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


New BMessage posted. It rules. No, really.

Filed under the:  department.
Posted by:Ryan on Wednesday, 06 Dec, 2000 @ 8:52 PM
 
Be Inc

Ladies and gentlemen, I think Be is starting to see the need to support their community a bit more directly. In the the new BMessage on their site, there are several very nice articles. JLG talks about wireless, such as bluetooth. Lee Williams directly tackles the issue of co-development, in a great article, basically explaining Be’s seeming silence. Very reassuring. Finally, Jon Watte has written an article about a whole new portion of the media kit api called game_audio, which is apparently pretty nice. While they have done the BMessage for a while, this one is especially nice. This thing made my day. :)



51 Responses to “New BMessage posted. It rules. No, really.”

  1. Nick Hritsko Says:

    I fully agree

    This thing made my day too.

    -Nick

  2. Scar Says:

    I said *damn* thats a good bmessage…

    This is a great BMessage. One of the best I’ve read, both from a Be Inc Supporter and BeOS users’ perspective.

    The two bet quote in my book, and my translation of them.
    (These are my opinions only and may or may not be the truth. )

    “Maintaining a competitive edge necessitates a secretive development process, with controlled methods of communication and disclosure that benefit the parent company or the company primarily responsible for launching the product.” - Lee Williams

    Translation - We’ve had to keep our mouths shut to keep ourselves ahead of everyone else out there, not because we don’t want you around. Alot of the advances that we could be telling you about for BeOS could be extrapolated to provide our competition info ohn where we may (or may not) be with BeIA. We can not afford to have this happen.

    “Hang in there. Don’t misinterpret the changes you’ve seen in our efforts. Look for the subtle signs of progress that define our opportunity. We can’t be as open and footloose as we’ve been in the past about demonstrating our capabilities and our successes, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t happening — and that is our dilemma” - Lee Williams

    Translation - We can’t tell you exactly what is going on, but its all good!! We’d love to, because we do know what you’ve been saying about us in our silence and we’d love to alleviate your concerns. But we can’t. Yet. (nudge nudge, wink wink)

    Go Be Inc.!!! I’ll be here when you want to talk!!

  3. h_ank Says:

    In Response To Jean-Baptiste Queru @ 12/07/2000 05:03:57 AM

    Re: New BMessage

    But we all know this already. Loose lips sink ships and all, but why should I be excited? I haven’t heard any definite specs for nVidia’s nv20, so does that mean I should be excited about the possibilities? I guess it’s possible that it will have BeOS support and support two monitors and have HDTV decoder functions…
    I love BeOS, and I intend to buy every BeIA device I like and can afford (I’d LOVE a Be powered PDA!) but essentially this article was an apology / explanation about why they can’t hire and cheerleaders at the moment.
    It’s all understandable, and I intend to continue supporting them even though I don’t know what they’re doing. I just don’t see anything to get all giddy about.

  4. LeftTurn Says:

    Good BeMessage!

    Thanks for pointing this out Nutcase, as I don’t always have time to read the BeMessage :)

    It all sounds positive to me. BeIA by it’s very nature puts Be in a much tighter position with their partner companie (and I’m sure there are several). That alone would dictate what can be said, etc., etc., not to mention they need to keep their edge and not let the competition catch on to quickly as to what they are doing.

    I bet we see a good R6 early next year for BeOS! (Just my positive outlook on this!)

  5. spar Says:

    In Response To Jean-Baptiste Queru @ 12/07/2000 05:03:57 AM

    Re: New BMessage

    Of course it makes sense to keep quiet about their technology. I never said that they should trumpet their specs for any of their technology. I’m hoping that they’re doing something truly revolutionary that I’ll love, and that’ll drive the price of all that stock I bought back up.
    I guess I’m just a bit confused by the actual exsistance of BMessage. BMessage seems to be some kind of outreach effort to BeOS users/enthusiasts, but Be no longer sells their product to users/enthusiasts, they sell to other businesses. That they talk about BeIA is kinda cool, but I’m really more interested in knowing when more BeOS updates/improvements are coming. Sure, some of the BeIA stuff will make it into BeOS at some point down the line, but it’s getting a bit disappointing that they won’t commit to a timetable for improvements. Heck, IMO, saying certain functionality will make it into BeOS Pro in Q3 of 2005 is better than not saying anything.

