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


What would happen to Linux if BeOS were GPL’ed

Filed under the:  department.
Posted by:Ryan on Saturday, 16 Dec, 2000 @ 12:18 AM
 
Software

Slashdot has an interesting story asking Slashdot readers what would happen to Linux if BeOS we’re GPL’ed. While BeOS will almost certainly never be opensourced due to licensed code and the fact that it shares a lot of code with BeIA, it is an interesting discussion. Be warned though.. the article is about the effect on linux, and not on the software world as a whole. And Slashdot readers tend to be pretty closed minded about anything being better than Linux. (not that BeOS users are consistently rational) My advice is to take the high road. Read along and correct false information, while avoiding getting trapped in a religious war.



28 Responses to “What would happen to Linux if BeOS were GPL’ed”

  1. Technix : Chris Simmons Says:

    [No Subject]

    First Post!!!!

    heh.. I always wanted to say that.

    Well, you know, I read the article at /. and I’m not impressed.

    I used to be a huge fan, but I feel they’ve really shifted into a “with blinders on” mode…

  2. frespch Says:

    In Response To Technix : Chris Simmons @ 12/16/2000 01:53:18 AM

    Re: [No Subject]

    hmmph.

    As of 8AM Central Time slashdots’ been down.

    Anyway, I’m going to go waste my time recompiling kernals.

    Not.

  3. wobegon Says:

    It could happen.

    The only way BeOS would be opensourced is in case of total financal collapse of Be inc.BeIA would have to be opened up as well.It would simply be a last ditch option to save the platform and still provide users/developers a future.If it all were opensourced nobody would have to talk in terms of “well let’s just use BeOS/BeIA anyway until something better comes along in 5 years”.Sure theres plenty of code that couldn’t be opened up, that’s no problem, just open up what you can and we can fill in the blanks later.If the latest BeMessage is any indication Be’s looking real good right now and financal stablilty doen’t seem to be a problem.

  4. Anonymous Says:

    Holy wars

    Yeah, JIHAD NOW!!!

  5. Beowulfs_Ghost Says:

    Slashdot’ers make Linux look bad

    I’m realy tempted to replace my Linux partition with freeBSD.

    Some of those uberhackers on Slashdot love to gloat over how great Linux is, and how it’s just as good, if not better then BeOS at every thing. They brag that Linux can play audio just as well as BeOS. Woopee for them, because in the year and a half that I’ve been using Linux, I’ve never gotten a single sound card to even work on six different machines.

    ubershlashdoter responce;
    “It’s OPEN SOURCE. Just rewrite the kernel and make your own drivers you idiot.”

    Those idiots would go ape sh** over a Linux powered toaster, and then get angry about having to pay real money for it.

  6. wobegon Says:

    In Response To Beowulfs_Ghost @ 12/17/2000 00:56:16 AM

    Re: Slashdot’ers make Linux look bad

    I’ve always thought that the very definition of a “geek” was someone that questioned everything, and having questioned everything and after careful consideration, picking the best tool or solution for the job.This lifestyle requires intensive study and some fair measure of honesty.If another chooses a solution I don’t care for,fine go your way, I choose mine.
    It is clear from the amount of crap and outright OS bigotry from /. that there are few that would fit anyones decription of what a geek should be, let alone mine.
    I’d guess that of all those that live and promote Linux on /. that about 90% only use Linux because of the percieved geek uber coolness of it, not because they really understand it.Linux for the most part is an ego boost, nothing more.
    The fundamental diference between BeOS and Linux is, with Linux just installing it and telling your buddies you run Linux makes you feel intelligent, more intelligent than others around you.hence the rudness factor, I run Linux therfore I’m better than you.
    BeOS on the other hand, Just let’s you get things done.
    BeOS is only usefull to you if you have REAL work to do.
    For me it not spending hours upon hours getting things running and just achieving basic functionality, i’ve actually got things to do. BeOS let’s me compile my code, write my HTML pages, not six months after point of install but soon after it boots for the first time.
    Bottom line is this you can leave Linux on your drive or install FreeBSD,you’ll never get away from wannabe’s, the wannabe’s exist in both camps Linux and all the BSD’s.
    I don’t have to be anybody i’m not with BeOS,BeOS let’s me just Be.

