Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: GodotOS – Fake operating system interface made in the Godot engine

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 292 posts

Re: Show HN: GodotOS – Fake operating system interface made in the Godot engine

#261

Post by rubymamis »

pests wrote: post #172
rubymamis wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I own a 2017 MacBook Air, and I don't see why a block editor like Notion should be so slow on my computer. This is why I'm building my own block editor in Qt C++ and QML[1]. [1] https://www.get-plume.com/

Looks good. I joined the waitlist. How does it compare to Obsidian? I didn't see it in any of the comparison graphs.

Hey there, just saw your comment. Obsidian isn't a block editor (see below what it means in practice) so it's not being compared.

- Obsidian is using the resource-hag framework Electron. So it uses much more resources. Plume is built using Qt C++ and QML, and it's actually faster than comparable native apps.

- Obsidian editor is not a block editor (i.e., like Notion), so you can't put advanced blocks like a Kanban (tasks board) within the same page.

- Since it's not a block editor, you can't drag & drop different components.

Unlike Notion (which is also a web app wrapped with Electron), Plume is:

- Fast (Qt C++ vs Electron)

- Easier to use (opinionated design vs. Notion's complex databases)

- Portable (Underlying data is plaintext* vs. proprietary database)

*Currently all the notes' plaintext is stored in a database, but soon we'll change that to support arbitrary folder.

Re: Show HN: GodotOS – Fake operating system interface made in the Godot engine

#262

Post by soraminazuki »

forrestthewoods wrote: post #219
JeffSnazz wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Video game engines absolutely handle text rendering across a wide range of languages. They handle specific subsets of text rendering across a wide range of languages. There's a ton of interactions with the OS-level text interactions that are both difficult to fully enumerate and even more difficult to re-implement non-natively. Font programming can get really, really complex—some of it might be perceived as unneces…

> They handle specific subsets of text rendering across a wide range of languages. People radically overstate how hard this is. Yes there’s a lot of cases. But God bless UTF-8 which provides a very clear path. There are countless hobby text editors and libraries that handle literally all of this. > I can't imagine implementing a screen reader without relying heavily on the OS.... Of course. You “just” need to use the…

> But God bless UTF-8 which provides a very clear path.

It's a very clear middle finger for CJK users if text rendering issues were dismissed because "we do UTF-8." Thanks to the Unicode Consortium, letters from CJK languages have shared code points in Unicode. This makes it very easy to have, for example, Chinese style fonts sprinkled over Japanese text. This kind of mixed styles are aesthetically inconsistent, unpleasant, and hard to read.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_unification

i18n is very much not about slapping on UTF-8 support and calling it a day.

Re: Show HN: GodotOS – Fake operating system interface made in the Godot engine

#264

Post by lmpdev »

freshnode wrote: post #119

This reminds me of a time circa 2005 where "Sub OSes" were somewhat popular in the GameMaker community. Seems that given enough time someone will try to make an OS-like interface in a given game engine. It was a great way to understand UI and usability paradigms beyond building game mechanics. This definitely triggered some pleasant nostalgia for me.

Yes I remember the same for The Games Factory 2/Multimedia Fusion

Re: Show HN: GodotOS – Fake operating system interface made in the Godot engine

#265

Post by nightowl_games »

ahoka wrote: post #252
jermaustin1 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From where?

https://github.com/godotengine/godot/pull/48497#issuecomment...

That's irrelevant to the issue of copyright enforcement or handling of the copyright.

I've wanted to know what Pouley Ketchup is talking about for a long time, but we don't know, so hard to use it as evidence for much.

I have my guesses who he's talking about tho.

Re: Show HN: GodotOS – Fake operating system interface made in the Godot engine

#266

Post by corethree »

whstl wrote: post #237
corethree wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No the meme is frontend changes too much not JavaScript changes too much and that meme is still relevant and will be relevant for a while. Heck you can argue for how HTML and JavaScript are 20 years old!! Wow that means front end hasn't changed at all for 20b years! Come on man. Anyway my overall point wasn't even about what's changed. My point is that these are all awkward apis to use to develop a windows style UI.…

I'd be happy to discuss specific changes in good faith, but "Wow that means front end hasn't changed at all for 20b years!" is a gross misrepresentation and dismissal of my arguments. I will maintain that the pace of change is not the same as you portray. Definitely not when it comes to professional frontend developers working in the industry. Blog-oriented-development or experimental niche frameworks that reach top…

It's not a gross misinterpretation. I'm sorry, but a huge portion of the evidence you've stated was simply the ages of certain technologies and using that as invalid evidence for your arguments. I've clearly presented evidence to the contrary and you simply call it a gross misinterpretation without even providing a counter argument?

