On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 3:41 PM, pulkomandy
> The main grief we have with Linux is that everything there seems to need
> manual tuning, whereas we go for a system that just works, out of the
> box. The result of this, on the Linux side, is a quite fragmented
> ecosystem with GNU/Linux distributions preconfigured for certain tasks,
> and some non-GNU usues of Linux for example in Android.
It's nice to see
> that the Linux kernel is flexible enough to find uses in so many cases,
> but I think there is some use in writing and finetuning our own kernel
> and building our own APIs on top of it. Where would be the fun
Besides the "fun" argument, all your points speak *for* Linux (or a BSD for
that matter). There would be a configuration tuned for BeOS workloads, and
you would never have to do that job again. I don't follow your logic.
As for the fun argument, I totally buy that. It's an important motivational
factor. But the truth is, end users don't care about that. They want a BeOS
clone that works. Now :) I'm personally having a ton of fun making a
BeOS/Linux, so I guess it's possible.
> I must also mention the BlueEyedOS project, which was an implementation
> of the BeAPI on Linux (2.4 or maybe 2.6 at the time). It didn't get as
> much success as Haiku for various reasons, but mainly because most of the
> developers chose to go with Haiku. I wasn't a contributor of either
> projects back then, so I won't comment on why this happened.
It was a blue eyed effort. An attempt with the current Haiku "work force"
would end up with something beautiful that would work right now, with
thousands of drivers working on all kinds of devices, not just desktops.
At any rate, my initial question wasn't really about my pet project (which
may or may not end up as something more), but an assessment of how far away
Haiku 1.0 is.