[HN Gopher] Giving Haiku Beta 3 a try
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Giving Haiku Beta 3 a try
        
       Author : pjerem
       Score  : 105 points
       Date   : 2022-01-01 11:26 UTC (11 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.friendlyskies.net)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.friendlyskies.net)
        
       | xyproto wrote:
       | Is there a Linux distro out there that is themed to look like
       | HaikuOS and works well?
        
         | capableweb wrote:
         | I guess you could look for themes (Gnome: https://www.gnome-
         | look.org/p/1143497| XFCE: https://www.xfce-look.org/p/1013908/)
         | but you won't get the same unified GUI as Haiku has, since
         | everything is built with unification in mind, compared to the
         | Linux ecosystem where modularity is usually king.
         | 
         | I guess Elementary OS is as close to a unified GUI you come
         | that runs with a Linux kernel, but it tries to look more like
         | macOS than BeOS.
        
         | rvense wrote:
         | The looks are the least important part. It _works_ differently.
         | Applications interact in a different way, there ' APIs
         | (especially around filesystem metadata) that applications and
         | scripts can use. It's not necessarily that the capabilities
         | don't exist on other systems, it's just that they're exposed
         | and most importantly used in a different way. It's also a
         | system that was built from the ground up to be GUI-based. The
         | command line is there, but it's not the primary means of doing
         | anything much.
         | 
         | There are BeOS/Haiku window decoration themes for at least XFCE
         | and I think OpenBox. But looks are really not what Haiku is
         | about.
        
       | schleck8 wrote:
       | > _The name of the project is simply "Haiku". Unfortunately,
       | despite numerous attempts, the registration of haiku.org has not
       | been possible; hence the reason for haiku-os.org._
       | 
       | And guess what, the domain haiku.org is collecting dust. What a
       | surprise with how civil the domain market is.
       | 
       | https://www.haiku-os.org/about/faq/#why-isnt-it-called-haiku...
       | 
       | https://haiku.org/
        
         | KZerda wrote:
         | Domains are used for more than just webhosting. The owner could
         | have email accounts, etc, that use the haiku.org domain that
         | they don't want to switch to another less recognizeable name.
        
           | thewakalix wrote:
           | Seems likely.                 Starting Nmap 7.80 (
           | https://nmap.org ) at 2022-01-01 14:17 CST       Initiating
           | Parallel DNS resolution of 1 host. at 14:17       Completed
           | Parallel DNS resolution of 1 host. at 14:17, 0.00s elapsed
           | Initiating Connect Scan at 14:17       Scanning haiku.org
           | (35.213.168.88) [11 ports]       Completed Connect Scan at
           | 14:17, 5.00s elapsed (11 total ports)       Nmap scan report
           | for haiku.org (35.213.168.88)       Host is up.       rDNS
           | record for 35.213.168.88:
           | 88.168.213.35.bc.googleusercontent.com              PORT
           | STATE    SERVICE       21/tcp   filtered ftp       25/tcp
           | filtered smtp       53/tcp   filtered domain       80/tcp
           | filtered http       110/tcp  filtered pop3       143/tcp
           | filtered imap       443/tcp  filtered https       587/tcp
           | filtered submission       993/tcp  filtered imaps
           | 995/tcp  filtered pop3s       3306/tcp filtered mysql
           | Read data files from: /usr/bin/../share/nmap       Nmap done:
           | 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 5.06 seconds
        
             | watermelon0 wrote:
             | Those ports are commonly exposed when using a web hosting
             | provider. Visiting above IP serves with TLS cert for
             | Siteground, which is a popular provider.
        
         | rvz wrote:
         | Maybe if they had tons of cash somehow, they would have bought
         | it already, just like how Signal was able to buy signal.org
         | (even with or without donations) regardless.
         | 
         | Assuming everyone here from many companies from large
         | corporations / startups to small open-source companies know how
         | expensive some domain names are.
        
         | halpert wrote:
         | What is your opinion on property rights?
        
