Home | Forums | Submit   Haiku Generator | Quotable JLG | The Icon Tarot 


The King Is Dead - Long Live The King

Filed under the:  department.
Posted by:Deej on Sunday, 19 Aug, 2001 @ 11:38 AM
 
Petition

So, it must be said - get over it - BeOS is dead. Palm didn’t buy Be, they bought Be’s IP. Even if Palm decides to do something with BeOS, it won’t likely be called BeOS.

The King is Dead. A number of people and groups have stepped forward with actions to back words… Michael Wulff Nielsen wrote up an editorial on his opinions on what to do. It’s in the “Read More” link at the bottom. Along those same lines, Michael Phipps has started a mailing list at the prompting of many on the BeDevTalk mailing lists. They are looking to replace components of BeOS with open source modules one at a time, or a complete work from scratch - which is still a bit unclear to me as yet. If you would like to join, you may do so by sending email to openbeos-request@freelists.org with ’subscribe’ in the Subject field.

There are also three petitions now set up to help convince Palm that BeOS is worth continuing - Here, here, and here. The first being especially important, as Palm is actually waiting on the information retrieved in that one. Go sign them.

There are numerous people talking with Palm now about possible solutions to keeping our beloved OS alive and well. Palm is very open and receptive, it would seem, to these ideas. Keep your fingers crossed, and stay active in the community.

Long Live the King!

Saving BeOS

So now that we know for sure that BeOS will die, what are we to do about it??? So far the suggestions I have seen point to a couple of solutions:

1. Email palm, as if that would make any difference. I personally don’t believe it will.

2. Create a money based campaign to convince palm, won’t work either.

3. Turn over and let BeOS die.

I find none of the above alternatives to be very attractive, so it seems I will have to find a fourth option.

After some time and some thought I found a possible solution.

4. Create a new BeOS

Okay, before the flaming starts about how long that would take and how impossible it is, let’s look at a hypothetical way of doing it.

1. Find a suitable kernel

Possible candidates would be the Linux or the Atheos kernel. Personally I think the Atheos kernel might be the most Be like kernel, but the Linux kernel is far more mature. I will leave that to the developers taking on the kernel. On to the next step.

2. Implement the Storage and Application Kit/Server

This would be the absolute number 1 priority for a “new” FreeBeOS. In my opinion the system should aim for a source-level compatability between R5 and the new FreeBeOS. There is a lot of work to be done but in my humble opinion it might be possible. Perhaps we could even fix a lot of bugs during the process.

3. Convert the OpenTracker/Deskbar to the new system.

This would bring the lovely user interface of BeOS to the new system, and it would ensure source level compatibility