  7. JayKey Says:

    In Response To wobegon @ 12/16/2000 3:45:13 PM

    No, it cannot happen. Here is why

    It have been pointed out before, but BeOS will NOT suddenly become opensource if Be goes under. Third party code is used many places in the BeOS code base, it would take a lot of resources (time and money) just to detect where changes need to be made, not even mentioning re-writing those portions of the code. And there would be no cash left to do that. And it would be no reason to do it either, from a business perspective. And I doubt anyone else than Be could do the neccessary work either (you must know who wrote what,…. design decisions.. etc). Certainly not linux hackers or lawyers.

  8. JayKey Says:

    In Response To wobegon @ 12/16/2000 3:45:13 PM

    No, it cannot happen. Here is why

    It have been pointed out before, but BeOS will NOT suddenly become opensource if Be goes under. Third party code is used many places in the BeOS code base, it would take a lot of resources (time and money) just to detect where changes need to be made, not even mentioning re-writing those portions of the code. And there would be no cash left to do that. And it would be no reason to do it either, from a business perspective. And I doubt anyone else than Be could do the neccessary work either (you must know who wrote what,…. design decisions.. etc). Certainly not linux hackers or lawyers.

  9. Shice Says:

    In Response To wobegon @ 12/17/2000 04:44:56 AM

    Re: Slashdot’ers make Linux look bad

    Hey, you’ve been reading the “New Linux Kernel Will Increase Intellectual Superiority” article on BBSpot :)

    http://www.bbspot.com/News/2000/12/smart.html

  10. wobegon Says:

    In Response To JayKey @ 12/17/2000 11:00:43 AM

    Re: No, it cannot happen. Here is why

    Yes,BeOS has a lot of third party code that can’t be opened.so what.If Be decides to call it quits,(again worst case possibility, that looks like won’t happen )they open the code that they can, an organization of users and developers much like opentracker is formed, and the task they are faced with is to replace the code that is missing.plan and simple.this may take months or years, but it would eventualy come to a successful conlution and we have in the end ensured BeOS has a future, which is preferable to the defeatest attatude of ” well if Be closes it’s doors, i’ll just continue to use BeOS untill something better comes along.” Opensource software development doesn’t take money it takes time, there are plenty of Linux hackers that contribute to Linux for free, because of love of code and community spirit.Opensourcing BeOS becomes even more likely when you consider the possibility of Be closing it’s doors,imagine after a while of no system updates of having to switch back to Windows or Mac or Linux, ick.I’d sooner barf on my hardware than run anything else but BeOS.there is no way on earth that BeOS wouldn’t be opensourced, even in part.but like I said before, happily this doesnt look like it will have to happen as be appearently has a very rich future ahead.

  11. LeftTurn Says:

    In Response To Shice @ 12/17/2000 1:08:57 PM

    Re: Slashdot’ers make Linux look bad

    He he, that was pretty funny :)

    It also has such a ring of truth to it…

  12. cedricd Says:

    In Response To wobegon @ 12/17/2000 2:09:28 PM

    Re: No, it cannot happen. Here is why

    You missed the point. The point is not “it’s not sure whether
    Be would have time to write replacement code for all the licenced
    code”, it’s “Be wouldn’t have resources to IDENTIFY licenced code”.
    Those things must be awfully complex. Even if you put big blinking (!)
    comments everywhere it’s relevant in the code, where it shouldn’t belong
    anyway, you’d have to have it all proof-read by a lawyer or something.
    So just forget about it.

    Incidentally the other part of the thread talking about blind OpenSource(tm) bigotry
    is very entertaining to read, nice to see the community be in a funny mood again
    when Facing Adversity :-)

  13. cedricd Says:

    In Response To Shice @ 12/17/2000 1:08:57 PM

    Re: Slashdot’ers make Linux look bad

    Oh my is this BBSpot site excellent..
    Also check out
    http://bbspot.com/News/2000/5/MS_Linux_delay.html

    and tons of others. Here goes another entry in my bookmarks.

