Would you program for Syllable?



  • Hi all,

    Syllable is a new open source operating system. It is aimed at small office and home users. It has a nice API and a very simple and powerful toolkit (similar to BeOS's).

    But why almost no one made any application for it except the main developers? Why no one helps them despite Syllable being the future of open source desktop OS's?

    I waited for desktop Linux for too long, but entropy keeps that from happening.
     

    Syllable is neither Linux nor BSD, it is made from scratch. By learning the others' mistakes. It's a chance to start over.

    It has a new journaled file system with arbitrary file attributes, a new media system, a simple application management system a la Mac OS (just unzip the application to /Applications), etc. etc.

     

    You don't have to be an "30-years-old-hacker-who-haven't-showered-since-last-month" to write an application for it, just grip the basics of C++ (yes the OS uses C++) and some coffee. I'm a noob and I'm writing an application for it, and everything is going fine!!

     

    P.S: I'm -admittedly- a Syllable fanboy.  



  • Honestly, I think that Linux and BSD are good enough as desktop alternatives. Maybe Syllable has some strenghs Linux is missing, but I would rather work on improving the Linux desktop experience than write software for yet-another obscure operating system.



  • I have to agree with ammoQ here.  Although this work is a great learning environment, as it sounds like a simplified OS, it's probably not "the future of open source desktop OS's".  ...well it might be somewhere in the future, since it'll take them years to catch up to linux in terms of features.  Maybe by then, it'll be "the future" :P

    I also had to cringe at the one line in their feature list:  "A full GUI is built into the OS". That's been my biggest beef against Windows; when the desktop goes, the entire system goes.

    This work just has the "reinventing the wheel" feeling all over it.  Very possibly a great OS for schools to use to teach with though.

    Totally worth looking into it for learning, but not something I'd devote the majority of my time to.
     



  • Would it be possible for the forum software to disable posters from rating their own submissions? Considering that it's CapitalT's first post, I honestly believe it wasn't intentional.



  • I can reply with "Consistency" and that would be enough, but I'll elaborate.

    I'm not flaming Linux or BSD, as a matter of fact I'm an OSS evangelist. But saying that either of them is a desktop operating system is wrong. You and I (geeks) may live with it, but think of the children^H users.

     

    Syllable has the greatest advantage of being built to be a legacy free desktop operating system. This way there will be no more bloat*.

    It is focused on on being a "normal" (read non-geek) user desktop OS, so features that Mac OS and Windows Vista are bragging about will be included in the system it self. Thus avoiding "ugly hacks".

     As for developers, life is easy too. The current libsyllable bindings (correct term?) are in C++, which makes life a whole lot easier. It's even prettier than QT. Dependency hell is almost absent, and you've got a buffet of useful utilities (like the registrar). In short, you stop worrying about the brain damaged aspects of the gazillion toolkits and frameworks out there and just worry about what you want to code.

     

    Check it out anyway, it may change your mind :)

     

    *) 50 libraries loaded and none used is bloat, sorry.



  • Hooray!  Another "Operating System of the future" that looks and acts like every other operating system, except with less usability testing.

    I'm all for writing a new OS, but why not build a _new_ OS.  This constant reinvention of things that people are already doing doesn't amount to much more then mental masturbation.  The absolute best you can really hope to accomplish is become a player in an already crowded arena and fragment the market even more.

    But I'm grumpy.

    -cw



  • @CapitalT said:

    I can reply with "Consistency" and that would be enough, but I'll elaborate.

    I'm not flaming Linux or BSD, as a matter of fact I'm an OSS evangelist. But saying that either of them is a desktop operating system is wrong. You and I (geeks) may live with it, but think of the children^H users.

    The average user doesn't care about what's under the hood. You think Linux (or BSD)+X+KDE (or Gnome) is too much bloat? The average user probably doesn't care. Face it: It works. The main problem is the lack of some applications Windows users are used too.


    Syllable has the greatest advantage of being built to be a legacy free desktop operating system. This way there will be no more bloat*.

