Originally posted by grndzro
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
PC-BSD Is Developing Its Own Desktop Environment
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by nslay View PostYou're right. While we're at it, let's write our own Linux-specific display servers. We did create our own Linux-specific sound system in the past, so why not?
Linux is at the cusp of becoming a mainstream operating system. That wasn't the case even 2 years ago.
If so many people weren't so dead set on expressing their independence by going against the grain Linux would have taken off many years ago. Instead we have had to deal with Windows crap for 3 OSes too long.
Comment
-
Originally posted by grndzro View PostBecause linux is at the same point in it's development as it was 10 years ago.....You are living in the past.
Linux is at the cusp of becoming a mainstream operating system. That wasn't the case even 2 years ago.
If so many people weren't so dead set on expressing their independence by going against the grain Linux would have taken off many years ago. Instead we have had to deal with Windows crap for 3 OSes too long.
Comment
-
Originally posted by nslay View PostYou're right. While we're at it, let's write our own Linux-specific display servers. We did create our own Linux-specific sound system in the past, so why not?
ALSA happened not because they wanted Linux-specific, but because it become proprietary and Linux contributors saw it as a danger. In the end, it only benefited. If you want - take ALSA and modify it for BSD. But BSD is not doing it because they are limited on resources and limited on interest and its better this way. If tomorrow OSS decides to close down or turn into proprietary at-key shelf-solution (BSD-based hardware with own proprietary OSS stack in a black box, like PS4), then BSD will be without sound at all. Then something will be changed or not, and your phrase above will shift.
The real question is - why are they not taking LXQT, aka ex-Razor?
They want their own DE which they think differs from existing solutions or want to duplicate for the reason of fun, then so will it be.
Calm down and do what you consider right. That simple.
Comment
-
Originally posted by nslay View PostYour post says it all. You're the arrogant ones and have been all along; not BSD. There's the Unix-like community and then there's Linux.
BSD diverged so far from Unix after the rewrite that it is a completely different OS that uses Linux for the majority of it's advancment.
It isn't being arrogant, it's being practical. Open source is in general too fragmented.
FreeBSD has little or no aspirations toward becoming a mainstream operating system. The work needed to make it competitive with Linux should be devoted elsewhere.
FreeBSD has a lot of things going for it but being a desktop is never going to be one of them. They should make a framework rather than a desktop. It would be more productive and in line with what freeBSD has become.
Comment
-
Okay, so a few things...
1: This is BSD you guys, not Linux, and if it ever does become Linux as well then that would mean that it had overwhelming success and popularity.
2: If you used PC-BSD you'd know the status of the DEs and why this is freaking awesome for the BSD community. Think of it like if the linux DEs were all Windows ports.
3: Do you guys hate people so much that you want them to just fail?Last edited by profoundWHALE; 24 April 2014, 03:01 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by xeekei View PostI haven't used PC-BSD, but this might be a "that's it! screw it!" reaction. Maybe all DEs just doesn't work very well on BSD, since pretty much all of them are made with Linux in mind? With systemd (and by extension logind), maybe Linux finally ventured far away enough from likeness with BSD that a new DE is needed?
Originally posted by brosis View PostALSA happened not because they wanted Linux-specific, but because it become proprietary and Linux contributors saw it as a danger. In the end, it only benefited. If you want - take ALSA and modify it for BSD. But BSD is not doing it because they are limited on resources and limited on interest and its better this way. If tomorrow OSS decides to close down or turn into proprietary at-key shelf-solution (BSD-based hardware with own proprietary OSS stack in a black box, like PS4), then BSD will be without sound at all. Then something will be changed or not, and your phrase above will shift.
Also, I'm pretty sure the reason BSD isn't interested in porting ASLA is because it's a steaming pile of buggy crap compared to OSS4. Pretty much everyone I know who has to work with ALSA drivers feels that way about it.
Comment
-
Originally posted by mendieta View PostMeaning, software as a hobby is awesome, but the power of Open Source is precisely cooperation and access to the code, rather than hobbyism.
Originally posted by mendieta View PostSo, you need a company to produce a polished product.
Originally posted by mendieta View PostThe main partners for this have been IBM on the big Iron in the early years, and later Intel, Google certainly, and very many other corporations.
Originally posted by mendieta View PostLet the hackers keep having fun, forking away, creating, recreating, failing and succeeding. It's all good.
Comment
-
Originally posted by brosis View PostLets not. Systemd is as is, because BSD has older interfaces and lack any serious initiative to stand up and catch up. If BSD don't see any advantage, they can leave it be. If there is conflict between a piece of software, those with higher marketshare, higher income, higher man/hour resource will drive it, in opensource. That is the case with udev.
ALSA happened not because they wanted Linux-specific, but because it become proprietary and Linux contributors saw it as a danger. In the end, it only benefited. If you want - take ALSA and modify it for BSD. But BSD is not doing it because they are limited on resources and limited on interest and its better this way. If tomorrow OSS decides to close down or turn into proprietary at-key shelf-solution (BSD-based hardware with own proprietary OSS stack in a black box, like PS4), then BSD will be without sound at all. Then something will be changed or not, and your phrase above will shift.
The real question is - why are they not taking LXQT, aka ex-Razor?
They want their own DE which they think differs from existing solutions or want to duplicate for the reason of fun, then so will it be.
Calm down and do what you consider right. That simple.
Comment
-
Originally posted by rdnetto View PostKDE is apparently going to use systemd for session management in the future. Given that BSD doesn't support it currently, it makes sense they'd be looking at alternatives.
Comment
Comment