  14. RepairmanJack Says:

    In Response To wobegon @ 12/17/2000 04:44:56 AM

    Re: Slashdot’ers make Linux look bad

    I always thought the definitiion of a “Geek” was a circus freak who eats the heads off of chickens :)

  15. wobegon Says:

    In Response To cedricd @ 12/18/2000 06:27:39 AM

    Re: No, it cannot happen. Here is why

    sifting thru the entire BeOS/BeIA code base with all it’s libraries apps ect looking for 3rd party code is a task I wouldn’t wish on my worst enemy.And to make things worse I belive one of the developers is quoted in saying in the BeBook because the code is so poorly commented.
    however it may not be all that bad.
    The first task involved in releasing the code,would be to weed out the 3rd party code.If the original documentation of all 3rd party code were available so you knew what you were looking for, and you were working with about 20 people, it might not take that long,and in the endthey would know what was removed and would be able to make notes for later as to what new code they neede to write to replace the 3rd party code.
    It could be handled like this, just have all volenteers working on just one small part like one library or just the media kit a fragments of it, then when that library was “clean” release it,BeOS would be cleaned first followed by BeIA ect.
    It may not take all that long I mean the BeOS kernel is only 696.07 kb large,it’s not like were talking about code
    of Microsoftian proporsions here.I figure at the least the kernel alone could be cleaned out in less then a week to a month of solid work, or, by volenteers working after thier day jobs, at least 2 or 3 months.
    A hell of a lot of work however long it took but in the end the goal would be to perserve the BeOS code for future use.It would be a damn shame to see it go to waste.
    However like I say it would never have to work out that way Be is in good shape.I say we keep the opensource idea in the back of our minds and forget about it,just remember it’s there as an option.just in case.

  16. Brent P. Newhall Says:

    In Response To Technix : Chris Simmons @ 12/16/2000 01:53:18 AM

    Re: Slashdot

    Well, their news tends to be so Linux- and open-source-heavy that I just don’t find much of it useful. It seems to be mostly a site for Linux and open-source news. Which, of course, is fine; it’s just not what I’m interested in reading.

  17. Brent P. Newhall Says:

    In Response To Shice @ 12/17/2000 1:08:57 PM

    Re: Slashdot’ers make Linux look bad

    LOL! I love it! This one’s going on my webpage.

  18. Brent P. Newhall Says:

    In Response To wobegon @ 12/18/2000 4:28:34 PM

    Re: No, it cannot happen. Here is why

    “It could be handled like this, just have all volenteers working on just one small part like one library or just the media kit a fragments of it, then when that library was “clean” release it…”

    But the problem is that Be couldn’t hand off the code to volunteers. Only Be employees could sift through that code, and if Be went under, there wouldn’t be any Be engineers left. Legally, Be couldn’t show that code to *anyone*, even people who were trying to make the code “legal,” as I understand the law. Be holds the rights, and if Be sinks, the rights go down along with Be.

    I say this, as much as I’d love to see the BeOS continue in just the way you describe, if Be, Inc. ever has to close its doors.

  19. Brent P. Newhall Says:

    In Response To wobegon @ 12/17/2000 04:44:56 AM

    Re: Slashdot’ers make Linux look bad

    ::applause::

  20. wobegon Says:

    In Response To Brent P. Newhall @ 12/18/2000 5:27:38 PM

    Re: No, it cannot happen. Here is why

    As long as Be didn’t owe anybody anything, didn’t have any outstanding debts or the like,then I don’t see why Be couldn’t remain a company simply for legal purposes only.
    JLG would still be in charge, and all employees would be paid a default fee of a dollar a year just to keep it legal.
    JLG contacts all 3rd party code owners and informs them that they wish to do right by them and will to satisfy thier privacy and rights remove all 3rd party code.
    After this is done,and the missing parts are filled in with new code,BeOS can officaly release an OS on cd to be sold thru the usual opensource distributors that shipLinux today,also of course iso images would be available for download, Be users groups would be heavily relied upon to spread the code and build community support.
    After a time it might be possible that BeOS sppreads like wildfire,just like Linux did, and Be starts making mony like RedHat, SuSE or even Caldera.RedHat has prooven that you can make money on free code,RedHat stock sucks,but they made money in sales,they average something like 40 to 50 mill everyear.
    we also need a License too, either the style BSD licence might do, or write a new one maybe the BePL?
    there’s always a way around everything.