  6. IAmWhoIHam Says:

    In Response To h_ank @ 12/07/2000 12:12:28 AM

    Re: New BMessage

    but essentially this article was an apology / explanation about why they can’t hire and cheerleaders at the moment … I just don’t see anything to get all giddy about.

    The Lee Williams article is simply reassuring. There were many in the Be camp that were becoming worried, that were not used to the quiet from Be. This article waylays their fears, which is why you are seeing lots of happy campers.

  7. spar Says:

    New BMessage

    I’m not getting the enthusiasm you guys seem to have. JLG talked about competing wireless protocols… ok, what the big deal? Be indicated that they’d be bluetooth compatible a long time ago.
    The other guy talks about product secrecy, but uses examples of hardware production that, in my mind, don’t exactly parallel software production. Afterall, as far as we know Be isn’t making hardware, they’re making an OS for hardware. And we know they’re making an OS already.
    Now if they’ve come up with a truly revolutionary function in the OS, of course they don’t want to show their hand prematurely.
    But honestly, that BMessage doesn’t seem to have a lot to do with BeOS users, or at least this one. Be, Inc. is selling their OS to corporations, not to users, and I doubt the people making the hardware are outside of Be’s info loop. I would think that BMessage readers on the web would be more interested in some word about the OS we are fortunate enough to use, and in particular the ship date for the OpenGL rewrite and BONE. Which everybody knows they (are/were/could be) working on, so there’s no need for a bunch of secrecy, is there?

  8. Torsion Says:

    In Response To spar @ 12/07/2000 02:23:28 AM

    Re: New BMessage

    Amen, spar!

    I too didn’t think it was any big deal.

    What percentage of readers of the BMessage do you think are at all interested in BeIA versus BeOS?

  9. h_ank Says:

    In Response To spar @ 12/07/2000 02:23:28 AM

    Re: New BMessage

    I’m not excited either. Maybe it’s because I’m really tired, but there wasn’t anything in there. Bluetooth is good, silence is good, BeIA is good…
    I knew all that. How about JLG saying something like: “OpenGL will be released next Tuesday, BONE on Wednesday and the two together correct the [url=”http://bebugs.be.com/devbugs/detail.php3?pkey=22749″]19990826-
    13309[/url] bug.”
    No that’s something exciting.

  10. Jean-Baptiste Queru Says:

    In Response To spar @ 12/07/2000 02:23:28 AM

    Re: New BMessage

    Well, you should re-read the BMessage in detail, because it explains exactly why Be cannot give details about what’s going on in Menlo Park.

    Here are two scenarios, both of which are purely hypothetical and will most definitely be inaccurate in the end, unless I’m really lucky (or unlucky).

    Scenario #1 :
    -Be starts improving their existing implementation of OpenGL in Q2 1998 and quickly moves towards building a new one from scratch.
    -Be announces in Q3 1999 that they are working on a new OpenGL. Company X, that has lots of money and that also shifts towards appliances licenses some existing implementation of OpenGL and add the feature to their IA offering by Q2 2000.
    -Be gives details about the overall architecture and implementation details of the new OpenGL implementation in Q1 2000. Company Y, that is also in the OS and appliance space and that has also ported its own OpenGL from their desktop OS to their IA system uses that information to optimize their implementation on both platforms and ships a fast OpenGL for IAs by Q3 2000.
    -BeIA devices finally ship in Q1 2001 with OpenGL, but every other device on the planet already has it.

    Scenario #2:
    -Be starts working on improving and re-implementing OpenGL in Q2 1998.
    -BeIA devices ship in Q1 2001 with OpenGL while no other devices have such features, everybody likes the innovative 3D interface and BeIA becomes the leader in the IA space.