           | krono wrote:
           | IANAL: As I understand it, dotcom domain names are leased
           | rather than owned.
           | 
           | Either way, if squatting of high value domains were illegal,
           | you could make the case for some form of (civil) asset
           | forfeiture, or eminent domain if the taker is a popular open
           | source project. Not sure how I'd feel about this, though.
        
             | halpert wrote:
             | Rights of parties in a lease are also governed by property
             | rights.
        
             | analognoise wrote:
             | There's no way business interests would ever allow asset
             | forfeiture to help open source projects.
             | 
             | It's a laughable idea.
        
               | Fnoord wrote:
               | Trademark perhaps?
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | krono wrote:
               | The concept of "Eminent Domain" entails the state taking
               | private property specifically for public use always.
               | 
               | Which is why I mentioned it in relation to open source,
               | separately from forfeiture :)
        
               | fragmede wrote:
               | Open source projects with no backing run by a single
               | overworked and unpaid developer, yeah, but the legal arm
               | of billion dollar open-source company Redhat definitely
               | going to try _some_ shenanigans if you somehow managed to
               | gain ownership of redhat.com
        
       | gtsop wrote:
       | I was completely oblivious to the existence of haiku until i saw
       | a couple posts on HN. Is there any tl;dr version of how it is
       | different than let's say a linux distro?
        
         | Ygg2 wrote:
         | It's derived from BeOS, rather than a Unix.
         | 
         | Also it's a hybrid kernel written in C++, unlike Linux which is
         | monolithic kernel in C.
        
           | tialaramex wrote:
           | > Also it's a hybrid kernel written in C++, unlike Linux
           | which is monolithic kernel in C.
           | 
           | "Hybrid" doesn't mean anything here. The "hybrid" design
           | claims all the benefits of a monolithic kernel, without the
           | disadvantages of a microkernel. Huh. Wait, let's read that
           | again. It's a monolithic kernel with better marketing. Even
           | the networking, which in BeOS back in the 1990s was genuinely
           | userspace code - is baked inside the Haiku kernel just like
           | the IP stack in Linux.
           | 
           | C++ is not used very much in Haiku's kernel. This is because
           | the Haiku kernel ABI boundaries are defined in C not C++ and
           | because they're stuck with stuff from last century for
           | compatibility reasons. If you know C++ 20 you will find
           | Haiku's C++ dialect pretty archaic, they don't yet have C++
           | 11 era smart pointers for example.
           | 
           | In practice, unlike Linux the Haiku kernel has a very 1980s
           | attitude to hardware, it's big on "probing" at boot time for
           | devices, like DOS would have, making it a poor fit for modern
           | intelligent peripherals. As a hack USB is treated a bit
           | differently so that at least it has some sort of "hot plug"
           | like a 1990s PC. Where Haiku tried to go beyond probing they
           | chose something very strange, they focus on capability
           | discovery. So Haiku's thing is, you want a sound device, lets
           | look for a sound device, I can't see one, give up. In Linux,
           | discovery is driven by the peripherals, so this is a PCI
           | controller, let us explore the PCI bus, OK there's a USB
           | controller on it, let's explore the USB bus, OK there's an
           | Intel HDA controller on it, let's explore that, it's a PCM
           | output. We can play sound through that. Haiku's approach
           | might fit well in some other universe, but the Linux strategy
           | matches how your hardware actually works in our universe.
        
             | waddlesplash wrote:
             | (Haiku developer here.) We have our own homegrown smart
             | pointers and do make plenty of use of them, though we could
             | stand to make more. Already pretty much any short-lived
             | objects (i.e. that have no lifetime beyond the function
             | they are immediately in) are smart-pointer-managed.
             | 
             | The "probing" approach needs a rewrite and we know it. Most
             | of that code is confined to about 2-3 files inside the
             | kernel. It will be a big job to fix it, but we won't need
             | to reinvent the world. Eventually I or someone else will
             | probably get around to it, but we haven't needed it yet;
             | the people who need PCI hotplugging will have to do without
             | Haiku for now. (Or they can submit patches :)
        
