Can a distro of Haiku be made in the future?

"If Linux were a complete OS. :)" :D

There's a *really* good point, and one I agree with. Linux is NOT complete, and is not stable for the end user. All it is is thrown together parts, borrowed from every software that's called "free", but I don't think Linux gets it. For instance, on a basic level, gnu programs are used, Fluxbox is used, and the X Window System is used--all in the same system--and we're only skimming Linux here! I think that the *Linux* programmer, who thinks Linux is the best OS that ever came out, is really Linux's audience. And if they keep insulting Windows(r) users, and not respecting them as human beings who are using a grossly overpaid buggy S/W, then they're not going to be very successful.

My first idea was to build a small shell, and build a Linux distro. After seeing how unstable it was, and especially seeing the fact I'm *NOT* a die-hard GPL fan, I began to look into Haiku. I'd already begun using it, and really like it. It's as stable and simple as you'd find on a Palm(tm) or a Mac. I thought, combined with it's liquid performance and stability, it would be possible to use it as a base in the future, per-say. Of course, I understand anyone else could as well. I didn't just post this for myself, but hopefully for others to get the concept. Open source is about helping others with what you know, and with what others know. It's not about one OS, one license, like the Linux community thinks. :)

With that in mind, I was thinking to make things plug-and-playable, and build a very simple HTML shell people could use like they use webpages. Why HTML, and not C? I'd like to go for simplicity, so that anyone could pick up how to contribute to it without crashes, dependencies, bugs, etc. There are more complicated programs, but as programmers, we're missing the fact that any open OS must cater to the user, and not us. Haiku's got that vision, and I believe it's because they have great programmers who understand how an OS is done. :) If only Linux'd catch on and take a look at Haiku, instead of being arrogant about Linux....

(As for the PC, I'll try to find out why it just blanks the screen at shutdown. It's a bug somewhere--but it's the only major bug I've found in Haiku so far. :) And I know the real release will have it fixed. :D)

Thanks for replying, sparklewind. That's my thoughts.

Thank you, tonestone57! I had located this ticket earlier. I always run a search engine before asking questions, as I think it's more polite, and saves time on the forum. :) This certainly helps :), however, I'd like to find the terminal command to toggle acpi support on or off, and see if that works.

I also agree here too, tonestone57--Haiku cannot become 400+ distros like Linux is--that's just ridiculous. :) We need more like, 2-10, or somewhere around that value. That way Haiku remains the flagship OS that'd start it off.

Thanks, all, for your replies. It's appreciated.

@ fano: Thanks for your input. I honestly do appreciate your post, and I like looking at several different points of view on computing and operating systems. :) However, may I reply to a few comments?

Firstly, Linux couldn't have done this (that is, build a strong, full OS)--it needed a kernel and GUI shell, and more. Linux started as Minix as a command-line environment, and for the most part, still is :), underneath all the eye candy. Taking into consideration how Linux is built would better help you understand why. The core of Linux rests on top of the kernel, and from there, a command-line or the "shell" awaits it's user. To fix this, the X window system is thrown on top, along with a login manager, along with a GUI shell, and along with applications all requiring hundreds of dependencies. Your average Ubuntu installation with KDE or Gnome requires at minimum, 800 packages installed--most dependencies. This is due to applications being written in at least 5 different languages, and once that's done, on top of that, they are compiled as Gtk+, QT, or another application type. This is what makes Linux so unstable, and therefore, this both answers your question on why applets don't work, for instance, and destroys the previous argument that hackers prefer the GUI over the CLI. The CLI is how the base of Linux can be accessed. Furthermore, the programmer does use and enjoy the CLI in *any* OS, including Windows(r), as it gives them full power over their system in situations where the GUI was not designed to. Personally, I think an OS is only half an OS without a text interaction of some kind. :) I strongly disagree that the programmer prefers all GUI--but I *really* think the GUI is the future. Users will not use a CLI. They want a simple, point-and-click interface that they can understand without hassle. Programmers should work to make the shell integrate for the user.

Secondly, Linux is and isn't professional. Linux runs on the world's most powerful supercomputers, and on most of the smartphones today, thereby making it professional in that field. On i386 or powerpc, however, as mentioned, Linux is *not* professional by any means--I do not consider Ubuntu or CentOS to be professional. Linux users need to be honest, and realize this is the case.

Thirdly, you had mentioned editions, which *would* partition the OS. Two computing history examples serve to prove this, respectively. Apple(r) made the Centris(tm), Quadra(tm), Performa(tm), Power Macintosh(tm), and other desktop computer products. Until Apple(r) brought the computer lines into four main product lines, and three classes of computer (notebooks, desktops, mobile) users were confused and sales were down until the introduction of the iMac(tm). Recently, Windows(r) has made the same mistake, splitting itself into Starter (that is, the netbook edition), Home Basic, Home Premium, Professional, Ultimate, x64, Embedded, Server (which I agree with--that port makes sense), and of course on the side, Phone. Vista(tm) did poorly because of this, and Apple(r) gained a huge market share in 2008 and into 2009.

Fourthly, why not make a distro? OpenSolaris(tm) has about 8-10 distributions, and all it's users recognize the fact that it is the same OS with different aspects to it. This would help the OS by opening new ways of thinking how to build it and fix bugs. That way, everyone'd benefit.

In conclusion, I think a distro would be a great idea, but that's just my opinion. I appreciate the post and I honestly do like hearing different points of view--I just wanted to clear up a few points here. I apologize if I was rude.

Thanks. :)

I have read the posts so far carefully here, because I certainly think it is wise to. :) I think listening allows learning.