    Of course, I have never said that either of those scenarios were accurate, neither for OpenGL nor for any other feature. But it totally makes sense for Be to try to be as close as possible from scenario #2, because going in that direction pretty much only gives them advantages.

    –jbq

  11. Big Al Says:

    In Response To Jean-Baptiste Queru @ 12/07/2000 05:03:57 AM

    Re: New BMessage

    Exactly. The coolest thing (to me) is that while you speak hypothetically, you still speak of something out there (at least on the BeOS side) that we know about. What I get from the article is that there *could* be things we don’t know about or could even imagine that is being developed for BeIA (or already developed and waiting for public release) that will make its way into BeOS. That extraordinarily cool, in my book.

    Hat’s off to the Be team for keeping this thing exciting. Who knows what the future will bring?

  12. cedricd Says:

    In Response To Jean-Baptiste Queru @ 12/07/2000 05:03:57 AM

    Re: New BMessage

    After some rather “so-so” months and weeks I find
    myself being optimistic again and eagerly awaiting
    the next ‘deadline’.. The webpad being announced
    for Jan, 6th and the latest BMessage certainly
    contribute to this.

    Come on Be, impress us, take the world by storm!

    :-)

  13. Bat Says:

    In Response To Jean-Baptiste Queru @ 12/07/2000 05:03:57 AM

    Re: New BMessage

    And that’s exactly what happened with BeIA Map (which, i think, took the everyone by surprise). Now, this is a cool thing that it should be taken as an example of how hard and good the people at Be are working.

  14. Wade Majors Says:

    In Response To h_ank @ 12/07/2000 04:27:02 AM

    Re: New BMessage

    Damn, I don’t think I’m ever going to be able to leave that bebug behind me.

  15. IAmWhoIHam Says:

    In Response To spar @ 12/07/2000 02:23:28 AM

    It would help if you actually read the article…

    Because Lee Williams explains:

    “This is why you have seen a different face on Be. Our co-development partners guide our ability to disclose information.”

  16. Torsion Says:

    In Response To spar @ 12/07/2000 02:23:28 AM

    Re: New BMessage

    Must…try….to…be…more…positive!

  17. David Bruce Says:

    In Response To Jean-Baptiste Queru @ 12/07/2000 05:03:57 AM

    Re: New BMessage

    I also like scenario #2 a lot better, but I still have to wonder: would the sort of OpenGL information that BeOS users want really be that valuable to *engineers* from competing companies, to the extent that it would allow them to beat Be to market? Wouldn’t anyone capable of developing a world-class OpenGL implementation already know a heck of a lot about such things?

    I don’t mean to insult fellow BeOS users, but saying that Be has to be secretive with us for purely technical reasons is a little like a father telling his toddler “I can’t tell you what I do at work because your friends’ parents work for competing companies”. I think the secrecy exists because the suit-types demand it, not because a few more newsletter articles would really help the competition.

  18. James Says:

    my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    I merely tried to ask them questions. I either hit the spot on what they don’t want to say, or my skepticism is too outrageous for them to even bother to answer… well… here goes…

    Mr Williams:

    First of all, I would like to thank you for your “The Co-Development Conundrum” article on the latest BMessage. This was the issue I’ve been waiting to be talked by an employee of Be, Inc. instead of users’ speculation without any concrete proofs. However, upon reading your column, there was something I felt missing, and thus I’ve decided to ask the following via e-mail.

    I realize the necessity for Be, Inc.’s adpotion of “a different face” with regards to new development for the BeIA. However, what I do not understand is the reasoning behind Be, Inc’s secrecy regarding the development of OpenGL, BONE, and JVM, and wished to be enlightened on this issue.

    The development of BONE, JVM, and your OpenGL rewrite has been public knowledge for a relatively long time. Although I realize a form of JVM and BONE will be used for your BeIA platform, those technologies are currently adopted in various operating systems on the market today.

