromises or it simply wasn’t there at all. Audio latencies of less than 10ms on consumer hardware were otherwise unheard of. Windows, out of the box, was still operating in the 100+ms range.
- zozbot234 5y ago
  True low-latency workloads on modern Linux (and 10ms is definitely low-latency!) still require a custom patchset (namely PREEMPT_RT). It's slowly making its way through the process of being upstreamed, but still.
- swerner 5y ago
  I would love to see a BeOS/Haiku userland on top, of the Linux Kernel. That would bring wide hardware support, including HW accelerated 3D (something BeOS was always lacking). It is not going to happen though, the attempts that were didn’t go far and porting the entirety of Haiku would be a gigantic effort that no one is volunteering for.
  - pjmlp 5y ago
    Android, not joking, most of the original team are former BeOS engineers.
    - zozbot234 5y ago
      And it's still terrible at low-latency response compared w/ iOS...
      - pjmlp 5y ago
        That has been sorted out, but you need to make use of NDK APIs like AAudio, and naturally own a flagship device, so are the Google ways.
pjmlp 5y ago
Because we already have enough UNIX clones and a Window manager lacks the full stack development experience.
somewhatbetter 5y ago
>I wonder why build a OS from scratch instead of a window manager over Linux During the last 30 years it was proven tt is impossible to create a seamless window manager / desktop environment on nixes. >what things can impact the user experience if you are allowed to start from a fresh design? It lets forget everything about the harm, mess and pain the nixes made.
- setpatchaddress 5y ago
  Mac OS X is proof that this can be done if you build a window system from scratch, without X Windows. But I’m not personally on board the just-use-Linux train. There’s room for innovation at the kernel level.

armchairhacker 5y ago

#1 reason is probably nostalgia, and just the idea that you have a simpler, older-style OS. vs a modern OS just reskinned to look old. Personally i think speed: I see a 90s UI and I expect stuff to happen almost instantly on my modern Desktop. Also expecting less bugs because it’s a simpler OS. But in practice even though Linux is much larger and more complex it’s probably still faster and less buggy. So probably just the idea. EDIT: Should also add, probably because these OSs do some core things differently than Unix and Windows. Those OSs are constantly updated but the core features are still old, so the niche OSs could possibly implement them “better”.

anthk 5y ago
> Also expecting less bugs because it’s a simpler OS. That's not my experince on late 90's. You sneezed, and w98se BSOD'd.
- somewhatbetter 5y ago
  You probably cannot add 1+1, that person meant the 90's style desktop means there is no unnecessary cruft in it, therefore it won't try to amaze the user with eyecandy, so operations will happen instantly. And less code means less chance for bugs.
  - anthk 5y ago
    > And less code means less chance for bugs. The OpenBSD bug on Xenocara which allowed root needed more code, not less. So this is the case with pledge(4) and unveil(4), you need (a little) more code in onder to sandbox setuff properly. NT4 was much more complex than W98SE, yet NT4/w2k was much better on multitasking (by a huge margin). I've seen w98se crawl even with a Pentium 4 and 512MB of RAM with just 3 IE windows open back in the day, while 2k flied.
    - somewhatbetter 5y ago
      >The OpenBSD bug on Xenocara which allowed root needed more code, not less. X was considered and still is a "hack". >So this is the case with pledge(4) and unveil(4), you need (a little) more code in onder to sandbox setuff properly. You don't write a graphical subsystem and then tries to sandbox it. Sadly nix advocates won't ever understand this logic. >NT4 was much more complex than W98SE, yet NT4/w2k was much better on multitasking (by a huge margin). I've seen w98se crawl even with a Pentium 4 and 512MB of RAM with just 3 IE windows open back in the day, while 2k flied. Let me compare apples with pears, i mean two different approach for OS development which have almost nothing common except the w32 stuff, and let me conclude the newer is better. I don't really see your point.
      - anthk 5y ago
        I woudn't say "newer" is better, but sometimes you need a bigger and more complex codebase to get more performance, stability and security.
        somewhatbetter 5y ago
        And bugs.

zozbot234 5y ago

Linux plus the PREEMPT_RT patchset would make a nice low-latency kernel for multimedia and UX-focused workloads. It would still need quite a bit of user-level work compared to most distros, however. Some other OS projects have legitimate reasons for starting from scratch, e.g. Redox being written in a memory-safe language. I suppose you could class Haiku's compatibility with original BeOS software as reason enough.

renox 5y ago
Not really, it's a social reason not a technical reason: those who are 'hardcore enough' to build a 'BeOS shell' like to 'own' their kernel too.. From an 'time to release' POV it'll take much longer, but it's not like they're expecting to earn money from the release.. Haiku is still here while all the BeOS clone projects on top of Linux/BSD kernel died..

swerner 5y ago

Linux 20 years ago wasn’t what it is today. Low latency audio for example, that was something that BeOS in the late 90s could do out of the box, a similar experience on Linux required special kernel patches and some compromises or it simply wasn’t there at all. Audio latencies of less than 10ms on consumer hardware were otherwise unheard of. Windows, out of the box, was still operating in the 100+ms range.

zozbot234 5y ago
True low-latency workloads on modern Linux (and 10ms is definitely low-latency!) still require a custom patchset (namely PREEMPT_RT). It's slowly making its way through the process of being upstreamed, but still.
swerner 5y ago
I would love to see a BeOS/Haiku userland on top, of the Linux Kernel. That would bring wide hardware support, including HW accelerated 3D (something BeOS was always lacking). It is not going to happen though, the attempts that were didn’t go far and porting the entirety of Haiku would be a gigantic effort that no one is volunteering for.
- pjmlp 5y ago
  Android, not joking, most of the original team are former BeOS engineers.
  - zozbot234 5y ago
    And it's still terrible at low-latency response compared w/ iOS...
    - pjmlp 5y ago
      That has been sorted out, but you need to make use of NDK APIs like AAudio, and naturally own a flagship device, so are the Google ways.

pjmlp 5y ago

Because we already have enough UNIX clones and a Window manager lacks the full stack development experience.

somewhatbetter 5y ago

>I wonder why build a OS from scratch instead of a window manager over Linux During the last 30 years it was proven tt is impossible to create a seamless window manager / desktop environment on nixes. >what things can impact the user experience if you are allowed to start from a fresh design? It lets forget everything about the harm, mess and pain the nixes made.

setpatchaddress 5y ago
Mac OS X is proof that this can be done if you build a window system from scratch, without X Windows. But I’m not personally on board the just-use-Linux train. There’s room for innovation at the kernel level.