4. Start bringing all the other BeOS system stuff over.

Now we are really rolling

~~~~~~~~– Time out ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So is this possible??? It’s hard to tell, I am an application programmer not a kernel guy. I hope people take this opportunity to discuss it in depth.

Of course the new operating system wouldn’t have the advanteges of the slick BeOS kernel, but it would be opensource and free.

Perhaps BeUnited could be the focus point of this immense project, because this would need the ENTIRE community, every developer, every user and by god all the man power we can muster. The good thing is that we don’t have to reinvent the wheel, we can just look at how Be did it.

If you want to see what inspired me take a look at www.aros.org.

Thanks for your time
Michael Wulff Nielsen
Author of Cool Cat Editor



133 Responses to “The King Is Dead - Long Live The King”

  1. Anonymous Says:

    [No Subject]

    e-Picture has been already ported elsewhere
    keeping its lovely interface and speed.

    Moho has been already ported elsewhere
    keeping its lovely interface and speed.

    Gobe Productive 3 has been already ported
    elsewhere keeping its lovely interface and speed.

    Every one has got Windows preinstalled on its PC
    and can download for free Linux or buy it with
    a cheap magazine. The spirit of BeOS will survive
    there.

  2. Anonymous Says:

    [No Subject]

    personalStudio has been ported elsewhere
    keeping its lovely interface and speed, too :(

  3. Anonymous Says:

    [No Subject]

    Whoa, come on! - Let’ take things one step at a time!

    Jumping straight to write our own BeOS is a little premature.

    First, the emails to Palm have not fallen on deaf ears, Palm are listening to us, and have asked BeFAQ to carry out research for them - this obviously shows their interest!

    Secondly, you propose that a “FreeBeOS” use a Linux kernel…linux? I can’t see that working! - BeOS and Linux are just two TOTALLY different operating systems!

    I’m going to stick with putting my faith in Palm for the time being - but the other options certainly can’t be ignored.

    But as I said, let’s take things one step at a time!

  4. Anonymous Says:

    [No Subject]

    Oh come on, some of these petitions only have 1000 signatures. Palm may be friendly, but 1000 people does not a market make.

    Off to linux.

  5. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 1:26:22 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    > Jumping straight to write our own BeOS is a little premature

    Yes, and because of this, there is a mailing list for discussing this first!

    > First, the emails to Palm have not fallen on
    > deaf ears, Palm are listening to us, and have
    > asked BeFAQ to carry out research for them -
    > this obviously shows their interest!

    Yes, they show interest, but in the end they will do nothing. They are not an desktop OS company, and even if they manage to put out a R6 with the use of sourcecode they aquired from Be, I don’t see that there will be a future in Palm. They are not better than Be. I don’t even think they have enough developers to do BeOS development..

    > Secondly, you propose that a “FreeBeOS” use
    > a Linux kernel…linux?
    No, not a linux kernel. The OpenBeOS will create the future BeOS, while keeping binary compatiblity.

    The OpenBeOS project are serious BeOS people, I hope. They want it to actually *be* a BeOS. And they will create whatever kernel that is needed. I don’t think it will be a linux kernel.

    The BlueOS project on the other hand looks like a stupid idea. Taking an linux kernel and X-Server is a stupid idea. They will end up with a Linux including some kind of MediaKit and InterfaceKit.

  6. Anonymous Says:

    I submitted the BeFAQ’s story to /.

    I wrote into slashdot for them to post the story about the upcoming report to palm. Everyone else should submit the story too so they’ll be sure to print it. What we really need is for BeNews to be up too so that the rest of the community knows where to voice their opinions where they’ll be heard.

    -lucid dreams

  7. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 12:31:48 AM

    Re: windows

    “Keeping it’s lovely interface” OK
    Keeping it’s speed on windows? Yeah right….:(

  8. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 1:52:20 PM

    The Slashdot effect.

    I agree. If you want this to be seen by as many people possible, it has to be posted by slashdot. I also submitted an article to them, including all relevant links to the BeFaqs survey and the two petitions.

    Here is the link to sumbit a story to Slashdot.

  9. markh Says:

    Save BeOS petition fun ?

    It seems someone is having fun with the save BeOS petition and is filling in the names of most of the employees Be ever had.

    On another point. If someone wants to continue BeOS, why couldn’t it be called BeOS anymore ? If necessary they can purchase the name from Be. How much would it cost ?
    It still has name recognition.

  10. Naish Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 1:26:22 PM

    Re: Why not the linux kernel

    So why can’t we use the linux kernel???

    I will accept that we can’t get all the performance that the beos kernel will give.

    But most of the interesting things in BeOS is implemented in the servers.

    Take the app server, it could run on top of the framebuffer device in the linux kernel.

    Actually using a linux kernel would give any reimplementation of BeOS a huge step forward in posix compliance.

    The ReiserFS provides a nice alternative to BFS, the largest problem would probably be nodemonitoring.

    So I ask again why not use the Linux kernel.

    Michael wulff Nielsen

  11. Naish Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 1:49:10 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    Do you have any idea of the complexity of writing a new kernel???

    Besides finding the programmers who can actually write and debug one, you would have a LOT of work before you had a kernel as fast and stable as the Be kernel.

    The Linux kernel is here and works. It is also very mature and has support for a lot of hardware. There is also a lot of driver development for the Linux kernel so a NewBeOS would benefit enourmously from the Linux community….

    The only price we would have to pay is perhaps a little speed and binary compatability with R5.

    But Be broke the binarys between R3 and R4, why can’t we do the same between BeOS R5 and FreeBeOS DR1????

    Michael

  12. Anonymous Says:

    All good things come to those who wait

    I had originally investigated BeOS about six months back, and fell in love with it immediately. Unfortunately, it was shortly thereafter that news began appearing that Be would no longer support the OS. Now we here that Palm “might” be picking it up. In my opinion, that’s the best darn news we’ve had in several months, and we should throw our collective energy into introducing ourselves (BeOS developers) to Palm and showing off our wares. And then, of course, hoping like hell they don’t take BeOS and become “Microsoft, the sequel.”

    I suggest we not shoot the horse til it’s dead. While BeOS is lying unconscious, the heart is still beating — and that heart is *us*. So what I have decided is that I will wait and be patient. If Palm picks up BeOS and brings her back to consciousness, I WILL buy the commercial version. If they do not, then we should talk about re-creating BeOS or joining in Linux crew.

    Travis Beaty
    Claude, Texas.

  13. Anonymous Says:

    [No Subject]

    I still say that the petitions, the way they are setup at the moment, aren’t that convincing. I could just sign it a hundred times if I wanted as an example. And signing the petition won’t mean that those who do sign will actually buy the next version of BeOS if it ever gets released.
    I still stand by my argument that sending 100$ or however much a new releaase would cost via paypal to an account would have more of an impact (wasn’t that how the Black&White call to arms was set up?). If there is a new release within a given time those people are sure to get it, in case Palm won’t be persuaded to work on BeOS the money is returned within half a year from now on.
    That way you only get those people to sign the petition who are seriously interested in BeOS.

    thies
    (who doesn’t understand why his password didn’t get sent to him by email)

  14. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 1:49:10 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    Well, I’m sorry - but a good OS like BeOS just doesn’t come out of thin air. It’ll be a LONG time before OpenBeOS appears in a fully useable form - and by then, if, according to you, Palm are just leading us on like suckers, then the BeOS community will have taken casualties and there will be significantly less people to take interest!

    Moving on to your point about “they will do nothing” how do you know?

    Palm are a damned lot better than Be - more cash, more employees, and expert engineers - including the 50 or so be ones - and Palm are actually willing to communicate with us. I mean, I did like Be, but let’s not start looking back through rose colored glasses!

    Ok, Palm aren’t a “Dektop OS” company, but Microsoft wasn’t an embedded OS company, but out came WinCE! - It happens all the time!

    We’ve all heard the rumours that BeOS 6 is basically complete, BONE, OpenGL etc all finished - even the rumour of the golden master. If this is true, then BeOS 6 provides a nice foot into the desktop OS market with a proven OS, that development of has already been completed, it’s a quick way to make some cash - then they can decide based on demand whether to continue development of BeOS or not!

    I’m sorry, while I think the people who are writing “alternative BeOS’s” are super people, willing to put so much effort into keeping some form of BeOS alive. I’m going to have to put my faith with Palm for the time being!

  15. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 3:49:51 PM

    Now it’s our turn

    Now we know what’s going on. Who should I shoot ;^)? It’s time for radical things! Steal the source! Can be one…….. Flood Palm with emails and letters. Assasinate BG….. nah I’m kidding a bit….

    But don’t wait, don’t say BeOS is that, don’t Be dead! Choose live, choose BeOS!

    Know your power is within,

    Paul

  16. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 3:49:51 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    While that is a good idea, I think that many people would be “worried” about sending such a significant amount of cash such as that, if BeOS may not be developed - even though it would get returned if it wasn’t! - Most people would be cautious about it!

    As a dramatic idea, some ambitious person, could ask Palm if they could do a presentation for them, actually there in their building, walking them through and showing them what a great OS it is, and showing the creativity of the BeOS developers - there’s no doubt we have some FANTASTIC applications for BeOS. They could also show some ideas that the community has for future versions of BeOS - i.e those faked screenshots of BeOS 6 from that french site, while they were “faked” they could be shown as a possible idea for a new stunning UI that could compete with WinXP and MacOS X!

    Just throwing some ideas around :)

  17. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 1:52:20 PM

    Re: I submitted the BeFAQ’s story to /.

    Anybody knows if benews are still experiencing problems with their servers or if they’re down for different reasons this time?

  18. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Naish @ 08/19/2001 3:33:42 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    Actually, yeah, we do know how hard it is to make a new kernel - been there and done that.

    There are numerous kernels out there to look at and get good ideas from, too.

    But. All of that aside. A fair amount of this is done. There is a BeFS implementation that is nearly complete. Tracker and Deskbar are already free. There is a replacement mail_daemon out there.

    What does that leave? Printing, networking,media, app_server and the kernel are the big ones. They are also pieces that can be swapped out at will. The print_server, in particular, is something that Be has never really worked really hard on. If we (the openbeos community) replaced the kits as we finished them, people could continue to use their existing, stable BeOS to its fullest. And migrate when the features/stability tradeoff is in their favor.

    Yes, it is a big job. When I started this, I was completely unaware that there was any interest at Palm in considering. The last thing that I had heard was that Palm had no interest in the desktop. I am not willing, nor are the 50 or so on the openbeos list, to give up my investment in BeOS. I think that almost everyone would prefer to see Palm take this and run with it.

    If they don’t, we have an alternative. We also will have an organization in place to work alongside them. Say they decide to open the printing kit to the community. We could take that over and reduce the load on the Palm engineers. In the same way that Be did with OT/OD. I would like to see Palm do the things that a small, focused group of pros can do - kernel, media. 1/2 app_server. I would like to see the community do printing, mail, application kit, translators, and others.

    Anyway - I am not an open reactionary. I don’t want the whole world open sourced. I want BeOS to continue to be the best OS out there for us. If that means going partially or totally open, fine. If that means getting behind Palm, great! If that means moving to Windows XP, well, who wants a great deal on my computer? :-)

    Michael Phipps

  19. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 4:06:19 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    sure a lot of people would be worried about sending the money, but you could be sure that those who do really are willing to pay for a new release and that you get noone signing more than once (or only in case he would want more than one copy of BeOS ;)

    about the faked screenshots: In case you mean those that were showing the one with an image editor with a pic of a girl, I can just say I happen to know her and she would gladly rip someones head of in case that picture goes around again.

    thies

  20. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 1:49:10 PM