    If BONE is based on BSD’s networking stacks which is open sourced, what exactly is the secret behind this development status that poses a threat to maintaining the “cutting edge” for your BeIA platform?

    Most OSes today has some form of a Java Virtual Machine. Assuming you do not plan on open sourcing your code for your implementation/optimizations of the JVM and also assuming your JVM is made to be fully compliant with Sun Microsystems’ standards, how does notifying the progress of this development hinder the technical superiority of BeIA relative to the product’s competitors?

    The OpenGL rewrite is arguably what the BeOS users are most anxious to be completed. I recall an article by a former BeNews editor, Eugenia Loli, reporting on the performance of your OpenGL implementation. If memory serves me right, this was over 3 months ago. Since then, nothing has been heard about the status of development sans users’ losing confidence in Be, Inc. Again, assuming that your new OpenGL implementation is compliant with the standards and also assuming this isn’t planned to be open sourced, how does a progress report aimed to assure the consumers of a continued development conflict with keeping BeIA superior over it’s competitors? After all, Macintosh, Unix, *BSD, Linux, MSFT and QNX (although I’m sure I may have missed some others) all have one form or another in terms of OpenGL, and since the upcoming OpenGL implementation was public knowledge, I fail to see the necessity of keeping such information away from anxious (and restless) BeOS users/consumers.

    Another issue I was interested had to do with the statement “Unit testing, integration testing, user testing, and other types of validation take the proposed products to extremes that replicate the most bizarre situations in which the product might be used.” For a company with relatively limited resources (number of employees, amount of capital, and time), what better way is there to test the products than to utilize relatively inexpensive (not monetarily, but economically) beta testers who are willing to use and abuse the new code for absolutely no monetary compensation from you? Although I realize this may be relatively difficult for BONE considering this enters the kernel space which may not be suitable for beta testing, do OpenGL rewrite and your JVM encounter the same? And if not, what better way is there to use over 10,000 BeOS enthusiasts compared to the handful of developers who are primarily occupied to the development of BeIA? Wouldn’t some promising signs through showing progress in this manner increase the morale of BeOS users, and thus also increasing the consumer loyalty of the same users?

    As skeptical as I may sound, the only possible reason I could come up regarding the secrecy of the status updates was Be, Inc.’s unwillingness to admit the stalling of these developments to the BeOS loyal users. I realize that such a news will most likely result in an even smaller userbase which is currently small as it is. The secrecy policy may cause some to choose another operating system to use, while die-hard enthusiasts to maintain their loyalty toward Be, Inc. If my initial assumption is correct, it does explain your decision to keep any information away from your consumers (including those not affecting BeIA’s edge over its competitors). However, I would love for my skepticism to be proven otherwise not only as a loyal BeOS user/consumer since R3-Intel, but also as a stockholder.

  19. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To James @ 12/07/2000 1:31:45 PM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    My guess is that the reason this went unanswered is that it’s a complete load of bollocks.
    FYI it is well known that openGL and BONE *ARE* beta tested by a broad cross section of BeOS users and developers. If you want to keep an eye on how it’s going try going to bebugs.be.com and surfing through the bug reports. And incidentally, just because BONE is modelled on the BSD stack doesn’t mean AT ALL that it’s the same code.
    When will people like you get it into their THICK SKULLS that there is no sinister master plot. Be have a duty to their shareholders for secrecy. They are not, repeat NOT stalling development. You clearly didn’t read the article properly, or if you did then you didn’t understand it.

  20. Howard Berkey Says:

    In Response To James @ 12/07/2000 1:31:45 PM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    Just as an aside, BONE is *not* based on BSD code.

    The BONE *headers* (and sockets api function prototypes) are, but that was just to make porting unix apps easier. Internally BONE and BSD’s stack have nothing in common besides adherance to the same RFC’s.

    This is a perpetual rumor that keeps cropping up, I have no idea why.

  21. Big Al Says:

    In Response To James @ 12/07/2000 1:31:45 PM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    *sigh*

    Okay, think for a minute and reflect on what the BMessage said. You don’t understand why they can’t say anything more about BONE or OpenGL? What if there’s something in BONE or OpenGL that is unique to Be technology, and that *includes* both BeOS and BeIA?