@fano: I'm well aware of the Linux history, but like I have mentioned earlier, it's audience will never really be the end user, unless it is on a cell phone or generic device because Linux is not a complete OS. I've said before, and I can state again that Haiku *is* a complete operating system, which comprises it's pieces similar in fashion to the MacOS(tm). Linux started as a kernel cloned from Minix, and it really, in 18 years or so, hasn't gotten much further in terms of use, other than a bunch of eye candy in Gnome and KDE. True, there are very different ports of it, but underneath, Linux is just Linux. And again, I believe that editions would cause the end user to get confused as in what to choose. 2 or 3 might be fine--like if Windows(r) were just Corporate, Home User, and Mobile, it'd be easy to figure it out. *However*, NT did start with two editions, "Workstation" and "Server", and the home user had 98. This fanned out to the editions that they have today. Simply put, I think we can learn from this.

@thatguy: That'd be a great idea to implement in the software. Making things plug-and-playable would make the experience as simple as installing add-ons in a browser. :)

As for the whole distro idea, I can see points where it could be great, and also where it could not be so great. It sounds like there's different opinions on it. :)

And, once again, as I've repeated before, I think that a distro could have some use. However, this is only if it'd help out the Haiku in expanding. Bringing great concepts to life, along with God on their side, is what's made inventors like Edison innovative.

sparklewind, once again, I agree with you on this. :)

I was using the term 'distro' so that any Linux programmers or users could catch my meaning. But, yes, I was referring more to a 'fork' of Haiku.

However... I still think chopping any software up into editions may not be the smartest idea, unless Haiku in the future just stuck with Desktop, Server, Mobile, to keep things simple--if nothing else, for users. Or, 32 and 64 bit? The names here, for instance, would be self-explanatory. And, I know OS X has Server and the retail version--two editions, and I agree with the idea there--*much* simpler/better than the half a dozen Windows(r) editions. :) But, isn't Haiku already at where it's powerpc, i386, mips, and arm? Maybe I'm wrong on this.

I don't know... what do you think?

Quote: "The problem with Linux is with so many distributions, you don't know what to go for. I don't really understand Linux frankly."

@Papsie: Studying computer history would help out--here's a brief overview of Linux for you. :) Understanding operating systems is understanding the fundamentals that run the operating system--such as the kernel that the OS is built on, and the source code behind it--this is why open source software is better. It can be studied by the computer programmer, or even the end user, who can then study it to better understand computing, coupled with the study of computer science. Closed source hides the code, so only company employees know how it ticks. :)

Firstly, the world, regardless of the distribution name, generally calls 'distros' "Linux", and around this there is some controversy, because of two naming differences. Most will state that Linux is purely the kernel which allows different operating systems to emerge from building around the kernel. Collectively, it is called "Linux" or "gnu/linux" by different open source fans. This naming convention differentiation came from the building of linux and hurd--at the time, the hurd kernel was not mature enough to manage the OS, though the gnu community wished for all gnu software; as a result, the kernel for the OS became linux and the software was bundled out of gnu products. Some argue it is just "linux", whilst the gnu community argues "gnu/linux."

The software, however, I'll refer to as Linux--but you need to remember that Ubuntu, Fedora, and even Palm's webOS, Google's Chrome, and Android are all "Linux" but are all different operating systems by definition--some will use different package managers, computer languages, and ports to platforms. Obviously, anyone can choose and download a Linux distro--but because this is a brief overview, here's how it's built, and why I don't like Linux (I'll still use Linux a little, though.) :)

Firstly, you start with "Linux" itself by grabbing and compiling the Linux kernel in an active operating environment. You will then need to compile and add the coreutils, write in options and driver support into the kernel, add a package manager, and you will also need to choose what shell you wish to operate from (e.g. bash) and from here, if everything is successful, you can throw the small OS together and make the squashfs and image it into an .iso. Secondly, write it to CD or a USB drive and fire it up. Hopefully, you can at least connect to Ethernet, because you've only begun! You don't even have a GUI (graphical user interface) yet--unless you are a real geek, and honestly like the shell. :) To start, you'll need to use your new package manager and download the X Window System, along with fonts, and if you don't like the default, a cursor set. Of course there's a lot of options. Once that's done, what window manager do you want? Of course there's a lot of options--more than a dozen. What desktop environment do you want? Of course there's a lot of options. Then, you'll need to download apps. Of course there's a lot of options--up to 32,000. :)

Summing it up without going further writing what has already become a gigantic essay :D, Linux is not a complete operating system, like how arrogant Linux coders and fans look at Linux. And because of the vast array of choices at every corner, it has almost made Linux unusable for the average end user, who can't even figure out which distribution out of at least hundreds that have been developed to use! I would honestly dare the Linux fan to launch an application (written out of 1 or 2 of more than a dozen languages!) from the shell, and see if it opens cleanly--most will not--this is not a feature of good software.

However, for the entry-level user, most download Ubuntu or LinuxMint. Does this clarify your questions about Linux?

Haiku is a great operating system--I just can only hope that Haiku gears up for the end user, because it honestly needs to in order to be a great operating system people will want to use. Hope this was not too long. :D

@Paspie: Could you expand on what you're saying here? It would help.

Here's what I meant when I said "Could you expand on what you're saying here? It would help." I was mentioning for all the details you had posted if you could explain:

a) "What [you] would like to be done with Haiku in the future, is for all the necessary drivers for all the applications to be included in the OS, so that the end user doesn't have to do anything more then extract the zip, dc on the file, opens instantly, job done."

b) Why "[you] can't even get mplayer (with all the gcc4 plugins) to work, among the games."

c) Why "the trash is an absolute nightmare to operate especially on a USB thumb drive."

I'm not quite sure why you're sticking the Media Player application in the /boot directory, instead of in apps. I'm only understanding part of your response to your Media Player issue. This is what I'm getting so far--thanks.