    The future of BeOS

    BeOS could keep me warm and happy for the next several years if I could just get my hands on BONE (and maybe some hardware OpenGL… though I don’t use BeOS for gaming, anyway).
    If it is going to fade away, that’s okay. It happens. We would just need to refocus our attention on another worthy OS that should be ready for general consumption in the next couple of years… such as AtheOS (which is not BeOS in any way, nor is it based on BeOS… the creator just took the great ideas on what a “good” operating system needs and implemented them on his own — same thing BeOS did).

    In short, I don’t see a future for BeOS. How can anyone?
    But if Palm can throw us a few scraps, that should keep BeOS going long enough for a worthy predecessor to come to fruition.

    -Jason

    ps - since I don’t have an BeGroovy account yet, I can be reached at jrdepriest@hotmail.com.
    I signed up for TheGreenBoard, NewBe.org, and BeBits… I guess I missed this one.

  21. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 3:43:47 PM

    Re: All good things come to those who wait

    Why would you shoot the horse *after* it’s dead?!?

  22. Anonymous Says:

    Long live the King

    I cant see my King is dead its still alive and kicking
    in my computer and I have no plans to kill him.

    Hg

  23. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 4:45:03 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    Wow - there’s a whole team around this?

    And, work has already started on it?

    Is there a website, will there be one?

    What extra features do you *hope* to eventually have?

    This really interests me!

  24. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 4:54:01 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    No, no. I mean the “screenshots” that were one persons view of what the BeOS 6 interface would look like - they were very good - The url is somewher in the forums at newbe.org under the topic “cool screenshots”

  25. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 6:11:15 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    Here’s a screenshot (remember it is faked):

    http://the.belette.free.fr/images/0052.jpg

    And the page address is:

    http://the.belette.free.fr/screen.htm

  26. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Naish @ 08/19/2001 3:28:19 PM

    Re: Why not the linux kernel

    The ReiserFS provides a nice alternative to BFS, the largest problem would probably be nodemonitoring.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~—

    The BeOS folks seem to forget that their beloved BeFS is basically a reimlementation of the IRIX XFS filesystem. And now that XFS is available on Linux, you get it for free (including extended attributes!!). And what’s that node monitoring? BeOS people also seem to think that this is a unique feature to BeOS, yet it has been available in IRIX for a long time! And guess what, there are patches for Linux that enable node monitoring:

    http://oss.sgi.com/projects/fam/

    So there, Linux provides you with almost all of BeFS features, for free!!

    Good luck to the idiots trying to recreate BeOS from scratch. Remember, it took a company almost $100 million and dedicated 50 engineers to get us the BeOS we have today.

  27. Anonymous Says:

    BeOS development platform?

    Why doesn’t Palm market the BeOS as a development platform for their BeOS-based handheld devices? QSSL is doing it with their QNX platform and look how well it is doing. This way, Palm is not competing in the desktop os arena, and they can drum up development support for their handhelds.

    If the new Palms are going to be BeOS-based, the development for it will have to be done on BeOS anyway. So for Palm to successfully compete with Microsoft, they will have to continue updating BeOS to satisfy their own internal needs. Why not provide the developers with the latest updates so they too can reap the benefits of having the most advanced tools with which to develop for Palm?

    I think this is a win-win situation all around for BeOS fanatics, the developers, and Palm. Sound like a plan, guys?

  28. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 6:49:58 PM

    Re: Why not the linux kernel

    Why are you calling them idiots? is it because something like that is too much for someone like yourself? I would support this project all the way. I’m kind of tired of waiting on companies. I personally do not like linux and wouldnt want to use the kernel.

    I think it could be done with a dedicated few to make the kernel first.

  29. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 6:49:58 PM

    Re: Why not the linux kernel

    Why are you calling us idiots?

    If you think that Linux already has all the features BeOS has, fine. But please try to be fair.

    Of cause Be needed many time in designing all the software, but design is completed. Reimplementing an existing does take much time, but we are evaluating if this if possible, since we want BeOS to survive and evolve.

    Even if Palm continues BeOS development now, you don’t know if they are going to do something evil like dropping support completly in a couple of month/weeks.

    Marcus Overhagen

  30. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 12:39:00 AM

    Re: [No Subject]

    I disagree. personalStudio is a LOT faster on my machine under BeOS than the Windows version.

  31. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 4:55:46 PM

    Re: All good things come to those who wait

    duh…

    As a precautionary measure you Be Dope ;)

  32. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 6:20:50 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    Actually with these screenshots added with the ones that weresne to BeFAQs for the ‘Fake BeOS 6 Screenshots’ contest would be a nice thing to look into and let the BeOS help in designing the next generation UI. I am pretty good at this kind of stuff since that is part of my job criteria at work (I progam in a proprietary display language that designs AND, PLOT and MIMIC displays for my company, this on top of some other programming they have me do) I’m not an expert, but graphics are important to me and when I saw BeOS form the first time that was what got me interested in BeOS in the first place (I think Windows is ugly). The first impression is always the important one, and that usually falls under visual impression (or something like that). So if anybody would like to get together and design a new UI with icons and the whole bit, I am interested in getting involved with that.

  33. CattBeMac Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 8:08:05 PM

    UI design ;-)

    sorry for the typos and I forgot to login as well, I think it’s because I keep jumping from Net Positive to Opera and back again OOPS…

    Actually with these screenshots added with the ones that were sent to BeFAQs for the ‘Fake BeOS 6 Screenshots’ contest would be a nice thing to look into and let the BeOS community help in designing the next generation UI. I am pretty good at this kind of stuff since that is part of my job criteria at work (I progam in a proprietary display language that designs AND, PLOT and MIMIC displays for my company, this on top of some other programming they have me do) I’m not an expert, but graphics are important to me and when I saw BeOS for the first time that was what got me interested in BeOS in the first place (I think Windows is ugly). The first impression is always the most important one, and that usually falls under visual impression (or something like that). So if anybody would like to get together and design a new UI with icons and the whole bit, I am interested in getting involved with that.
    [Edited at 20:14 Aug 19 2001 by CattBeMac]

  34. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 7:05:15 PM

    Re: BeOS development platform?

    Argh! - I can’t stand it any more. If one more person says that I think I’m gonna snap big time!

    1) BeOS is an operating system not a development environment for PalmOS applications - no company with a brain larger than a pea would spend time and money on an OS that is to be used as a dev environment for another OS’s applications. It’s like Microsoft distributing a version of Linux as a dev environment for WinCE apps! - Insane!

    2) People seem to think that Palm is going to use BeOS/BeIA in their future products - that is nonsense! - Palm are improving PalmOS by including technology from BeIA and BeOS in PalmOS - PalmOS will be NOTHING like BeOS!

    3) PalmOS apps can be developed just about ANYWHERE! - They are just C applications with specific PalmOS header files - Palm even have an emulator available for !*Windows*!

    Finally, BeOS is only going to be developed by Palm *IF* the reports show that there is SIGNIFICANT demand for BeOS and that we are willing to pay as much as it will take to make them a profit!

    I don’t know where this idea came from but it’s going to die here and now - an OS as a dev environment for another OS’s products - that’s a great way of making Palm go flat broke - an OS is an OS - And BeOS will only survive as an OS, nothing else!

    Sheesh did everyone suddenly wake up and take stupid pills this week! - If BeOS did become a dev platform for Palm apps who in their right mind would download a 45mb Operating system (and possibly pay for it) just to develop applications for Palm os, when they can do it for free on any other operating system!

    Sorry, it’s not going to happen. The only thing that can happen now is if we all do our best to make Palm realise that we do exist, that we will pay for BeOS, and that there are a lot of us around, and that we are not taking NO for an answer!

    Failing that the OpenBeOS project certainly sounds promissing, I look forward to possibly seeing some good results!

    Oh, and another post about Linux being just as good as BeOS or that “someone” is giving up on BeOS and moving to Linux and there are going to be casualties!

    I’m sorry if this sounds slightly angry but I wish people would 1) think before they post. 2) stop being so god damn depressed. 3) stop trying to tell us how good Linux is … if we thought it was good we’d be using it, but HELLO…we’re not, we’re using BEOS here!

    End meniacle rant!

  35. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To CattBeMac @ 08/19/2001 8:12:44 PM

    Re: UI design ;-)

    Here’s an idea that kinda fits in with thise faked screenshots which look stunning by the way!

    I’ve been thinking of a new “concept” for the BeOS desktop. For one, I want that deskbar gone! - We’re better than that, it’s too Windows like. I like the tabbed taskbar style in those screenshots though! - That is one thing I really WANT!

    Anyway, about the desktop. How about having the desktop as we currently know it as just a background (color, image etc.) - Now in my “concept” you would not be able to place icons on the desktop. Instead you would place “objects” on the desktop..(hold on, this is going somewhere)…objects are mini applications that add features to the desktop (similar to MS Active desktop but not as shit) - for example, in those screenshots (urls above) there is a “panel” for icons in the bottom right-hand corner. This “area” could be a desktop object - This particular object allows you to place icons in it, and it also “moulds” itself to where it’s placed on the screen (e.g top left, right etc.) - It would also support an invisible icon panel that would allow you to emualte the way the desktop works now.

    These “objects” would provide the user with MUCH more control over how their desktop looks, icons could be grouped etc. It could also allow you to add specific content panels to the desktop etc.

    It just seems that no other OS has expanded on the “Desktop” concept, and it’s well due for a new idea.

    What do you all think? Does this make sense? Do you like it?

    I’ll *try* to do a screenshot or something of what I mean if necessary!

  36. CattBeMac Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 8:30:42 PM

    Re: UI design ;-)

    So would you like to work together on this? I like your ideas and would like to throw ideas back and forth. Let me know!

  37. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 1:35:38 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    Thank you for putting so much faith in the BeOS community.

    We hope you enjoyed your time here, and we hope you have fun wallowing around in the unholy bowels of hell that you are “off” to :)

    1000 signings in 2 days - Not bad at all in my opinion - But some people have unrealistic expectations!

    Have fun with linux!

  38. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To CattBeMac @ 08/19/2001 8:35:55 PM

    Re: UI design ;-)

    Sure, I’d love to! - I’ll say this now though, I’m not *cough* good at graphics! :)

    But we can certainly pitch ideas back-and-forth! You can email me at: gavinjames@runbox.com

  39. CattBeMac Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 8:19:55 PM

    Re: BeOS development platform?

    Look don’t be beating on people that are bringing up these crazy ideas, these ideas will probably lead to better ideas… it is good that people are putting their heads together and coming up with a solution. I actually applauded this idea even though I think it would be insane, but we need to get the think tanks going and come up with a solution, just let the people comment and chat on ideas and these ideas will only lead to better ideas. They always do.

    As for jumping ship and may think OpenBeOS is the answer, yeah I have thought about that and it sounds interesting, but I still am not sure how well this idea will take off with most of the Be community. Most are probably going to want an alternative solution in a year or so being that our software might fall behind the times and we’re not internet compliant with the formats that will be evolving for multimedia type of stuff, unless we stick with the legacy formats that BeOS knows and all the BeOS communites around the world are willing to keep us alive in that respect. Who knows what is going to happen a year from now… a scary thought indeed!

  40. CattBeMac Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 8:41:57 PM

    Re: UI design ;-)

    okie dokie I will get in contact with you soon as possible.

    Talk to you soon!!

    With your ideas and my graphics eye along with the Be community’s 2 cents… we should have something wonderful in the end!
    [Edited at 21:04 Aug 19 2001 by CattBeMac]