    Suppose (and this is just supposition) that there’s a new game console coming out that uses both BONE and the new OpenGL? This console has something that neither Sega, Nintendo, Sony, or anyone else has. And they don’t want the information getting out there. That’s the gist of the BMessage. There are things going on that might or might not involve BONE, hence the need for silence. Same goes for OpenGL.

    Don’t worry, people. It’s out there, it’s being tested, it’ll make it’s way to us eventually. OK?

  22. DrBe Says:

    In Response To Jean-Baptiste Queru @ 12/07/2000 05:03:57 AM

    Re: New BMessage

    mmmmm…

    “innovative 3D interface”

    OpenGL-iscious

  23. IAmWhoIHam Says:

    In Response To spar @ 12/07/2000 12:45:17 AM

    News Flash!

    Be is not focused on BeOS, they are not going to make money in the foreseeable future with BeOS, they are not going to be talking a lot about BeOS.

    The BMessage is directed towards people interested in *Be*, not necessarily BeOS. Therefore the focus is going to be on BeIA. And as an investor in BEOS, that is where I want the focus!

  24. IAmWhoIHam Says:

    In Response To David Bruce @ 12/07/2000 1:28:26 PM

    Re: New BMessage

    Jeezus! They never said they were being secretive for strictly technical reasons. They said they are being secretive for COMPETITIVE REASONS. If you are working on an OpenGL implementation that is awesome, has X, Y, Z features, and is getting X fps on X Mhz processors, you don’t let the competition know until you are shipping.

    That is called a competitive advantage, and you exploit all of those that you can get to succeed!

  25. MrEntropy Says:

    In Response To Howard Berkey @ 12/07/2000 3:17:46 PM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    Probably for the same reason that people keep telling me that BeOS is another version of Unix.

  26. Zaranthos Says:

    In Response To spar @ 12/07/2000 02:23:28 AM

    Flame-flame-flame :P

    Can’t you read? Look for the SUBTLE blah-blah-blah. I have seen the suble signs of life and activity for a long time when others *didn’t get it* and I’m not the only one. You can’t read it with the typical *I hate Be cause they abandoned us* attitude that has infected some people in the community. I’m not even gonna tell you all the good stuff I saw in there. Someone else probably already did (haven’t read the whole thread yet).

  27. James Says:

    In Response To Big Al @ 12/07/2000 3:20:30 PM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    I wasn’t asking for the feature-set of OpenGL, but simply a status report on exactly how far from shipping it is. Is that such a trade secret that cannot be disclosed knowing that many platforms already have OpenGL?

    I wasn’t asking for the technical issues, but more so just some indication that it is actually alive?

    I never cared so much of exactly what *specific* was included in the OpenGL implementation of their possess, so if they do have such a case, then I can understand the need for a closed beta. What I don’t understand is what harm it causes to talk about the progression toward completetion (as in, how far along they have come to a shipping product)

  28. James Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 12/07/2000 2:48:11 PM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    and exactly what part of the article mentioned the one thing I was looking for… not technical answers, not the specifics of what the three compoenets do, but a simple “how much of a progress (quantified) has been made relative to time past”

    if you read my e-mail closer than you read the column, mebbe my focal point may go thru, in your words, your THICK SKULLS…

    oh, and it wouldn’t hurt to stand up for your words rather than posting as AC, ya know?

    “NOT stalling development” <= ever heard of the term “seeing is believing? why do you think, as sad as it is, the userbase of BeOS seem to decrease more and more… there’s been enough hype, and at a certain point, hype just turns into vapor in their mind… think about the issue with the New Amiga… is it being developed? so they say, the SDK is apparently already sold… do we see much of it? is there a following behind it that justifies a large commercial developer to port apps?

    is it good to drive away the userbase, or lose customers’ confidence in Be, Inc as “so much promise, so little results?” even though the more technical savvy users can explain exactly why the BeOS is superior, without functionalities unseen that exists on other readily available platforms, is this beneficial to Be, Inc.?

