Non-Mainstream OSes?

DAM

Diamond Member
Jan 10, 2000
6,102
1
76
well, im an occasional beos user, and a linux user, its more of a hobbie thought.




is novell considered an OS?




dam()
 

DaHitman

Golden Member
Apr 6, 2001
1,158
0
0


<< We have had Linux distro for mom, OS of choice, and Window's OS of choice. So why not Alternate OS of choice and why?

So any FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, Darwin, Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, True 64, BeOS users? If you use linux which distro and why? Any others that I forgot? Let's hear about the non-windows, non-mainstream OS users.
>>



Not sure what bus you got off of...but I would not call Solaris, HP/UX, or AIX &quot;non-mainstream&quot;.... they are VERY VERY far from it... not on your puny little aol terminal but they are VERY mainstream on real servers, and in computer rooms and data centers all over the world.

And Linux is now main-stream.. its now NUMBER 2... 30% of the market according to IDC Research. More desktop users of Linux now than MAC.

 

n0cmonkey

Elite Member
Jun 10, 2001
42,936
1
0


<<

<< We have had Linux distro for mom, OS of choice, and Window's OS of choice. So why not Alternate OS of choice and why?

So any FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, Darwin, Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, True 64, BeOS users? If you use linux which distro and why? Any others that I forgot? Let's hear about the non-windows, non-mainstream OS users.
>>



Not sure what bus you got off of...but I would not call Solaris, HP/UX, or AIX &quot;non-mainstream&quot;.... they are VERY VERY far from it... not on your puny little aol terminal but they are VERY mainstream on real servers, and in computer rooms and data centers all over the world.

And Linux is now main-stream.. its now NUMBER 2... 30% of the market according to IDC Research. More desktop users of Linux now than MAC.
>>



1. I included linux so as not to insult the children who use it.
2. Solaris/hp-ux/aix/true64 are not your normal desktop home user OS, therefore not mainstream.
3. What is this aol terminal you are talking about? Will AOL run on anything other than Mac and windows?
 

lucidguy

Banned
Apr 24, 2001
396
0
0
AOL terminal refers to a computer the owners of which use it for the sole purpose of the stupid AOL client and for no other purpose whatsoever. In effect, a computer that is capable of thousands of uses is effectively reduced to an AOL terminal from a functional viewpoint.

That is my impression of the term anyhow.
 

n0cmonkey

Elite Member
Jun 10, 2001
42,936
1
0


<< AOL terminal refers to a computer the owners of which use it for the sole purpose of the stupid AOL client and for no other purpose whatsoever. In effect, a computer that is capable of thousands of uses is effectively reduced to an AOL terminal from a functional viewpoint.

That is my impression of the term anyhow.
>>



Makes sense.
 

lucidguy

Banned
Apr 24, 2001
396
0
0
For a genuine AOL terminal, check out the Gateway Connected Touchpad.

This is a Internet appliance in a laptop-like form factor, but is meant for the home. It includes a touch-sensitive LCD screen, a wireless keyboard/mouse combo, a low-powered Geode chip, a solid-state 64 Mb drive, loaded with what I believe is Midori Linux and AOL software for Linux and very little else.

This is AOL's answer to the MSN Companion series of Internet appliances, made by e-machines and Compaq with Win CE software provided by Microsoft.

These Internet appliances are priced competitively with the cheapest e-machines, and their advantage is idiotprooftitude. You really can't get more idiotproof than AOL on a solid state drive.
 

Elledan

Banned
Jul 24, 2000
8,880
0
0
Hmm.. QNX looks nice, but I couldn't find an answer on two questions:

1) how compatible is QNX with Linux? i.e. can you run most Linux apps on it?

2) what are the disadvantages of this OS (compared to OS's like Linux, Windows, UNIX, BeOS etc.)?
 

lucidguy

Banned
Apr 24, 2001
396
0
0
1) It is source compatible, More or Less. Often Less as opposed to More. You often need to edit anywhere from a few lines to a few hundred lines of source and then recompile.

2) It costs money, though they do have an evaluation version free for download for noncommercial users.
 

n0cmonkey

Elite Member
Jun 10, 2001
42,936
1
0


<< here are some real non-mainstream oses:

<a target=new href="http://www.fywss.com/plan9

[L=atheos]http://www.atheos.cx/">plan 9</a>
java os
qnx
freedos
>>



Deffinately some great additions. I would love to have a plan9 workstation
 

Chaotic42

Lifer
Jun 15, 2001
34,497
1,673
126


<< So any FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, Darwin, Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, True 64, BeOS users?
>>



I've used FreeBSD and I've had GNU (using the HURD) installed. It was version 0.2.
I might reinstall it.



<<
If you use linux which distro
>>



Debian



<<
and why?
>>



apt-get update ; apt-get upgrade : apt-get install

It seems to be the least commercial and well thought out distro.




<< Any others that I forgot? Let's hear about the non-windows, non-mainstream OS users. >>



Many. There are *so* many different OSes. I'd like to use a Next system.
 

n0cmonkey

Elite Member
Jun 10, 2001
42,936
1
0
If you want Next, grab Mac OS X. It's as close as you will get without finding an old next box.

I haven't used Debian, but thier apt-get stuff has me interrested. I just cannot stand the logic behind the distribution. Non-commercial is fine, but why does EVERYTHING have to be gpl? BSD license is still good even if it is more free ;)
 

Diffusion

Senior member
Oct 19, 2000
467
0
0
I run OpenBSD on my Athlon machine. Right now I am rebuilding a SPARCstation 2 to run OpenBSD/sparc. I love the sparse feel of OpenBSD, it just feels more solid then the other *nix OSs I have tried. FreeBSD and most of the Linux distros are so cluttered that I feel like I am running less of an operating system then a random collection of softwear.
 

n0cmonkey

Elite Member
Jun 10, 2001
42,936
1
0
I personally run openbsd on my machines, but I want another box to run FreeBSD. I havent used it for a couple of releases now and I kind of miss it ;) It deffinately has its uses. Unlike what sysadmin magazine thinks it is one of the best performing oses out there.
 

kylef

Golden Member
Jan 25, 2000
1,430
0
0
That's hilarious. Every OS sux. I've got to remember that. I think Weird Al might be able to deliver the song with better execution, but the lyrics I think are right on target.