  41. CattBeMac Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 8:37:35 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    If worse comes to worse I will be taking my Mac OS seriously again… until then I am fighting together with the BeOS troops till the end!

    Good luck to all those jumping ship and moving onto Linux, it was good having you here and I wish you the best… as you move on, your new battle is with Micro$oft now and I hope you become victorious!!

  42. LeftTurn Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 6:49:58 PM

    Re: Why not the linux kernel

    Calling the people “idiots” ruins any credibility your comments may have had.

    One thing the BeOS offers that Linux still lacks, is the extreme ease of setup and fast, responsive GUI.

    If people want to try and build something similar, more power to them. If they don’t think a particular kernel is the answer, why does that make them “idiots”?

  43. LeftTurn Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 3:49:51 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    If any account is set up, please DO NOT USE PAYPAL! Their system has been so screwed up. I cannot get an account there for whatever stupid reason. If anything like this gets set up, please do it under some other pay system that actually works with the users to make sure things work like they’re supposed to.

  44. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 7:26:37 PM

    Re: Why not the linux kernel

    I personally do not like linux and wouldnt want to use the kernel.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~—

    You see, you are already making decisions based on emotion only. Try to approach it from a technical standpoint. You object to the Linux kernel, without even knowing its internals. I bet you decided Linux was not right, because you had bad experience with a crappy/bodged distro install procedure or perhaps a run-in with the ghastly GNOME.

    Go ahead. Name some good technical reasons why the Linux kernel is not well suited. And please underpin them too. And this is the kernel only (not a distribution), just the ftp.kernel.org tarball :)

  45. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 4:45:03 PM

    Re: Saving the BeOS

    Go Michael,

    But please… not the Linux kernel. It’s as big as the Titanic and is sailing in the wrong direction (downward). Micro-kernels are leaving it for dead as far as I’m concerned. And X-windows is piss-poor performing on my old Riva TNT where BeOS is a breeze.

    Anyway, what you say is good. I think an OpenBeOS could work with (or without) Palm’s support. We need to harness some of the incredible enthusiasm of open-source supporters.

    I’m not really a techie, but I’ve searched for a viable alternative to WinDoze for years. It became a bit of an obsession that I’ll certainly need treatment for at some point. I’ve tried Linux x heaps of distros, Win2K, QNX, and sniffed at a few others (like OS2). The BeOS combines the best of them all, none of the failings of any, and all in a neat contemporary package. Shit, we can’t let it die! Pass me the Molotov, I’m ready to march!!

    CLR

  46. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To CattBeMac @ 08/19/2001 8:49:48 PM

    Re: BeOS development platform?

    I don’t think it is such a crazy idea. Like I said earlier, it is working for QSSL, and I think it will work for Palm.

    For those who think Palm is only going to take certain parts of BeOS/IA and update their mediocre Palm OS, I advise them to rethink that statement. It is like saying you are going to take a 1943 Ford and throw on some parts from a 2001 Ferarri to create a better version of the Ford.

    As for creating a free Be clone: why? Do you really think it is possible to build an entirely new OS modeled after one that took 10 years and $20 million to make in the first place? And what is wrong with AtheOS? A least it is off the ground and is somewhat Be-like, from what I have heard.
    I don’t know why so many people are jumping ship on Be, anyway. It is a good OS, and it does what I want it to do. Some people still use Apple IIs and Atari STs simply because they work. Just because BeOS got sold doesn’t mean I’m going to take it off my PC. And nobody from Palm is going to come to my house and delete it, either. So for now, I’m staying put.

  47. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To CattBeMac @ 08/19/2001 9:11:59 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    Actually, I use Linux everyday, that’s why I am NOT going from BeOS to Linux. IF I abandon BeOS, it will be for Windows. Linux is only good as a server, not for media of any kind.

  48. Anonymous Says:

    GnuStep - just a thought in a slightly different direction

    I thought it was worth looking at GnuStep, to see what others have gone through attempting to do a major port along these lines.

    I wonder if they are any stories like HippoDraw for BeOS. Has anyone developed replacements for some of APIs that BeOS provides in order to port their application? If so one might hope to open source these, not the application, but just the BeOS replacement stuff. To help possible build a fuller set of BeOS replacement APIs which could run under Windows, MacOS, and Linux. As well as separately working on a kernel replacement.

    Then I thought, what is it about BeOS that you want to continue? Do you 100% identical replacement?
    If not, why not just extend the GnuStep project and focus on the multimedia, A/V stuff, which would make development of quality A/V apps easier on all the platforms supported by GnuStep and your additions. Since GnuStep is open, you could more easily bring that to any other kernel that you might prefer, be it more suitable or optimized for A/V. You’d have at least one really optimal platform and a way to easily get the apps to run on numerous other platforms even if they were as optimal. Part of the problem of BeOS development is it’s too much BeOS only to have a large enough market. This would solve that.

    You have much of the good stuff about MacOS X - GnuStep even runs on on Darwin - all that it needs is the subset of things you like about BeOS that doesn’t have anything comparable in Open Step.

    And if there is any portion of BeOS that Palm isn’t going to use, maybe even the Kernel, one could that it could be open sourced, between that and GnuStep, you’d be far further along towards a really cool alternative, than you would be starting from scratch.

  49. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 9:22:23 PM

    Re: Saving the BeOS

    There are more than 50 of us. There is a source forge project and a mailing list (send email to
    openbeos-request@freelists.org with ’subscribe’ in the Subject field OR log into the Web interface).

    I have no interest in tne Linux kernel or X11, other than as guides to understanding hardware/issues.

  50. CattBeMac Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 9:31:04 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    “Linux is only good as a server, not for media of any kind.”

    And Windows is??

    OUCH!!!

    But good luck any route you go and if you decide to leave the BeOS realm (I hope you don’t) keep in touch with the BeOS faithful, you’ll always have a place here with us!
    [Edited at 21:52 Aug 19 2001 by CattBeMac]

  51. Anonymous Says:

    Posted on Anandtech…

    I posted the petitions on Anandtech forums, and the replies i’m receiving are not good. Any back up would be appreciated :)

    http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.cfm?catid=27&threadid=536875

    http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.cfm?catid=34&threadid=536872

  52. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 1:52:20 PM

    Re: I submitted the BeFAQ’s story to /.

    Slashdot only wants to post bad things about BeOS and wants nothing to do with saving it. There the people who go on huge rants saying things about be and beOS that are totaly wrong. If its not linux they will only post bad things so they can have fun posting stupid comments about why anything but linux sucks. If you summited somehting saying some new linux project wich will go no where has been started it would be up in no time. The last things those assholes want is for BeOS to live. But hey you can try, just don’t hold your breath

  53. Anonymous Says:

    [No Subject]

    Well, if you had gotten comfterble with actually looking at hot to use Linux for awhile, you wouldnt have this let-down. Ive been telling you for quite awhile now.I dont even miss BeOS anymore because of the great luxuries of Linux!

  54. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 1:52:20 PM

    ArsTechnica

    I submitted the story to Slashdot, then submitted it to ArsTechnica by emailing news@arstechnica.om. They have been more BeOS positive than Slashdot has.

    These two sites are important in giving the efforts more visibility.

  55. Anonymous Says:

    If BeOS were maintained and released by Palm

    I’ll bet if they gave it some more media/web exposure that Be didn’t give to the BeOS, we could easily see another mainstream OS become popular, as long as Joe User can watch pr0n and flash (streaming wma, wma, flash, javascript, java, realmedia, all-the-latest-plugins-and-filetypes-what-have-you)

  56. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 8:41:57 PM

    Re: UI design ;-)

    ah gavin. why on earth would you want to do something positive for this operating system? aren’t you the one who’s been bashing it as being subpar the past few weeks,? hmmmm. i smell a rat.

  57. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Naish @ 08/19/2001 3:28:19 PM

    Re: Why not the linux kernel

    Umm, unless I’ve missed something in the past few days, BeOS is a closed source OS. Use the linux kernel? Why not use linux then? The rest is closed sourced also. And what is wrong with BeOS as you see it now? Nothing. A few missing apps, and open gl, but the rest is VERY much usable. And in fact, very much ENJOYABLE.

  58. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 10:48:22 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    So what is your purpose at a BeOS related forum? To try to convert people to a cult like some religious fanatic?

  59. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 6:49:58 PM

    Re: Why not the linux kernel

    Personally, from what I’ve seen, patches mean bulk. Linux has a patch for everything. Why not strip the bugger down and get it humming. Linux seems pretty stable but I’ve never incountered it humming on any machine.

    BeOS purrs like a kitten

  60. Naish Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 9:22:23 PM

    Re: Saving the BeOS

    I must admit that I can’t stand Linux/X Windows/KDE as a desktop, but what I think is important is that all the problems with Linux doesn’t arise from the kernel, but from the X Windows system and a huge bloated KDE environment.

    Personally I think we should grab the linux kernel and RUN like hell

    Michael Wulff Nielsen

  61. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 8:19:55 PM

    Re: BeOS development platform?

    Then snap…
    Whether truely feasible or not, you can only change things by going for the impossible. Palm will definately not support BeOS (or what ever they’ll call it) if we don’t ask for it. You seldom end where you start in any negotiation.

    BTW, even if you’re not registered with Begroovy you could at least sign your name if you rant at others…

    Harold V. Taylor

  62. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 11:26:50 PM

    Re: If BeOS were maintained and released by Palm

    That’s what I’m thinking. Read between the lines : ‘we needed Multimedia Capabilities for our PDA’s where BeIA/BeOS is obviously the best in (o.k. it’s not correctly)’ - now they can manage to catch three flies with one snap :

    Offering MM to PDA’s, step into the IA Market and offering Streaming media solutions for MM Companies Client & SERVER-side ;-) .

    I think that’s the buzz about. These Ideas only have to be realized faster than the big PocketPC-Concurrence : M$.

    Streaming Services via IIS & Mediaplayer seem to be a major combo, in which M$ still got big parts of the Pie, unlike Web/Mailserving Services, where they constantly loose, month by month.
    So they try to steal from the Database-Pie by Oracle.

    This is the best time to steal percentages from the Streaming Media Services Pie by Palm with a unique Client/Server Solution.

    Another Calculation is possible : Apple itself could buy the new Palm Inc w/Be’s assets to catch those flies for itself - remember Newton? And they also stated out, that there is a high interest from Apple joining the IA Market…With their 2-4 % Desktop-OS Marketshares, it’s only a question of time, they have to ‘Focus Shi(f)t’ ;-) .

    Things are moving forward now - during this time of indifference, a lot of nice things will hopefully appear on Bebits (Hint,hint;-).

    One more point, Folks : I got my Dual PIII 1 GHz up&running with BeOS 5.03 Pro, a 32 MB card w/ ViVo SCSI/Firewire/NIC/Sound, huge ROM & 1 GB RAM - I won’t change my System. So I can live with this OS at this status for at least 2 Years. Cause it rocks.

    What’s happening after then ? I will see. With or without Be Inc - Be will serve me until then, no doubt.

    Atilla, Webmaster TurkBUG ;-)

  63. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 00:38:42 AM

    Re: [No Subject]

    I check begroovy cause I’m 1/2 way interested in the BeOS stock being .220.. The joy of laughing in ur faces is an extra plus.

  64. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 6:49:58 PM

    Re: Why not the linux kernel

    Sure, 50 engineers and lots of money. But if you read the history, they spent a lot of time developing:

    a. A hardware platform
    b. A version for the PPC and the x86
    c. Be/IA

    You only have to look to Tim Wilkinson (Kaffe) for an example of what one dedicated programmer _can_ do. So before you say it’s impossible, remember that half of it is already available and the current O/S is there as a model. Which is a lot easier than writing it from scratch.

    However, when I signed the OpenSource petition I didn’t agree to any SourceForge project, mentioned in one of the messages above. Since a few dedicated people usually do most of the work (and the rest stand around whining about stuff that doesn’t work as they expected) I’d expect to have a share in the profits of any project set up to recreate the BeOS. Either that or the likes of RedHat, Caldera et al get to profit from my work.