    Food for thought, but there is more to “just wait, and it’ll come” to the chain of events that happen based on decisions a company makes… and as long as there are non-savvy computer users like myself, I’d assume there are others who feel the same way also….

    I’m not saying my thoughts are the majority, but there will be those who could potentially share the same views…

    and what’s with being unfriendly? is this slashdot, and I trashed how open source sucks?
    jeez, lighten up bro… I was making a purely honest assumption, just like you are with yours… unless you work for Be, Inc. and know for sure what they are exactly doing, you wouldn’t know with 100% certainty, unless you’re omnipotent

  29. georges Says:

    In Response To Scar @ 12/06/2000 11:49:45 PM

    Re: I said *damn* thats a good bmessage…

    The thing is most Be employees in the BeNews forums have been saying all this for months and yet no one listened… sigh.

  30. Scar Says:

    In Response To georges @ 12/07/2000 5:10:34 PM

    Re: I said *damn* thats a good bmessage…

    this suprises you why?
    ;)

  31. Scar Says:

    In Response To georges @ 12/07/2000 5:10:34 PM

    Re: I said *damn* thats a good bmessage…

    this suprises you why?
    ;)

  32. georges Says:

    In Response To James @ 12/07/2000 4:51:20 PM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    Yes, it’s called competitive advantage. ANY information that could tell competitors about their position should be kept secret.
    Besides, in the BMessage that you claim to have read so closely Lee Williams says that the companies they are working with control the disclosure of informatio, NOT BE. GET IT?

  33. David Bruce Says:

    In Response To IAmWhoIHam @ 12/07/2000 3:47:22 PM

    Re: New BMessage

    All I was trying to say was that even if Be told us more about the status of OpenGL (and BONE), engineers from competing companies would be unlikely to learn much that they don’t already know. They already know that Be is working on these projects, and they almost certainly already have the technical knowledge required to implement whatever they are working on.

    I guess it could hurt Be if Be said “We’ll ship BeIA with OpenGL on 1/1/2001″ or whatever, and other companies used this info to accelerate their own schedules so as to beat Be to market.

    Irrespective of what info Be gives out, I’m sure their competitors already know that OpenGL and solid networking are good things to have.

  34. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To James @ 12/07/2000 5:02:46 PM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    “and exactly what part of the article mentioned the one thing I was looking for… not technical
    answers, not the specifics of what the three compoenets do, but a simple “how much of a progress
    (quantified) has been made relative to time past”

    The article was not about progress. It was about exactly why they can’t answer the questions you are asking.

    oh, and it wouldn’t hurt to stand up for your words rather than posting as AC, ya know?

    Sorry about that, but I have my reasons. Normally I’m happy to stand behind my flames:P

    “is it good to drive away the userbase, or lose customers’ confidence in Be, Inc as “so much promise,
    so little results?” even though the more technical savvy users can explain exactly why the BeOS is
    superior, without functionalities unseen that exists on other readily available platforms, is this
    beneficial to Be, Inc.?”

    I’m not quite sure what you’re trying to say here, but I repeat, there is not a long drawn out conspiracy to lie to the whole BeOS user base about the development of core technologies. As they have repeatedly said, they aren’t gong to tell you much about anything. It may not be fast enough for you, but again if you read the article it tells you quite clearly why these things take time.

    “and what’s with being unfriendly?”

    Because I was annoyed with yet another posting whingeing about why you don’t have BONE or OpenGL and accusing Be Inc of being compulsive liars. They really don’t have any reason to lie to you. I repeat, there is no plot.

    “unless you’re omnipotent”

    I think you mean omniscient:P

  35. tpv Says:

    In Response To Howard Berkey @ 12/07/2000 3:17:46 PM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    Is the new stack completely written from scratch?
    That’s a pretty big acheivement.

    I remember reading somewhere that Solaris & Linux were the only unixes that didn’t use a BSD derived stack. (Not sure if that’s true though).

