Let me just say that I’ve tried Linux (and other Unices), and have mostly used Windows, but I am (extremely) dissatisfied with both of them.
So I’ve read a bit on BeOS, and how the architecture of the system differed from other OS architectures, such as those of Windows or Linux/Unix, in its simplicity, modularity and functionality (not to mention that I’ve seen screenshots). That said, I want to try out Haiku once it comes out.
However, I have a few questions (and maybe some ideas) regarding the future and continual development of the OS.
Haiku was licensed under the MIT License. I’ve read the explanation on why the MIT was picked over the GPL by the Haiku developers, and from my experience with Linux distros, I can somewhat agree with its stipulation that the developers want more users (both corporate and non-corporate, even those who may not want to be forced to redistribute code in source form) rather than more developers (and their code). However, I’m wondering if there are any inherent benefits of the GPL that would further Haiku’s development faster than any of the copycenter licenses (such as the MIT/X11 or BSD), or if the GPL is just a more popular license for developers that allows for just as much development as any copycenter license.
I’m familiar with how there’s an active Mozilla outreach to BeOS users, especially with Firefox and other notable members of the Mozilla platform. That said, I’ve read on the similarities between Java and Mozilla/XUL (both of which are meant to be portable to any OS architecture as possible, as stated by Free Software Magazine last year), as well as how Mac OS X included native Java support from the getgo (as shown in this Wikipedia diagram of the OS X architecture). However, Mac OS X doesn’t natively support Mozilla/XUL, which stymied the usage of Firefox for OSX users (hence, the Cocoa-based, Gecko-driven Camino browser).
So could, would, and/or should Haiku (maybe R2, since the main goal for R1 is to be fully compatible with BeOS R5) natively support Mozilla/XUL on the API level? It could probably give Haiku an edge over Mac OS X in regards to development, since XUL (“XML User Interface Language”) tends to attract alot of web programmers (I’m taking web design at the local tech college myself). It would make good advertising for Haiku to be labeled “the Web-ready OS”, especially with all the Web 2.0 types (not to be confused with all those “web-based desktops” that have come out within the last year or so, but pretty damn close).
Just a few questions and some wishful thinking, Thanks.
I’ve been thinking Haiku needs an easier way of making GUIs than is currently available (like Apple’s Cocoa), but I hadn’t thought of this.
I don’t know how well XUL could work with Haiku’s multithreadedness, etc., but it’s certainly an exciting proposition. How about doing some research both into Be/Haiku and XUL and see how the two could work together on a technical level? My main interest in Haiku is that it combines a non-idiotic windowing system with an open and well thought-out base so it can be used for some more out there experiments like what you propose. I urge you to look into it , it’s quite exciting.
Heh, I had been a bit too accustomed to the silence on this forum for the past two days, which is probably why I wasn’t prepared to show more of what I could pull up on XUL. But anyway, I looked for “XUL+windowing” on Google, and this was on the top ten:
Now, this may be about XAML, which is Microsoft’s equivalent to XUL which is going to ship out with Vista, but the two evidently share alot of features. However, XAML will be much more burdened down by .NET (one of MS’s more famous Windows APIs), as mentioned within the article (“XUL does to Microsoft and XAML what Microsoft does to everybody else.”).
Now where this relates to Haiku, I have close to 0 ideas, as I’ve never read up on BeOS or its internals sufficiently enough to determine exactly where they can tie in.
Now, this may be about XAML, which is Microsoft's equivalent to XUL which is going to ship out with Vista, but the two evidently share *alot* of features.
I believe it will ship out even sooner than that - as I believe this is part of "WinFX" which is now going to be part of the .NET Framework 3.0…
My company may be looking into this type of runtime-interpreted GUI layout system to help our product’s customizability.
Plus, a while ago, people on this forum were mulling over whether or not to use Symphony OS’s Mezzo Desktop Environment and Orchestra application environment for Glass Elevator’s GUI.
A native XUL API would benefit such implementations as this, if it were tried.