    If it gets GPL’ed, I’m out.

  65. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 10:48:22 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    Ha! Good one! :-)

  66. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 4:28:10 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    The truth is, you perverted Linux zealots are just afraid of BeOS, as every MEDIOCRITY is afraid of TRUE TALENT! You can see this phenomenon in everyday’s life all the time. And so, Linux has never detected my video or sound card at boot, and if you want to have some half-ass media performance you have to tune and patch it to death, and throw an 1 GHz processor at it, and it still won’t match a K6 running BeOS. Fuck, you mediocrities are the scum of the world.

  67. DrB Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 6:49:58 PM

    Re: Why not the linux kernel

    “Good luck to the idiots trying to recreate BeOS from scratch. Remember, it took a company almost $100 million and dedicated 50 engineers to get us the BeOS we have today.”

    linux is a pretty good OS. how many engineers did it take to build linux? how much money? how long? linux was recreated minix, which was recreated unix. someone probably said,”Good luck to the idiots trying to recreate UNIX from scratch.”

  68. DrB Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 00:28:44 AM

    Re: Why not the linux kernel

    OpenTracker is… well… open. So I guess you did miss something… but just that.

    ;)

  69. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 10:48:22 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    If you don’t miss BeOS way are you here and make a post?

  70. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 00:25:50 AM

    Re: UI design ;-)

    What? I haven’t said a bad word againts BeOS. It’s the BEST OS I have ever used!

    I think you have the wrong person >:(

  71. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 5:15:48 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    I’m real afraid of a dead os that hasnt ever been popular, that doesnt have near the capabilities of my wonderful Linux.

  72. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 5:33:50 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    Tthink I already answered this, youall provide my morning comedy.

  73. DrB Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 8:19:55 PM

    Re: BeOS development platform?

    Counterpoints

    1) BeOS is the development platform for BeIA applications according to Be. If BeIA = PalmOS 5 then BeOS is the development platform for PalmOS 5. This assumes that Palm leaves the core of BeIA intact. I’m guessing that they will port it to ARM first. This will probably take a few weeks (heheh) according to the PPC to x86 port time. Then they will see how it works on the reference hardware. If it is too slow, they will start chopping stuff up. (edited for humor)’It’s like Microsoft distributing a version of Windows as a dev environment for WinCE apps! - Insane!’

    2) Palm would not spend a dime on a technology that it would not use. Palm is moving from a 33MHz processor to a 200Mhz processor. Can you say DOS to NT? Color, audio, video. Three things that were foreign to PalmOS until recently. They see the writing on the wall (losing market share to WinCE) and they NEED multimedia capabilities. BeIA has it built in, PalmOS doesn’t. If you were building a fast fuel efficiet car out of a racecar and a volkswagon beetle, would you scale back the racecar engine and use the beetle body or would you take apart the racecar’s engine to make the beetle’s engine faster. The answer is, “Whatever costs less money.”

    3) Gotta give this one to you. Current PalmOS apps can be developed anywhere. Can you develop PalmOS 5 apps anywhere? Once we find out what PalmOS 5 is, I’m sure we will find out. You can *sort of* install the BeIA development (BeOS PE) enironment on Windows.

    I think that Palm will not develop the BeOS except as a development platform for BeIA. It will not be profitable for them to do so. If it was profitable, we would not be having this discussion. If PalmOS 5 (BeIA) developers want a feature added, they will ask Palm for it. I am willing to bet that most features will be implemented by the develpers themselves ala OpenTracker.

    OpenBeOS looks like the best bet. I hope they do as good a job as OpenTracker.

  74. DrB Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 10:48:22 PM

    Troll

    Typing is good, but spelling is better.

  75. Nutcase Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 9:18:15 PM

    Re: Why not the linux kernel

    Linux is a monolithic Kernel. BeOS is a micro kernel. The concepts in the design of the two are essentially opposites. Using the linux kernel, unless it was modified to an extreme extent beyond linux compatibility, would be a mistake. You would be better off starting with atheos.

  76. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 5:53:52 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    If “popular” is your measure, Windows95 beats Linux by a loooooooooong margin. But the capabilities it has are greater than Linux. Linux is just a mediocre Unix for PCs. FreeBSD has done better there, and Unixware even more so, without the pretense of being desktop operating systems.

    I am glad you enjoy your wonderful Linux. Too bad it’s just a mediocre operating system, with a following of mediocrities.

  77. Dutch Cap Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 10:48:22 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    Oh woopie! The luxuries of Linux! Like what? Editing config files whenever you want to change some advanced setting? Like waiting longer for Gnome/KDE to start then it does for the entire BeOS to boot? And oh boy, X’s speed and responsiveness are almost up to par with BeOS’s!

  78. Nutcase Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 8:30:42 PM

    Re: UI design ;-)

    Um… sounds like all you want to do is disable icons on the desktop. The desktop can already accept application objects. They are known as replicants. It has been able to do so for a LONG time. But no one writes any good replicants.

    If you were to write a deskbar replacement replicant, you could disable deskbar, and run it instead. Then just remove the icons from the desktop, and you are there.

    That said, its hard to have a “stay on top” for a desktop replicant. So switching apps would be a pain. Besides.. I /like/ the deskbar. ITs only windows like because a) people put it along the sides instead of in the corner, and b) windows keeps copying it.

  79. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 9:31:04 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    not for media of any kind.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    The big boys are disagreeing with you (think Maya).

  80. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 9:30:01 PM

    Re: BeOS development platform?

    It took them 10 years and burn through 100 million in cash because they kept running in circles — hobbit-ppc-intel, bebox, starcode, imacs-ppc clones-oem pc, beia and harp.

  81. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 9:30:01 PM

    Re: BeOS development platform?

    Just thought I’d point out that Palm’s “mediocre” OS is the most popular OS for handheld devices around!

    Oh, and Palm have actually said that integrating Be technology in PalmOS is their main concern ;)

    Personally I don’t like statements such as “why not use instead of writing another one”

    With that logic Linux wouldn’t exist, BeOS wouldn’t exist, AtheOS wouldn’t exist - there are flaws in every OS, and every OS sets out to be good at one main thing:

    Linux - Stability
    BeOS - Media, no doubt about it!
    etc.

    BeOS is a very good OS - and despite Palm’s buy, I’ve still managed to get people interested. With publicity BeOS will live.

    I personally think the whole Palm-BeOS thing is going to turn out good. Heck, they wouldn’t have asked for a “report” if they weren’t interested!

  82. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Nutcase @ 08/20/2001 6:08:07 PM

    Re: UI design ;-)

    To be honest I have absolutely no idea what a replicant is - I hear it mentioned so often but yet nobody ever explains what they are.

    Any care to explain ???

    As for the deskbar, well I dunno, I think the “Start Button” concept has worn out it’s welcome - the start button is a Windows concept and it’s been coppied by so many other OS’s that it’s well, just plain boring.

    The deskbar is fine as it is, but it can look so much better than just a button on a bar! - Like I said, I love the “tabs” as the button for each application in the screenshot - BeOS has a lot of competition in the looks department now, XP, and OSX - And like it or not, looks are what is going to tip the boat.

    BeOS looks pretty good as it is - but I know for a fact that nobody would mind some nicer looks - e.g everyone said, WinXP looks good, so what - they tried it, and the first thing they said was “wow, the UI!”

    I’ve never been a big fan of the taskbar / startbutton look - and IMO BeOS should break away from it, or at least make enough changes so it doesn’t look like a taskbar any more!

  83. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 6:02:21 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    if you think win95 makes a better os than linux, you need to go exparement with that crack a little more

  84. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Dutch Cap @ 08/20/2001 6:03:39 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    oh boy, I dont have to wait for X to load, oh boy KDE sucks, oh boy, I havent rebooted in months, oh boy, Be DOESNT HAVE OPENGL SUPPORT.

  85. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 5:53:52 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    Why is it that when people leave BeOS for Linux they turn into jerks…I just don’t get it!

    - Gavin

  86. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To DrB @ 08/20/2001 5:59:41 PM

    Re: Troll

    I’m sorry to say, in this day, it doesn’t look like the troll cares about spelling, and it doesn’t matter either because we can read what he says.

  87. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Dutch Cap @ 08/20/2001 6:03:39 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    Scuse me while I go play Quake3, mabe a little UT afterwards, and finish it up with Tribes2. Loki is not dead, they are reorganizing.

  88. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 6:55:37 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    aside for server use, it does make a better OS than linux.

  89. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Nutcase @ 08/20/2001 6:01:07 PM

    Re: Why not the linux kernel

    > Linux is a monolithic Kernel. BeOS is a micro
    > kernel.

    Wrong, BeOS is not a microkernel. A microkernel doesn’t try to stuff networking inside itself (think BONE). And there is exactly the problem with microkernels. While very elegant and nice on paper, they tend have problems in the real world. Most of the populair OSes these days are hybrids. BeOS is modular, but so is Linux. Both are hybrids.

    > Using the linux kernel, unless it was modified
    > to an extreme extent beyond linux compatibility
    > would be a mistake.

    Uhm, why is that again? Because it’s not a microkernel, and BeOS is? Well, we know that’s flawed reasoning. Yeah, lots of folks dismiss the Linux kernel, without even knowing its internals.

    As a student of Tanenbaum I am even more convinced microkernels suck raw eggs! Perhaps, because we were all confronted with these beasts during the programming excercises.

  90. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 6:56:48 PM

    who cares if no ogl for beos, i play games on windows anyway

    so? linux has ogl and what do they have UT q3? those games suck no thanks. If i am going to play games they might as well be on windows for now.

  91. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 9:36:59 PM

    why?

    The way I see it.. there is no good OS out there. Thats why people suggested making their own BeOS.

  92. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 7:35:56 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    Hahahaaha.. that’s some good crack your smoking indeed.

  93. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 8:04:43 PM

    Re: who cares if no ogl for beos, i play games on windows anyway

    heh, that’s a pis-poor BeOS defense.

  94. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 7:41:38 PM

    Because it SUCKS.

    Name ONE OS distribution that USES the LINUX kernel that is:

    As fast as BeOS AND as stable as BeOS and as easy to use as BeOS . . . all three at once.

    Oh, what? That hasn’t been done! but if the almighty Linux kernel is sooo great . . . whats the holdup????

  95. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Dutch Cap @ 08/20/2001 6:03:39 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    Yeah, let’s fire up another MP3 in the magnificant BeOS. That’s the only thing it’s good for: playing MP3’s. Superiour OS? How come it’s dead then?

  96. CattBeMac Says:

    Save BeOS goes global!

    Well Ladies and Gents it seems that the whole world is now involved with the ‘Save BeOS’ campaign and are taking it in stride. The Russian BeNews website has a ‘Save BeOS’ banner on it and it seems there is alot of talk about it over there, even though it was in Russian, one of my colleagues speaks Russian and was able to translate what was being said… so Russia wants BeOS to live just as much as us Americans, Europeans and everybody else who is in touch with the situation. Palm needs to realize that BeOS is not just an American interest, but it is a global interest and the world wants BeOS to see a positive future. As BeOS users around the world we must unite together in our darkest hour and get through this and conquer all that stands in our way. Let us fight to the finish my friends!

  97. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To CattBeMac @ 08/20/2001 9:33:00 PM

    Re: Save BeOS goes global!

    I still doubt that by now theres enough of a userbase left for anyone to make an income of it (hell, Be didn’t after all, neither did any company selling BeOS software ever make any profits for all I know) granted, Palm ‘might’ be in a position of having enough of a name and partners together with money to actually push BeOS in the market - but I still doubt that they will make such a big investment with not much of a chance to make profits.