  36. tpv Says:

    Jon Watte

    Hey, my biggest excitement about the new BMessage was seeing that Jon is still working at Be :)

  37. Howard Berkey Says:

    In Response To tpv @ 12/07/2000 8:01:15 PM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    >Is the new stack completely written from scratch?

    Yes.

    >That’s a pretty big acheivement.

    Thanks, that’s one reason it is taking so long.

    >I remember reading somewhere that Solaris & Linux
    >were the only unixes that didn’t use a BSD derived
    >stack. (Not sure if that’s true though)

    No. Most (all?) SVR4 unix implementations (Solaris being a prime example) use a STREAMS based stack. And while some of the STREAMS modules may reuse BSD code, STREAMS is a very different architecture than BSD’s.

    Linux has its own implementation as well.

  38. mr_skreet Says:

    In Response To James @ 12/07/2000 4:51:20 PM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    ” Is that such a trade secret that cannot be disclosed…?”

    The answer is self-evidently “yes”.

  39. David Bruce Says:

    In Response To georges @ 12/07/2000 5:21:00 PM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    Well, secrecy is a two-edged sword. It could help you to keep info from competitors, but it also can help to let out info and build interest and demand for your products. As far as BeOS is concerned, I think the lack of info is hurting them more than helping. The same may even be true of BeIA, for all we know. btw, does anyone here even have a clear idea of what BeIA is and how it differs from BeOS?

    Your last sentence sums it up, though - Be’s new partners are dictating a policy of secrecy. They hold the pursestrings, and they can simply say “Keep quiet because I said so”.

  40. tpv Says:

    In Response To James @ 12/07/2000 4:51:20 PM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    “I wasn’t asking for the technical issues, but more so just some indication that it is actually alive?”

    And the benchmarks on BeNews didn’t do that?

    Seriously, what do you want Be to tell you.
    Does it exist? Yes, you’ve seen reports on that.
    Is it being tested? Yes, you’ve seen that too.
    Is it cool? Yes, you’ve seen the benchmarks.
    When’s it coming? There’s the standard reply: “When it’s ready”

    If what you want is a promise that you’ll have OpenGL by your birthday, then you’re sweet-outa-luck. Be doesn’t make those sorts of promises.

    If you want to know that it is progressing then that’s already been shown.

    I really don’t know what more you can expect from them.

  41. tpv Says:

    In Response To Howard Berkey @ 12/07/2000 10:51:53 PM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    Is it possible to tell us why you wrote it from scratch?

    Is there something about the BSD or STREAMS stacks that make them unsuitable?

    I’m trying to see where this fit in the continuum of “Avoiding legacy issues” to “Not invented here”

    ie, This could be seen as an example of Be putting in the hard work to do it right, or an example of Be re-inventing the wheel.

    Since I trust you (& the Be engineering team), I’d lean towards the former. Is it possible to indicate why it was considered to be needed?

  42. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To David Bruce @ 12/08/2000 05:57:54 AM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    For BeIA we don’t know because we aren’t supposed to know. The OEM that are going to put out the IA’s are the ones who need to know. That is where Be needs to hype up BeIA and make demand. Not with us.

    BeOS is not the focus anymore. The secrecy may be huting them, but that’s a risk Be took when went ahead witht the focus shift.
    All we have to do is stick around and see what happens. That’s basically what the BMessage was saying.

  43. Anonymous Says:

    In Response To tpv @ 12/08/2000 07:41:15 AM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    Net_server is kinda flaky in my experience.
    I guess Be thought so too and thought it was time to replace it.

  44. tpv Says:

    In Response To Anonymous @ 12/08/2000 10:30:58 AM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    That much I know.

    But I would have expected (and Howard suggests as much) that it would have been faster to adapt a BSD stack to run in the BeOS kernel than to write a new stack from scratch.

    This isn’t a question about the net_server, is a question of “Why is Be’s custom built network stack a better solution than a BSD derived one?”