           | capableweb wrote:
           | Which means:
           | 
           | - Different Kernel (based on NewOS if I'm not wrong)
           | 
           | - Alright POSIX support but not 100%
           | 
           | - Haiku has is unified base/GUI/OS compared to Linux
           | distributions, that often choose their own window
           | managers/composers/custom kernels (sometimes) and so on. One
           | example is that the GUI is driven by the kernel in Haiku, in
           | comparison to Linux distributions that often use X11 or
           | similar software between
           | 
           | - Different bootloader that seems more Windows OS aware than
           | GRUB et al
           | 
           | - Haiku focuses on personal computing, compared to Linux that
           | (mostly) feels to aim for server usage, with supporting
           | personal computing. But sometimes those things are at odds,
           | and Linux allows you to configure it to be better for one or
           | the other use case, while Haiku aims strictly for personal
           | computing.
           | 
           | - Haiku/BeOS always had multithreading/multi-processor in
           | mind for it's design. If it's faster/better or not I'm not
           | sure, but the focus been there since early
           | 
           | - OOP API for development of Haiku software (if that's better
           | not is an exercise left to the reader)
           | 
           | I think the biggest selling point of Haiku is it's unity
           | regarding the entire operating system being designed for one
           | specific use case: personal computing. So responsiveness of
           | the GUI is prioritized because that's the best for personal
           | usage, while Linux (can) make other tradeoffs while allowing
           | you to customize it.
           | 
           | I'm writing this from the perspective of someone who test-
           | driven Haiku a couple of times but never used it full-time,
           | but am a daily user of Linux distributions (Arch, NixOS and
           | Ubuntu). Some things might be wrong, I'm happy to be
           | corrected if so, but this is what I've gathered from my usage
           | and reading about it a little every time it pops up
           | somewhere.
        
             | hestefisk wrote:
             | Is it multi-user?
        
               | orionblastar wrote:
               | Not yet, like the Amiga there is no login. It is still in
               | beta and needs hard drive encryption as well.
        
               | AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
               | What is the virtue of a multi-user desktop? There are
               | vanishingly few use cases for such a beast.
        
               | jhbadger wrote:
               | I think most people with SOs or families see the benefit
               | of having each user of a shared computer having their own
               | user account.
        
               | AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
               | 1) We used to share desktops with family before multi-
               | user was a thing desktops did.
               | 
               | 2) With smartphones and tablets and the like providing
               | most of the functionality that people once shared a
               | desktop for (web browsing really), there seems little
               | reason to share one anymore.
               | 
               | 3) I think having multiple user _profiles_ one could
               | switch between would cover almost any remaining use cases
               | without the complication of multi-user in the kernel
               | itself.
        
               | em-bee wrote:
               | for a usable multi-user system it is necessary to be able
               | to protect files from other users. a simple profile is
               | not enough.
               | 
               | fortunately haiku does have multi-user support in the
               | kernel, it's just not implemented in the GUI yet.
        
               | AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
               | > for a usable multi-user system it is necessary to be
               | able to protect files from other users. a simple profile
               | is not enough.
               | 
               | That is what encryption is for. The big difference of
               | course being that encryption is not one privilege
               | escalation or boot disk away from being completely
               | useless.
        
               | em-bee wrote:
               | ok, so if we don't have multi-user support in the kernel,
               | but instead implement it only as a layer in the GUI, each
               | user gets a partition or disk image that is encrypted as
               | their home directory that is mounted on login. the
               | file/partition is protected against deletion.
               | 
               | i suppose that could work, but i see a few downsides to
               | this approach: all processes run in the same space. if i
               | want to run a process in the background my home directory
               | has to be remain mounted, and thus potentially be exposed
               | to the next user. or i'd have to create a second
               | partition for this special process which only an
               | experienced power user would do.
               | 
               | so while i think this approach is possible, it doesn't
               | look like it would make anything easier. on the contrary.
               | the emergence of hostile apps on android demonstrates
               | that privilege separation of processes is becoming more
               | and more important.
               | 
               | the current multi-user approach is not good enough even
               | for that. but instead of simplifying multi-user support
               | to a single user, we actually need to make it more
               | complex to properly handle multi-user-per-process
               | separation.
        
               | AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
               | Privilege separation for applications is not the same as
               | having separate user accounts.
               | 
               | > but instead of simplifying multi-user support to a
               | single user, we actually need to make it more complex to
               | properly handle multi-user-per-process separation.
               | 
               | I disagree. This is such a small and vanishing use case
               | that adding complexity for it is exactly what you
               | shouldn't do.
        
               | em-bee wrote:
               | _Privilege separation for applications is not the same as
               | having separate user accounts._
               | 
               | true, and yes, maybe the whole system needs to be
               | redesigned for that. but nevertheless, this needs to
               | happen in the kernel. and once we have proper process
               | separation, adding multi-user support on top of that
               | seems almost trivial.
        
               | michaelmrose wrote:
               | Arguably you are one privilege escalation or boot disk
               | away from being compromised to the point that the other
               | user can acquire your passphrase or key from memory. If
               | merely a passphrase it could even be gathered by a device
               | between the keyboard and computer or plugged into a usb
               | port.
               | 
               | Security vs someone who has physical access to your
               | machine while you aren't there will probably remain
               | crappy.
        
               | rvense wrote:
               | I don't know the details about Haiku, but at the end of
               | its life, BeOS had some kind of multiuser support, in
               | that the OS was aware of UNIX-like permissions in the
               | filesystem (and for processes _I think_ ). But there was
               | no GUI for logging in, so you were always root.
               | 
               | It was meant for single-user workstations. Not having
               | multiple users was not really a problem, except that it
               | made (makes) some people look down their noses. In this
               | day and age, the main security issue on my workstation is
               | that I all applications - including the browser that
               | downloads a bunch of untrusted code and runs it willy-
               | nilly - run as the same user that owns all my important
               | files. I'm a lot more concerned about what's in my home
               | directory than anything under /usr!
               | 
               | So if and when Haiku adds security measures to isolate
               | applications from each other, I would prefer they looked
               | at some kind of sandboxing to isolate every app from each
               | other, rather than just copying the basic UNIX model,
               | which does basically nothing for the problems people
               | actually have.
               | 
               | (OK, if you need to share a computer which another person
               | you can't have separate settings and browser histories
               | etc., but.. I don't know if that's really such a big deal
               | that it needs to be tackled before the other one)
        
               | rzzzt wrote:
               | > you were always root
               | 
               | baron :)
        
         | cable2600 wrote:
         | HaikuOS https://www.haiku-os.org/ is a free and open source
         | rewrite of BeOS using APIs it can run BeOS code and has had a
         | lot of apps portered to it. It needs less memory than Linux and
         | is more like ReactOS https://reactos.org/ when they add in the
         | WINE porting to run WIN32 and WIN64 apps.
         | 
         | BETA3 is stable enough to use a web browser and email program
         | to get things done. It can be installed on old retro legacy PCs
         | to make better use of them.
         | 
         | Run it in a virtual machine first.
        
           | fernandotakai wrote:
           | nitpicking, but the OS is called just "haiku", not haikuos.
        
           | nyanpasu64 wrote:
           | Beta 3 won't boot on my Zen 3 desktop. Should I try the
           | latest nightly, report a bug, or only run it on older
           | hardware?
        
             | waddlesplash wrote:
             | (Haiku developer here.) It works on my Zen 2 machine and
             | I'm pretty sure one other developer runs it on Zen 3. Note
             | that you have to use the EFI loader (only on x86_64) and
             | you might need to use the fail-safe video driver if you get
             | a black screen after the splash. If that doesn't work, yes,
             | file a ticket.
        
             | fold3 wrote:
             | I'd recommend older hardware or in a VM.
        