    The more or less only way I see would be the OS2 way of things of licensing it out, replace as much of things that require license payments and then release it for an as low price as possible o the market.
    I’d still doubt that anyone could capture a huge marketshare by now seeing that Linux is quite well established by now and reaching a state of usability with BeOS already having the aura of an OS that failed.

    thies

  98. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 8:57:17 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    So I suppose 90% of all computer users are idiots … cool, get us all in one room and say it to our faces … that’ll make from some good early morning laughs!

    Like it or not mate, the only thing carrying Linux is the fact that it’s open-source. But that’s not going to be lasting long…have you noticed the “media hype” has suddenly vanished - the only place Linux will ever really exist is “on the net”.

    There are so many distros of Linux that it’s too overwhelming for any normal user to contemplate - and how long will it be before each distro becomes so different from the others that suddenly they’re not compatible any more … it’s going to happen - you can’t have so many distros without them straying slightly more from the original concept with each release.

    Open source has proved itself to be just preliminery hype - the code is usually messy, inefficient and most of the time slow.

    It will allways remain a geek OS - not one distro has managed to create a “built-in” GUI!

    WindowsXP looks good, works good, is very stable and is much faster - face up to facts!

    MacOS X - Based on a Unix (not linux) OS, but still with a killer GUI, fast, stable - and getting better.

    Linux has no chance of getting into the regular user market, it’s to damn cryptic. BeOS with Palm’s co-operation has that chance

    BeOS - ok looks, works very well, is VERY stable, and the quickest OS I’ve ever seen, enhanced for media - which is going to be the killer app of broadband.

    Linux - Stable, ugh…. complicated, ugly!

    Now let’s see if I can get a decent objective reply that doesn’t involve any of the following words

    “weed, crack, cocain, heroin, dope, smoke, sucks, r0ckz, ha, looser”

    It would also be nice if you don’t actually comment on me … you see you can call me a looser, a fuck, a moron or say that I am indeed smoking crack but unfortunately this will make no change to the comments I have made about Linux.

  99. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 8:59:57 PM

    Re: Because it SUCKS.

    > As fast as BeOS AND as stable as BeOS and
    > as easy to use as BeOS . . . all three at
    > once.

    These are all relative terms. And remember, we’re discussing kernels here, not distributions, or desktop enviroments. The point is, people are dismissing the Linux kernel without even investigating it first. BeOS R5 crashes every 6 hours on my PPC BeBox, so *I* wouldn’t call it stable :)

    > Oh, what? That hasn’t been done! but if the
    > almighty Linux kernel is sooo great
    > . . . whats the holdup????

    We are talking kernels here………………

  100. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 9:54:03 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    So I suppose 90% of all computer users are idiots … cool, get us all in one room and say it to our faces … that’ll make from some good early morning laughs!
    Yes, they are!

    Like it or not mate, the only thing carrying Linux is the fact that it’s open-source. But that’s not going to be lasting long…have you noticed the “media hype” has suddenly vanished - the only place Linux will ever really exist is “on the net”.

    No, I haven’t.

    There are so many distros of Linux that it’s too overwhelming for any normal user to contemplate - and how long will it be before each distro becomes so different from the others that suddenly they’re not compatible any more … it’s going to happen - you can’t have so many distros without them straying slightly more from the original concept with each release.

    Congrats, the popular ones (mdk) are simple to install, the others are more advanced

    Open source has proved itself to be just preliminery hype - the code is usually messy, inefficient and most of the time slow.

    I’ve only noticed it growing.

    It will allways remain a geek OS - not one distro has managed to create a “built-in” GUI

    Ok, built in, congrats, wow I didnt know a GUI has to be built in to be good.

    WindowsXP looks good, works good, is very stable and is much faster - face up to facts!

    er lets say security, stablility is false, faster, plz

    MacOS X - Based on a Unix (not linux) OS, but still with a killer GUI, fast, stable - and getting better.

    OSX rocks, but it has to get to Intel to be a player in the field.

    Linux has no chance of getting into the regular user market, it’s to damn cryptic. BeOS with Palm’s co-operation has that chance

    Palm isnt a desktop OS company. Linux can, and its making strides to do so, people will want quake before 5 minute installs.

    BeOS - ok looks, works very well, is VERY stable, and the quickest OS I’ve ever seen, enhanced for media - which is going to be the killer app of broadband.

    Be lags, media lags, crashes way too much, and has no apps for it.

    Linux - Stable, ugh…. complicated, ugly!

    Ugly is only how much you customize.

    Now let’s see if I can get a decent objective reply that doesn’t involve any of the following words

    just for you: weed, crack, cocain, heroin, dope, smoke, sucks, r0ckz, ha, looser

    “weed, crack, cocain, heroin, dope, smoke, sucks, r0ckz, ha, looser”

    It would also be nice if you don’t actually comment on me … you see you can call me a looser, a fuck, a moron or say that I am indeed smoking crack but unfortunately this will make no change to the comments I have made about Linux.

    moron you asked for me to first

  101. Anonymous Says:

    The free market works.

    There seem to be a small number of people in the BeOS community and a large number of people in the Linux community who look down upon those who choose OSs for different reasons than they would. You are arrogant. Mind your own business !

    Microsoft isn’t in first place because of evil business practices. It is in first place because people pay money for Microsoft software. Microsoft CAN’T stop people from making or selling alternative hardware, OSs, software, or standards.

    Computer manufacturers aren’t innocent victims. They CAN put other OSs on a computer, just not on the same computer with a Windows installation. Yet, this apparently isn’t very profitable right now; even if it was, it’s still the manufacturer’s choice of what they want to put their effort towards, not yours. Companies are not there to make your OS evolution dreams come true. They are there to make money…in the way they want to.

    Consumers aren’t innocent victims. They very rarely choose Linux when it is offered by computer companies like Dell. Even when Windows is “forced on” consumers when they (are forced to ?) buy a computer from a Windows-only company, they very rarely replace Windows once they start using the computer. They LIKE Windows for various reasons. It isn’t worth it to them to switch.

    Consumers can’t kill alternatives when they choose not to buy alternative products for such “stupid” reasons as not meeting their wants or needs. Developers can work on alternatives for little or no compensation for those who actually WANT to use them. If this seems unrealistic for you, then get realistic.

    I hate Windows a lot. I love BeOS. But, don’t tell me that free choice is wrong. The companies can sell whatever they own or want to make. People can buy whatever they want to pay for. This is the way it should be.

    (Hmmm…perhaps I should post this on Slashdot *evil grin*)

    - Cash Erler

    When anybody says something like “you can’t even spell or use grammar correctly”, I know immediately that they are stupid, putting form over substance.

  102. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 1:49:10 PM

    Palm is not a desktop OS

    And Microsoft is not a palmtop company, yet…
    >WinCE<
    And Microsoft is not a gaming company, yet…
    X-Box…

    MS is spread real thin right now, and the public
    is pouncing on them for XP’s BS. (lots of 2-letter
    acros!) What better time to hone in for the kill.

    Palm just might be gutsy enough to take on MS
    through Be. 1) No guts, no glory. 2) Risky moves
    are what makes life interesting.

    Perhaps Palm, Inc., can jump for some retribution.

    Should Palm decide to develop Be, it won’t
    be called “Palm”– I mean, who would take a
    desktop OS named “Palm” seriously?

  103. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 8:04:43 PM

    Re: who cares if no ogl for beos, i play games on windows anyway

    With friends like you, who needs enemies?

  104. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 10:19:37 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    LOL - You’re obviously living in a fantasy world .. I wish I could do that!

    I will ignore the “we’re all idiots” comment because it’s just snide, stupid and pathetic!

    You haven’t noticed the media hype dying LMAO, are you re-reading the same article over and over each month?? - It has died down a GREAT deal.

    Simple - so I click install and it installs right? I don’t have to modify any config files, don’t need to use the command prompt, don’t need to enter any technical info about my hardware - I think not ;)

    You think open source is still growing, maybe, but not for much longer, it’s slowing down as people realise how commercial close-source applications are far more stable!

    Well, duh, if the GUI isn’t built in, then it runs as an application on top of the command line interface, which slows things down considerably - that’s why BeOS beats the socks of of Linux!

    WinXP is VERY stable - you obviously haven’t tried it! - Security, there are hundreds of security apps on the internet Zone Alarm for example - oh and does Linux feature “rollback” in case a beginner accidently screws things up … oh no, it’s not welcome for beginners is it!

    OS X will never get on Intel, do you seriously think Apple is going to risk all the “help” MS has give them Internet Explorer, Office Mac - a significant investment I seem to remember!

    You’re right Palm isn’t yet a desktop OS company - and a few years ago MS wasn’t a mobile device OS company.

    What are you talking about - Linux is far too complicated for the average user, and what the hell are you going on about quake for - I don’t think “quake” is going to make everyone switch to Linux.

    Ahem, Be no longer owns BeOS - so that’s “be lags” down … media lags LMAO oh my god you kill me - IT WAS DESIGNED FOR MEDIA - IT HAS BETTER SUPPORT FOR MEDIA THAN ANY OTHER OS. That’s “media lags” down … and about applications, we’re talking about the OS here, not the applications - it’s the lamest excuse I’ve ever heard. When Linux first came out it had NO applications! - So there’s another down. Oh, and I doubt BeOS itself has ever crashed - you mean some of the apps crash, e.g Opera - not BeOS itself - that’s alnost impossible! - Ooh and another one bites the dust!

    No matter how much you customise Linux it still won’t look as good as XP, OSX or even BeOS!

    ooh, and I especially love that you added those words I asked you not to. it just proves what an illiterate moron you actually are.

    I don’t think i saw a reply to any of my comments that was “serious” and more than one line long!

    But hey, you can’t deny the truth can you - so I’ll let that one go ;)

    Oh and anyone with more than one braincell would have noticed that I said “don’t comment on **ME**” - and asked you to comment on what I said!

    (I even put double stars by the word you should pay attention too - hope that helps)

  105. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 11:00:38 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    LOL - You’re obviously living in a fantasy world .. I wish I could do that!

    I will ignore the “we’re all idiots” comment because it’s just snide, stupid and pathetic!

    You haven’t noticed the media hype dying LMAO, are you re-reading the same article over and over each month?? - It has died down a GREAT deal.

    actually, I cant even go to kroger without seeing Linux for dummies

    Simple - so I click install and it installs right? I don’t have to modify any config files, don’t need to use the command prompt, don’t need to enter any technical info about my hardware - I think not ;)

    sure, rpm, user opens up whatever GRAPHICAL rpm manager, installs needed files. Sure you get into some dll hell with stuff, but thats only projects under major devel.

    You think open source is still growing, maybe, but not for much longer, it’s slowing down as people realise how commercial close-source applications are far more stable!

    right, and thats why its the two are the same thing, except open source grows faster.

    Well, duh, if the GUI isn’t built in, then it runs as an application on top of the command line interface, which slows things down considerably - that’s why BeOS beats the socks of of Linux!

    yes, so we have the choice of what X server to run, or not to run one at all.

    WinXP is VERY stable - you obviously haven’t tried it! - Security, there are hundreds of security apps on the internet Zone Alarm for example - oh and does Linux feature “rollback” in case a beginner accidently screws things up … oh no, it’s not welcome for beginners is t!

    yes, I have, and no, its not stable or secure, there are so many holes that are obvious its not funny, just in nfs *sorry, windows shares* or in DESKTOP SHARING, REMOTE HELP, microsoft puts accoutns on, OPEN SOCKETS. welcome to the real XP, it aint what your idiot gui mind thinks.

    OS X will never get on Intel, do you seriously think Apple is going to risk all the “help” MS has give them Internet Explorer, Office Mac - a significant investment I seem to remember!

    so, then why did you bring it up

    You’re right Palm isn’t yet a desktop OS company - and a few years ago MS wasn’t a mobile device OS company.

    and palm is putting most of its gusto to keep up with handspring sony and wince. there are bigger fish to fry for palm