  45. IAmWhoIHam Says:

    In Response To tpv @ 12/08/2000 10:36:54 AM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    This isn’t a question about the net_server, is a question of “Why is Be’s custom built network stack a better solution than a BSD derived one?”

    Because the BSD stack was written for BSD and unix systems, and the Be’s network stack was written for BeOS. In other words, I’m sure the network stack takes advantage of how the BeOS kernel functions in order to get the best performance. In addition, I suspect there are some added features that were possible only with a new, non-BSD stack.

  46. IAmWhoIHam Says:

    In Response To David Bruce @ 12/07/2000 5:31:14 PM

    Re: New BMessage

    Apparantly you need to re-read the article, because your concerns are clearly addressed:

    “This is why you have seen a different face on Be. Our co-development partners guide our ability to disclose information.”

  47. Squire Says:

    In Response To IAmWhoIHam @ 12/08/2000 10:56:54 AM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    It has also been noted that with BeOS’ mere 3ms latencies that the BSD stack couldn’t be used. Most
    non-realtime OS’s have much higher latencies and thus can use the BSD or STREAMS stack. BeOS/BeIA would need to have their own stacks to maintain that low latency.

    Squire

  48. Howard Berkey Says:

    In Response To tpv @ 12/08/2000 07:41:15 AM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    Many reasons. The BSD stack is notoriously single-threaded, it processes all its data at interrupt time (requiring some hackarounds with threads) which is fine on an OS with multiple levels of interrupts but not BeOS (which has only one), the BSD stack has grown in place around other parts of BSD that may or may not make sense from a BeOS perspective, etc.

    I’ve written about it in a couple newsletter articles and posted in different places about it. The BSD stack is excellent, for BSD.

  49. Piers Bray Says:

    In Response To Scar @ 12/07/2000 5:12:36 PM

    Re: I said *damn* thats a good bmessage…

    The message was great reading and as you stated, in a limited capacity it has been the talk of Be Employees and the likes over the last few months. Unfortunately in this wired world, patience has been lacking.
    Good to see BeOS being taken seriously by a few developers especially in Audio and Video industries where it will excel.

    Now back to saving up for that B&W port )-: I need a new job.

    Piers Bray

  50. Duffahtolla Says:

    In Response To Howard Berkey @ 12/08/2000 2:48:53 PM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    What the..

    Oh my God!! I think I’ve just had an Orgasm!!

    wait.. yes.. I have definitely had an Orgasm.

    It was probably the phrases “written from scratch” and “multithreaded”. They’re like G-spots to me.

    :)

  51. Lee Williams Says:

    In Response To James @ 12/07/2000 1:31:45 PM

    Re: my unanswered e-mail to Lee Williams and cc’d to JLG

    James,

    Thank you for your interest and concern about my statements, and Be, Inc. Let me make clear one thing, your email and it’s subsequent demands for explanation are not the highest priority items on my plate.

    I respect yours and others opinions, because I have given you the benefit of the doubt that you are a constuctive contributor to the Be community of developers, shareholders, and customers. That is why I will reply to your lengthy email.

    However, this will occur when as a matter of due course, I have the time and wherewithall to do so in a thorough, accurate, and coordinated manner. In the mean time I am spending the majority of my time, spare and otherwise, dedicating my focus and energies toward higher priorities. And as curious as I am about why exactly you feel justified in your demands to recieve a response within your predetermined time frames, I will refrain from ‘demanding’ an explanation, and instead ask you to be patient.

    All of us at the company are working around the clock, and through weekends to accomplish agressive business goals that I am confident in the end will satisfy the most ardent critics. Thank you for your support of these efforts, and again please be pateint.

    Regards,

    Lee M. Williams
    Director, PDD

[powered by WordPress.]

Random Haiku:

Needle in the arm
I can't turn away, I'm hooked
Nowhere to run to

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

search BeGroovy:

BeGroovy Archives:

December 2017
S M T W T F S
« Jan    
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  

other:

23 queries. 0.079 seconds

[powered by WordPress.]