       | kgraves wrote:
       | Given the amount of progress in porting Wine [0], RISC-V [1], 3D
       | Acceleration and now has finally a full time developer
       | (waddlesplash)
       | 
       | It very is astounding to see what the Haiku team has done with
       | the resources they currently have on building what could be a
       | useable alternative OS for the desktop.
       | 
       | I can only kindly suggest more of us donate to Haiku [2] there
       | still needs to be more browsers (Chrome / Firefox) and polished
       | ARM support (think Raspberry Pis)
       | 
       | [0] https://discuss.haiku-os.org/t/my-progress-in-porting-
       | wine/1...
       | 
       | [1] https://discuss.haiku-os.org/t/my-progress-on-real-risc-v-
       | ha...
       | 
       | [2] https://www.haiku-inc.org/donate/
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | discmonkey wrote:
       | It would be great to implement some of the windowing improvements
       | as an addition to a current linux windowing system.
       | 
       | Pinning different applications together or being able to merge
       | applications with tabs both sound useful... These sorts of ideas
       | are why it's great to have another open source OS.
        
         | djur wrote:
         | Tabbed window managers have existed for X11 for ages, but the
         | concept only seems to have remained popular in tiling WMs, not
         | stacking WMs. KDE had built-in support for tabbed windows for a
         | while but it looks like the feature disappeared a few years
         | back, which suggests it wasn't being used much.
        
         | michaelmrose wrote:
         | Good points. Although tiling may be a departure wanted or
         | unwanted from your normal workflow i3wm does provide support
         | for tabbing arbitrary applications together however this
         | neither supporting merging 2 tabbed application into a single
         | level of tabs nor does it fully support using window manager
         | tabs in place of application tabs because of the inherent lack
         | of context that would require a deeper sort of integration.
         | 
         | For example in your browser you might want in its UI to open a
         | particular link in the background or foreground or perform an
         | operation on all tabs or a subgroup thereof that is specific to
         | browser tabs that wouldn't make sense in the broader context
         | like bookmarking, saving a session, sending to another device
         | etc.
         | 
         | There is a good argument for opening a window in the fore or
         | background being exposed to the application but it doesn't at
         | present work that way.
         | 
         | Regarding multitab operations, do you display only the options
         | that make contextual sense or perhaps list all the options that
         | make sense?
         | 
         | Example 3 firefox tabs and 2 Emacs tabs in a group. Show
         | bookmark all firefox tabs and save all Emacs tabs as operations
         | that can be done to the group? Possibly show only the relevant
         | options if some subset are selected. Example if only 3 firefox
         | tabs are selected show only those operations.
         | 
         | There is an argument for retaining multiple levels of tabbing
         | at the OS level and the application level other than
         | simplicity. Often when you want to perform a group operation
         | the app is an already defined group for that operation, and in
         | addition it often makes more sense to page through application
         | tabs and windows separately rather than as a singular
         | operation. For example going one window to the left for your
         | editor while leaving the existing firefox tab focused rather
         | than having to hit a different shortcut to jump up a level.
         | 
         | I think it would be interesting if you could have like
         | application windows automatically vertically tabbed like
         | Firefox's tree style tabs and have a contextual option to
         | either break out to a new tree or open a different applications
         | link as a child tab of the tree.
         | 
         | One could then optionally switch between showing trees side by
         | side/top bottom or joining them into a horizontal tab group.
         | 
         | Ideally operations performed on multiple tabs could be
         | performed by hitting a singular hotkey or button that would
         | present all relevant options without going into each apps menu
         | or pressing a different key or ui per app.
         | 
         | This would however be both complicated and require coordination
         | between players that would likely be impossible.
        
       | mssdvd wrote:
       | On a side note, Emacs has been recently ported to Haiku.
        
         | bluepoint wrote:
         | you mean with gui? It was ported as a terminal application a
         | while ago.
        
           | mssdvd wrote:
           | Yes, I do. It was merged to master a month ago.
        
         | e3bc54b2 wrote:
         | Which is a great boon for both Haiku and my old netbook. 9/10
         | times I'm using terminal, browser and Emacs anyway, and Haiku
         | is stupid fast. Now if only wireless support was bit better...
        
       | mysterydip wrote:
       | Good to see all the progress on Haiku. This might be a solution
       | for a "modern windows 2000" from the discussion the other day.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-01-01 23:02 UTC)