    What are you talking about - Linux is far too complicated for the average user, and what the hell are you going on about quake for - I don’t think “quake” is going to make everyone switch to Linux.

    Ahem, Be no longer owns BeOS - so that’s “be lags” down … media lags LMAO oh my god you kill me - IT WAS DESIGNED FOR MEDIA - IT HAS BETTER SUPPORT FOR MEDIA THAN ANY OTHER OS. That’s “media lags” down … and about applications, we’re talking about the OS here, not the applications - it’s the lamest excuse I’ve ever heard. When Linux first came out it had NO applications! - So there’s another down. Oh, and I doubt BeOS itself has ever crashed - you mean some of the apps crash, e.g Opera - not BeOS itself - that’s alnost impossible! - Ooh and another one bites the dust!

    again, I laugh at you because I have compared in great detail the two. simple mpeg support, simple file browsing, lets see oops tracker crashed on ya there bud

    No matter how much you customise Linux it still won’t look as good as XP, OSX or even BeOS!

    right, my desktop can look instantly THE EXACT SAME

    ooh, and I especially love that you added those words I asked you not to. it just proves what an illiterate moron you actually are.

    you obviously dont understand that illiterate means unable to read, which is also obviously not the case, immature mabe, having fun, deffinitely

    I don’t think i saw a reply to any of my comments that was “serious” and more than one line long!

    so, one word means its not true? plz

    But hey, you can’t deny the truth can you - so I’ll let that one go ;)

    theres no truth there

    Oh and anyone with more than one braincell would have noticed that I said “don’t comment on **ME**” - and asked you to comment on what I said!

    yea, another would notice you asking me to tell you why, dont contradict yourself

    (I even put double stars by the word you should pay attention too - hope that helps)

    and I dont care what you say cause youre a 2bit loser

  106. CattBeMac Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 10:20:11 PM

    Re: The free market works.

    So if there is a free market, then why did consumers have more options when buying a PC back then than they do now? Here is a history lesson;

    Development of MS-DOS and PC-DOS began in October 1980, when IBM began searching the market for an operating system for the yet-to-be-introduced IBM PC.

    IBM had originally intended to use Digital Research’s (actually, they had the somewhat pretentious name of “Intergalactic Digital Research” at the time) CP/M was then the industry standard operating system - you either ran a BASIC with disk functions, someone’s proprietary OS, or CP/M.

    Folklore reports various stories about the rift between DRI and IBM. The most popular story claims Gary Kildall or DRI snubbed the IBM executives by flying his airplane when the meeting was scheduled. Another story claims Kildall didn’t want to release the source for CP/M to IBM, which would be odd, since they released it to other companies. One noted industry pundit claims Kildall’s wife killed the deal by insisting on various contract changes. I suspect the deal was killed by the good ol’ boy network. It’s hard to imagine a couple of junior IBM executives giving up when ordered to a task as simple as licensing an operating system from a vendor. It wouldn’t look good on their performance reports. It would be interesting to hear IBM’s story…

    IBM then talked to a small company called Microsoft. Microsoft was a language vendor. Bill Gates and Paul Allen had written Microsoft BASIC and were selling it on punched tape or disk to early PC hobbyists, which was probably a step up from the company’s original name and goal - they were Traf-O-Data before, making car counters for highway departments.

    Microsoft had no 8086 real operating system to sell, but quickly made a deal to license Seattle Computer Products’ 86-DOS operating system, which had been written by Tim Paterson earlier in 1980 for use on that company’s line of 8086, S100 bus micros. 86-DOS (also called QDOS, for Quick and Dirty Operating System) had been written as more or less a 16-bit version of CP/M, since Digital Research was showing no hurry in introducing CP/M-86. Paterson’s DOS 1.0 was approximately 4000 lines of assembler source.

    This code was quickly polished up and presented to IBM for evaluation. IBM found itself left with Microsoft’s offering of “Microsoft Disk Operating System 1.0″. An agreement was reached between the two, and IBM agreed to accept 86-DOS as the main operating system for their new PC. Microsoft purchased all rights to 86-DOS in July 1981, and “IBM Personal Computer DOS 1.0″ was ready for the introduction of the IBM PC in October 1981. IBM subjected the operating system to an extensive quality-assurance program, reportedly found well over 300 bugs, and decided to rewrite the programs. This is why PC-DOS is copyrighted by both IBM and Microsoft.

    It is sometimes amusing to reflect on the fact that the IBM PC was not originally intended to run MS-DOS. The target operating system at the end of the development was for a (not yet in existence) 8086 version of CP/M. On the other hand, when DOS was originally written the IBM PC did not yet exist! Although PC-DOS was bundled with the computer, Digital Research’s CP/M-86 would probably have been the main operating system for the PC except for two things - Digital Research wanted $495 for CP/M-86 (considering PC-DOS was essentially free) and many software developers found it easier to port existing CP/M software to DOS than to the new version of CP/M. The IBM PC shipped without an operating system.

    IBM didn’t start bundling DOS until the second generation AT/339 came out. You could order one of three operating systems for your PC, assuming you popped for the optional disk drive and 64k RAM upgrade (base models had 16k and a cassette player port). These operating systems were IBM Personal Computer DOS 1.0, a version of the UCSD p-System, which was an integrated Pascal operating system something like the souped-up BASIC operating systems used by the Commodore 64 and others, or Digital Research’s CP/M-86, which was officially an option although you couldn’t buy it until later. Since IBM’s $39.95 DOS was far cheaper than anyone else’s alternative, darned near everyone bought DOS.

    This definitely makes you wonder why PC makers don’t give options like they did back in the old days don’t it?!

    Enjoy :-)
    [Edited at 2:18 Aug 21 2001 by CattBeMac]

  107. Anonymous Says:

    BeOS future: AtheOS vs. BlueOS?

    Preface: I want the BeOS to have a future. I have invested in the software and the company, but the times look bleek.

    “Along those same lines, Michael Phipps has started a mailing list at the prompting of many on the BeDevTalk mailing lists. They are looking to replace components of BeOS with open source modules one at a time, or a complete work from scratch…”

    Hhhhmmmm?

    Likely hypothetical Scenario: BeOS tech is swallowed up by Palm never to see the desktop again.

    In such a case what are the alternatives for an OS worthy of the BeOS legacy? AtheOS? BlueOS? Linux? ONX? WinXP? MacOS X?

    The last 4 are their own OS by their own right and not the BeOS. But what are peoples opinions on the future of a open source BeOS clone based on the AtheOS or BlueOS?

    The BlueOS is currently just a concept stages, but will be based on proven Linux underpinings.
    Can Linux base OS suited to be a BeOS clone?
    The AtheOS kernel may not be as muture as Linux (BlueOS) but it may be closer to the initial “BeOS” vision, but is it mature enough?

    Could opentracker be ported to another OS and be suited as a BeOS clone?

  108. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 7:41:38 PM

    Re: Why not the linux kernel

    The Linux kernel, unlike the BeOS one, doesn’t have pervasive multi-threading. That’s the reason why BeOS is so much more responsive than any other OS I used, and you’d still notice the difference even if you put a perfect copy of BeOS onto a Linux kernel!
    The other problem is that they want to use XFree86 in BlueOS. Ever dared to compare the performance of the BeOS-GUI and XFree86?
    Trying to remodel a 90s OS with technology from the 80s is just plain stupid!

  109. CattBeMac Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/21/2001 02:23:25 AM

    Re: BeOS future: AtheOS vs. BlueOS?

    I personally think that AtheOS has a good head start on the rest and maybe the BlueOS, FreeBeOS and OpenBeOS guys should join the AtheOS effort. Now I haven’t actually got to download or use AtheOS, so this opinion is only on what I have read on AtheOS thus far. My only complaint of AtheOS is that darn ugly user interface that is attached, now my speculation is that they probably wont use that in the future and are only using it now just to get the more important work done first… makes sense to me!

    In all respects I am supportive of whatever will keep BeOS alive or will carry its flame being whatever comes out of this whole mess.

    This is to all BeOS users… please don’t give up hope know matter what the situation may look like, at least now we know what is happening to Be Inc. and can move on to the next items at hand. Our only hope now is that either Palm will keep development on BeOS by releasing ‘R6′ or license it out to a worthy soul that will take good care of it and market it to its full potential since that hasn’t been done that well in the past!
    [Edited at 3:15 Aug 21 2001 by CattBeMac]

  110. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 11:42:14 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    Now now stop it!!
    You are getting you knickers all in a little twist.
    BeOS may not be your first choice of OS but it seems very silly to have a pathalogical hatred of it that makes you scorn and abuse the poor users struggling to keep it alive.

    Personally I am a very average user, with the help of a linux programming buddy I have really tried to install Red Hat, Debian Caldera, Suse, Corel Linux, Mandrake and I think about 3 others. Honest I have tried, but each time everything crashes down round my feet. However I would not go on to say like is crap or waste my time immaturely protesting to the world. I just think *so far* my experience has been bad. I would have another go but zealots like yourself are turning me off it with your borring redictable posts.

    Emma

  111. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 10:19:37 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    OK, let’s try this: your harddisk has BeOS and Linux installed. You move the harddisk to another computer: new mobo, new soundcard, new graphics card, new LAN card.

    BeOS detects them all automatically and it doesn’t complain about rebooting or anything, it just works. Linux: X will panic and die, the netcard won’t work unless you edit some kernelmod config file. And it won’t necessarily pick the IP address by DHCP, even then (some distros have recently tried to make this more user-friendly, but mostly still fail) and the soundcard won’t work just as well.

    (granted with Windows you can have even worse nightmares, like, for example, the CPU is not supported - happened with Win95 and K6-300 MHz)

    Therefore, ARGUMENT CLOSED! BeOS 1, Linux 0! Use it for server, leave the desktop to the topdogs, Mac, BeOS, Windows.

  112. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 9:01:06 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    Keep it up buddy…your silly zeolotry is driving people like me away from thinking of ever moving to Linux. You are exactly the very worse kind of advert any OS can have.

    Least in Windoze you dont have to come across trolls like you. Go do something constructive like shout at a lamp post.

  113. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 11:42:14 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    Ok both of you get some facts straight.

    Linux, ok has come leaps and bounds over the last couple of years. I actually didn’t mind Debian Linux but only Woody or Sid varients as Potato was to old and didn’t support some hardware of mine.
    Gnome Ximian Desktops are looking very cool nowdays although there are still many issues with GNOME thatmake usability harder than say Windows or BeOS or MacOS. I found that RPMs are a waste of time but I thought apt-get and Debian Packages to be the best out there.

    Now as for media, Linux sucks when it comes to the average person setting up DVD, video, TV, and the likes. Windows 2K, XP, and Mac OSX all suck big time when it comes to media. The only OS that can truely hold the media mantle is BeOS and THAT IS A FACT. ANY SMART ASS WHO WANTS TO CHALLENGE ME ON THIS IS CAN TRY BUT I KNOW THAT IN TESTING MEDIA PERFORMANCE AND OS USABILITY UNDER HEAVY MEDIA LOADING BeOS IS THE ONLY ONE THAT WILL GIVE THE USER A DECENT EXPERIENCE!!!!! FACT

    Test:
    Run 4 DivX video streams simultaneously encoded at a decent resolution > 480 x 640 but in small windows, run multiple MP3 streams at the same time and then tell me which OS gives the user the least dropped video/audio and a less than 0.5 second response time on the GUI whilst under this loading?

    This Test must be carried out on a single CPU of around 800 Mhz with a sub standard video card and a PCI sound card fully supported by the OS.

    I will be shocked to find anything that runs as decently as BeOS. Now try Plug and Play. Of any OS that has supported hardware, which one gives you the ability to change hardware and not have to fuck around with OS settings to get your previous OS settings up and running like Sound/ Desktop resolution and colour depth, Networking, and any bloody other thing you want.

    I spent a couple of months on Debian and although better than RedHAt 6.1 of a couple years ago, Linux still blows chunks on the desktop. MS blows in media although I am more than comfortable using it for 2D Graphic Design work. Mac OS anything just blows. Mac OSX runs like sludge and Mac OS Classic is as good as a 16bit OS with 32bit extensions bolted on, opps I mean Windows 9x/millenium. Total shit.

    Now lets try and creat a real user experience here which doesn’t
    1 drive people insane or
    2 cost the friggin earth in hardware cause the OS boggs down the computer with so much crap.

    The only answer has been BeOS but, oh gee, the company needs to be put down and a real player needs to step up to the plate to introduce it to the ignorant public who don’t realise they have been led down a shit path by Bill and Jobs.

