DISQUS

putnam120 · 3 months ago

This might be a silly question to ask, but I don't see what there is that would separate this from being considered just another Linux distro.

Byaryoga · 3 months ago

Haiku's kernel is not Linux. Haiku to Linux is like Linux to *BSD.

Drigor · 3 months ago

I'm supriced you mention package management as something missing.
It's something Linux needs because of dependencies. It's not something every OS would need or should have.

Ravi · 3 months ago

True. Package management is not a necessity for a good OS. But it sure is a nice and convenient feature to have. And having dependencies is good from a developer stand point as it allows different applications sharing the common files.

jrdls · 3 months ago

Actually I'd like to switch to Haiku once they release the final version of Haiku R1

hiero2 · 2 months ago

I would disagree with the commenter about an OS not needing dependencies. Technically, they are correct - however, and this is a big However! - Linux and Window both have dependencies.

In Windows, probably 99% of developers rely on Windows libraries to work. These are dependencies. In Linux, developers do the same thing - they build a program that "calls" system libraries, or other program libraries - i.e. dependencies. It is the same thing, whether in Windows, or Linux.

That said, developers don't HAVE to do this - but apparently it is usually more work to do this, since so few do make fully stand-alone programs. That would be why a package manager would be a must-have for any OS to be ultimately successful. In Macs and Windows, the "package managers" are sufficiently integrated into the OS that the user rarely even recognizes that they are there. To a degree, I suppose, Mac and Windows have simplified their package management environment by setting rules that developers have to follow for their programs to work. Linux developers can rely on distro package writers and the end-users to do some of this work. Maybe Linux could learn something on this score.