    There is a correlation between "legacy free" and "lack of applications". It took the Linux desktop more than a decade to reach the level of completeness we now have. There are still gaps compared to Windows, though. By saying "X is not good enough, let's remake it all again using the Syllable API and toolkit" you throw away two decades of Unix/X programming. IMO, X and the available toolkits (GTK, QT, wx) are not bad enough to justify that step. BTW, maybe it's just me, but I consider the network transparency of X a good thing.

    It is focused on on being a "normal" (read non-geek) user desktop OS, so features that Mac OS and Windows Vista are bragging about will be included in the system it self. Thus avoiding "ugly hacks".

    Linux is not necessarily geeky. People like my wife and my kids use it, too. They do not care about all those "command line", "config file" geeky things. In fact, geeky things are, if at all, necessary during installation and configuration. I guess it will take Syllable a long time to reach the same level of hardware support / hardware detection like Linux.

    The main feature of Windows is ~20 years worth of legacy software that people are used too. IMO people are not using Windows because it's so funny to watch the virus scanner, the firewall and the spyware blocker fight against the perils of the internet. They use Windows because they use, for example, MS Office.

    The main feature of Mac OS is the experience of integration and consistence it offers, plus a reasonably large stack of well-integrated applications.You might want to strive for that with Syllable, but IMO it takes the determination of a company like Apple to ensure that.


    As for developers, life is easy too. The current libsyllable bindings (correct term?) are in C++, which makes life a whole lot easier. It's even prettier than QT. Dependency hell is almost absent, and you've got a buffet of useful utilities (like the registrar). In short, you stop worrying about the brain damaged aspects of the gazillion toolkits and frameworks out there and just worry about what you want to code.

    Unfortunately, I don't feel like learning another toolkit, especially if it is only available on an insignificant operating system. IMO plattform independence is a good thing.



  • I would only program for Syllable if they offered me a $50-$90K starting salary!

    LOL

    C'mon, it's funny.
     



  • I'm going to have to agree with C#.



  • @CPound said:

    I would only program for Syllable if they offered me a $50-$90K starting salary!

    You've got a real bee in your bonnet about that...

    -cw



  • @CapitalT said:

    I can reply with "Consistency" and that would be enough, but I'll elaborate.

    I'm not flaming Linux or BSD, as a matter of fact I'm an OSS evangelist. But saying that either of them is a desktop operating system is wrong. You and I (geeks) may live with it, but think of the children^H users.

     

    Syllable has the greatest advantage of being built to be a legacy free desktop operating system. This way there will be no more bloat*.

    It is focused on on being a "normal" (read non-geek) user desktop OS, so features that Mac OS and Windows Vista are bragging about will be included in the system it self. Thus avoiding "ugly hacks".

     As for developers, life is easy too. The current libsyllable bindings (correct term?) are in C++, which makes life a whole lot easier. It's even prettier than QT. Dependency hell is almost absent, and you've got a buffet of useful utilities (like the registrar). In short, you stop worrying about the brain damaged aspects of the gazillion toolkits and frameworks out there and just worry about what you want to code.

     

    Check it out anyway, it may change your mind :)

     

    *) 50 libraries loaded and none used is bloat, sorry.


    Well since you're looking for a new way to approach OSes, legacy free OSes, and all that, I'm going to go on a limb and ask:

    Have you ever tried Inferno?



  • @CapitalT said:

    But why almost no one made any application for it except the main developers? Why no one helps them despite Syllable being the future of open source desktop OS's?

    Have you been at the helium? Seriously? You've got to be on something to come up with a question like that. It's like asking "Why am I not getting laid, despite the fact that I'm incredibly attractive to all females?"

     

    Syllable is neither Linux nor BSD, it is made from scratch. By learning the others' mistakes. It's a chance to start over.

    They have apparently not learned from the mistake made by all the other umpteen-thousand people who thought that writing a "new OS" was a good idea.

    You're going to look back at this post in 10 years and cringe, it's that clueless. And we're all going to keep reminding you about it, because it's funny as hell to us.
     



  • LEWL!


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.