Your job is to prove why ages of technologies is relevant to your argument. If it's not then the only thing you can do is admit how that part of your argument is fucking baseless. You may be happy to discuss other things with me but until you admit or prove me wrong on this point there is zero further discussion about anything. Just walking up to someone and telling them they're wrong is useless. When you say gross expectation I expect some evidence to back that shit up. If not then you can just leave.

That being said I don't think I'm in the mood discuss anything with you. Let me be clear, any response you make to me after this will be illogical because I won't care for it or respond and it will be a complete waste of your time. We are done.

Re: Show HN: GodotOS – Fake operating system interface made in the Godot engine

#267

Post by Gormo »

Narishma wrote: post #124
Gormo wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not aware of any GUI stack that doesn't require a GPU, nor any desktop hardware released over the past 30 years that didn't have a GPU.

Qt or Electron don't; they both have software renderers. The latest Godot needs a GLES 3 or Vulkan GPU. The older versions used to only need a GLES 2 GPU.

Qt and Electron output to the OS-level display APIs, where screen rendering is handled by X11, Wayland, Quartz, WDDM, etc., all of which still rely on GPUs for output.

Godot, as a game engine, bypasses the OS and uses lower-level graphics APIs like OpenGL and Vulkan. But you only need these APIs available regardless of what hardware is under them, and you can use software-based rendering with e.g. Mesa, Lavapipe, or other software renderers. With a 2D desktop application, performance should still be fine.

Re: Show HN: GodotOS – Fake operating system interface made in the Godot engine

#268

Post by Gormo »

zilti wrote: post #146
Gormo wrote: post #51

This is actually a great proof of concept for using Godot as a cross-platform framework for desktop applications. The distribution package is incredibly simple -- just a single executable and a data file -- and performance is excellent. This seems much superior to Flatpak and the like as a way to offer fully self-contained distro-agnostic binary packages, and vastly superior to Electron in the performance department.…

Have you heard of AppImage?

And use it regularly. It's a great solution to test applications out before installing them, or run "portable" applications from removable media or a remote server.

But as another of those bundled-runtime solutions, like Flatpak, it suffers from the same issues, including high complexity and poor cohesiveness with the rest of the system.

Re: Show HN: GodotOS – Fake operating system interface made in the Godot engine

#269

Post by Narishma »

Gormo wrote: post #267
Narishma wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Qt or Electron don't; they both have software renderers. The latest Godot needs a GLES 3 or Vulkan GPU. The older versions used to only need a GLES 2 GPU.

Qt and Electron output to the OS-level display APIs, where screen rendering is handled by X11, Wayland, Quartz, WDDM, etc., all of which still rely on GPUs for output. Godot, as a game engine, bypasses the OS and uses lower-level graphics APIs like OpenGL and Vulkan. But you only need these APIs available regardless of what hardware is under them, and you can use software-based rendering with e.g. Mesa, Lavapipe, or…

X11, Wayland and WDDM only use the bare minimum functionality from those APIs, so they work just fine on old DX9-level GPUs for example. Godot needs much more recent GPUs.

Re: Show HN: GodotOS – Fake operating system interface made in the Godot engine

#270

Post by whstl »

corethree wrote: post #266
whstl wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be happy to discuss specific changes in good faith, but "Wow that means front end hasn't changed at all for 20b years!" is a gross misrepresentation and dismissal of my arguments. I will maintain that the pace of change is not the same as you portray. Definitely not when it comes to professional frontend developers working in the industry. Blog-oriented-development or experimental niche frameworks that reach top…

It's not a gross misinterpretation. I'm sorry, but a huge portion of the evidence you've stated was simply the ages of certain technologies and using that as invalid evidence for your arguments. I've clearly presented evidence to the contrary and you simply call it a gross misinterpretation without even providing a counter argument? Your job is to prove why ages of technologies is relevant to your argument. If it's n…

My point was simply that the technologies we use are established, and haven't changed much. The age matters, because the current dominant players have been dominant for longer than jQuery was at the top.

Your counterpoint was instead that React changed a lot, but I counter argued. You are free to disagree with that, of course, but instead chose to answer with "Come on man!!"...

I understand that it might seem overwhelming to see lots of "new things" here at HN and other sites, but the reality is that those things are pet projects or new incumbents that haven't been adopted at large by the industry, if at all. In reality, movement in frontend has been slower after 2015 than it was in the 10 years before.

And sorry but you can't preemptively call my response illogical. This is not cool.

Post reply on HN