    Piers

  114. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 8:59:29 PM

    Re: who cares if no ogl for beos, i play games on windows anyway

    I’m sorry but you need to get your comments right.

    BeOS has OpenGL support. BeOS does not have hardware accelerated OpenGL support. Something different. Oh BTW, please enlighten us dumb ignorant BeOS advocates as to what EXACT STEPS did you HAVE to GO THROUGH to GET HARDWARE OpenGL SUPPORT????????????????????????????????????

    I thought so. Please give me and the rest of us a break and piss off into NO LIFE LINUX Land.

    Oh BTW, Linux suffers from security issues as well as Windows on the networking side, matter of fact there have been some seriouse network security patches issued in the last few months for Linux. Just incase you weren’t aware (-:

    Piers
    Looked seriously at Linux but realised that my life was more important to me than a bloody OS

  115. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/21/2001 02:52:10 AM

    Re: Why not the linux kernel

    > The Linux kernel, unlike the BeOS one,
    > doesn’t have pervasive multi-threading.

    Huh? Do you realize that this doesn’t make sense at all?!! It’s not the kernel that’s ‘pervasively’ multi-threaded, but the app_server, storage_server, etc… The linux kernel supports threads perfectly well, and has blazingly fast context switching.
    There are benefits to using threads pervasively but it is not the holy grail.

    I have ‘pervasively’ multi-threaded code that runs as good in Linux, as it does in BeOS.

    > Ever dared to compare the performance of the
    > BeOS-GUI and XFree86?

    Yeah, XFRee86 performance *smokes* BeOS when I compare both of them on my Geforce2 MX. On top of that, I have fully functional OpenGL 1.2.1 in XFree86, and it’s network transparant to boot! BeOS doesn’t even have that, I’d imagine a reimplementation will take even longer to acquire these features, if ever.

    > Trying to remodel a 90s OS with technology from
    > the 80s is just plain stupid!

    No, repeating drivel without knowing the facts yourself is foolish! And to use your own words, it’s kind of pathetic that an 80s technology smokes a 90s technology so badly.

  116. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/21/2001 07:09:17 AM

    Re: Why not the linux kernel

    personally I don’t like the GPL.

    And I think thats a DAM good reason not to use it.

    LGPL: Fine, BSD: Fine, GPL: Nasty.

  117. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 4:55:46 PM

    Re: All good things come to those who wait

    it was a two for one day on shoot gun shells, and you just don’t know what to do with the extra shell…

  118. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 7:01:38 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    And elvis isn’t dead either; he’s just rotting away in a box 6 feet under.

    stick a fork in Loki - they’re done.

  119. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 9:54:03 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    > So I suppose 90% of all computer users are idiots …

    Bingo! That’s exactly right!

  120. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/21/2001 04:57:40 AM

    Re: who cares if no ogl for beos, i play games on windows anyway

    > Looked seriously at Linux but realised that my life
    > was more important to me than a bloody OS

    Heh, not judging from your oversensitive reaction…

    Hahaha :-)

  121. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/21/2001 03:45:09 AM

    Re: [No Subject]

    > Keep it up buddy…your silly zeolotry is driving
    > people like me away from thinking of ever moving to > Linux. You are exactly the very worse kind of advert > any OS can have

    Do you actually think I care what OS you are running? Man, BeOS users sure are arrogant!!

  122. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 10:20:11 PM

    Re: The free market works.

    Slight correction: People aren’t *allowed* a choice in the OS’s that are bundled with *major* computer manufacturers, directly due to the Windows license agreement for useage of the bootloader.

    If your typical consumer wants an Intel-based PC, and they want a brand name, they get a Microsoft OS. Nothing else. No dual-boot Linux, no dual-boot BeOS, nothing but a Windows OS.

    *THAT* is not a free market. That is an abuse of monopolistic powers.

    Your typical consumer isn’t even aware that there are alternatives available to Windows. Would they use them if they were? Maybe not. But, at least they’d have the *choice*, which is what the current practices of Microsoft have removed from the equation.

    The very real threat by Microsoft to withdraw its Windows license from a major manufacturer is more than enough of a deterrant to keep companies such as Gateway and Compaq in line.

    BeOS might very well still be in the position it’s in now, if there had been fair competition in a true “free market,” but it was never given that opportunity.

    Dave MacLachlan

  123. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 12:31:48 AM

    Re: [No Subject]

    all of which, either dropped the BeOS interface a version or two before moving or never use it.

  124. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Naish @ 08/19/2001 3:33:42 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    ack, it’s hard, give up!

    bin compatablity is not a prob IF gobe and Corum III are ported :-)

    Using the Linux kernal will make it Linux-Multi-Media Ed (DiMuMe or what ever the f**k it’s called)

    Using AtheOS/NewOS ok, i guess….

    Using X is just DAM silly.

  125. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/19/2001 6:06:56 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    http://www.obedn.com

  126. juswhitaker Says:

    In Response To CattBeMac @ 08/21/2001 03:13:41 AM

    Re: BeOS future: AtheOS vs. BlueOS?

    Agreed.

    Look, there is no definitive Linux distribution. A core group of maintainers, including Linus, maintain the kernel, and the rest is dedicated code heads interested in furthering the cause.

    Red Hat’s main contribution has been to aid in the standardization of linux distributions, via the RPM format, and the mass of files that comes with it. The other distributions are essentially marketing efforts, or alternate takes on how the GUI should look, and what interactions should take place for the average user (Mandrake is the m0ost “windows like”, SUSE is like the BIBLE, etc..).

    The model we need is one like DEBIAN, where we can have several development threads going, all for a common goal: the updating of BE to R6.

    The kernel isn’t really an issue, as far as I can see. Atheos uses a simialr kernel to BE, but I’m not really certain about BE package comaptibility.
    BlueOS uses the linux kernel, which is a facinating choice, but are they going to rewrite the multithreaded server architecture that make s BE unique, special, and so kick-ass?

    I think that there is room for all threads to be pursued.This means: get off your buts, grab some code, and get involved.

  127. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 6:56:53 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    Maybe because they were jerks all along and you didn’t notice? BeOS jerks are the worst kind…

  128. Anonymous Says:

    BeOS and the Open World?!

    Here is my take on the whole situation… maybe it is not sensible, but possible?! Anyways I have been dwelling on this whole thing and thinking of what BeFAQs will be presenting to Palm in the proposal. The way I see it Palm is not going to want to spend lots of money on development for BeOS itself and/or even the man hours being that PalmOS is the priority. I have been looking into the OpenBeOS thing and trying to come to terms if it will be viable or not and here is my conclusion. I think one of the best open source movements other than Linux is Mozilla/Netscape… alot of BeOS users are concerned that if BeOS was to get open sourced it would fall apart due to anarchy in the community being not so controlled development environment. Now has this kind of concept hurt the Linux foundation?… NO, but it also hasn’t always helped it either. At least with the Mozilla and Netscape relationship the Mozilla side being open sourced and Netscape being the final product you get best of both worlds. If the OpenBeOS team was to get OpenBeOS as close to Be savvy as possible then all the open source people could enhance and further develop BeOS using OpenBeOS as the foundation or test dummy and the enhances and development that are approved could be pushed over to Palm to implement to BeOS after careful inspection. At least the open source wouldn’t get out of hand and Palm wouldn’t have to spend money and man hours developing and enhancing BeOS on its own.

    Also I imagine Palm probably does not want to sell BeOS from their own marketing point of view so why not let Gobe keep the usual distribution license and everybody is happy… well as long as Gobe wants to keep marketing and selling BeOS that is. I wanted to send these thoughts to BeFAQs, but the site has been
    down awhile so hopefully somebody might pick it up here… any takers?

    Well I hope all this made sense and maybe somebody out there could add to the idea and go from there. Good luck!!

  129. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Naish @ 08/19/2001 3:33:42 PM

    Re: [No Subject]

    Why not just put a BeOS skin on one of linux windows managers???

    There are big differences between linux and BeOS, thats what makes BeOS so good. Let us keep it that way.

  130. Anonymous Says:

    Steinberg, Adobe, Palm partnership?

    I have an idea for marketing BeOS in the world of multimedia. Palm should contact Adobe and Steinberg to form an alliance for a new software concept. Actually Industrial Light Magic, Sonic Foundry, and Macromedia could be of help also. The basic idea is to go after the multimedia croud that normally rave about Mac. It would be important to get BeOS to work on G4 machines. Imagine something like the “Microsoft office of media content creation.” A suite of programs is developed and distributed with its own optimised OS for top speed. It could be installed much like the free version of Be as a shortcut to reboot the Windows or Mac machine into the media OS. Steinberg’s Cubase VST is an amazing program. They were developing for BeOS before the shit hit the fan. Their comments indicated that much of VST’s code base is quite portable. Imagine booting up into Windows or Mac, clicking on a shortcut and the system coming up into a lightning fast OS with applications for creating professional content for Sound and Video. This is very close to my understanding of Be’s vision anyway. I am only using a Mac because I love Steinberg products and their Mac software is better than their PC software. I still think that Mac sucks ass! MacOS comes nowhere near close to exploiting the amazing capabilities of Apple’s hardware. So, why not try to repackage BeOS as an extension of a kickass app rather than merely waiting around for someone to develop a kickass app for a flakey OS. The pitch would be. Hey, (insert killer media app suite here) installs it’s own OS to get the best performance while leaving the native OS untouched. Steinberg has allready created it’s own audio system to provide low latency access to sound cards. It is called ASIO. ASIO driver are available for all serious audio devices. Why not take it a step further and bundle an entire computing platform (something like BeOS) with the application allowing other compatable apps to run under the new platform as well. Mac has something called OMS required by many MIDI apps in order to run. Why not at least go for the pro audio and graphics markets and kick the crap out of SGI? Industrial Light Magic and others would love to have a kickass OS that runs on cheap hardware. ILG is currently using a hotrod Linux to do this very thing. If they are ok with Linux, they would love a full strength version of Be. It is very common in the audio and film industries to purchase a computer (and the OS) because of a need for a particular application only available on that platform. Digidesign’s PRO Tools is only now becoming available for the PC. It also doesn’t work quite as well. Thousands of Macs were purchased just to run PRO Tools. Think of an OS that doesn’t suck on Intel hardware such as BeOS. A large pro audio or video application developer could put the OS on the map in professional circles on its own, and many would follow. Steinberg’s ASIO and VST plugin platforms are a perfect example. There are many software houses that do nothing but write plugins for VST2 and MOTU’s MAS system. We must recruit the artfags and geeks!

  131. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/21/2001 04:57:40 AM

    Re: who cares if no ogl for beos, i play games on windows anyway

    Two easy steps, install 2 files, and then add 2 lines to a config, not hard considering the use.

    Tell me, how much real use can you get out of gl over there with your wonderful gl support.

    and with ur security, no os is secure, its arrogant and stupid to claim that one is, but at least there are developers writing patches for linux, nuff said

  132. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/28/2001 12:44:53 AM

    Re: [No Subject]

    How long has Be been dead? Loki has only gone for protection and reorganizing. There are other companies sprouting up now as well, and several companies writing their own ports.

    Loki paved the way for others to follow, and they are following.

  133. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 08/20/2001 10:11:01 PM

    Re: Because it SUCKS.

    >BeOS R5 crashes every 6 hours on my PPC BeBox, so *I* wouldn’t call it stable :)

    Yeah well, Windows *only* crashes once a week on one of my computers, but I wouldn’t call it stable just because everyone else’s Windows boxes crash a couple times a day….

    BeOS *is* stable. Your situation is just like the Windows situation with one of my computers. *Most* Windows boxes are unstable. *Most* BeOS boxes are stable :-)

[powered by WordPress.]

Random Haiku:

Run Net Positive
It may not be full featured
But it is real nice

Since 1998 - Until the Last User Leaves...
BeGroovy, established 1998

search BeGroovy:

BeGroovy Archives:

April 2017
S M T W T F S
« Jan    
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30  

other:

23 queries. 0.140 seconds

[powered by WordPress.]