  21. Jean-Baptiste Queru Says:

    In Response To wobegon @ 12/16/2000 3:45:13 PM

    Re: It could happen.

    I thought it would be obvious that, if Be suddenly “went under”, Be’s primary concern would still be to maximize the shareholders’ benefits, possibly by trying to have the assets of the company bought by some other company.
    I thought that it would be obvious that giving away the primary asset of a company like Be (in the state where it’s going under, i.e. when no engineers are left) would not be the best way to maximize the value of the company’s assets.
    Obviously, I was wrong.

    JB

  22. mlk Says:

    if be goes under….

    we should all get a copy of lience breaker out
    and start hacking :)

    mlk

  23. JayKey Says:

    In Response To wobegon @ 12/18/2000 8:54:36 PM

    Re: No, it cannot happen. Here is why

    I don’t see GPL as the solution for BeOS, or any other open source license for that matter.

    IMO, to “spread on like wildfire” doesn’t mean to convert linux freaks into using BeOS. They never will. They’ve seen the light. I mean, you know the mix of religion and warfare. Forget about it.

    On the other hand, IA OEMs run from Linux to BeIA to seek new opportunities, and I would not worry about Be’s future. We should know where Be’s business focus is by now.

    In the future, the IA space will be bigger than the current desktop, mobile phone and entertainment markets today together. Whether BeOS will survive the changes in it’s current form depends on the sales of the Pro Edition, which in turn depend on the developments of BeIA but also 3rd party BeOS developers. All the variables depend on each other, and unforseen effects usually happen.

    Hey folks, just be ambitious and do whatever you can if you want this OS to not only stay alive, but also continually kick you into the future.

  24. wobegon Says:

    In Response To Jean-Baptiste Queru @ 12/18/2000 9:54:28 PM

    Re: It could happen.

    It is extremly obvious,of course,but the least desirable option.Most likely if anyone bought Be and it’s assets it would be Microsoft,they’d probably fire everyone after the sale and keep the assets, and then incorperate the code into windows.BeOS/BeIA as independent OS’s would never see the light of day again.
    at least an attempt to turn Be around as an opensource company would keep BeOS alive and garantee a future for BeOS users, and maybe even finally generate profit for Be, and it’s shareholders.

  25. Thomas Hochmann Says:

    Hmm…

    I’m a hard-core Linuxer, I admit that up front. I’ve used Linux for four years, and I love it, and for my purposes, it’s the best thing I’ve ever run on this machine. However, it’s hardly perfect, and I’ll be the first to admit that.

    Linux is not easy for new users, without doubt. It has hardware incompatibilities from time to time, and that goes with the territory of being one of the underdogs. I’ll say this — Linux is the best choice for low or medium-end network oriented setups, and it is quickly positioning itself as a nice OS for the desktop market.

    However, I also have great respect for BeOS. In fact, I dumped both my Windows and Linux partitions on my laptop, and put BeOS on there instead. It looks great, runs great, and not only that, I think the BeOS community is one of the coolest out there.

    I think discussions of which is better are utterly pointless. They’re in totally different leagues — Linux is in the UNIX family, which focuses more on the server and techie side of the computing world, especially networking. BeOS, however, focuses on the techie world, and also the desktop user world to some extent. Different areas, and they both perform admirably in their respective parts of the computing universe, sometimes beyond.

    Truth be told, I love both. BeOS is great, with excellent performance, it has a diverse and very unique community (where else would you find a radio station dedicated entirely to an operating system, like www.beosreadio.com?), and has turned my aging laptop into a powerhouse machine. Similarly, Linux offers wonderful performance, has a delightfully techie community, and is surprisingly capable even in areas it was never intended for (Linux in a watch, anyone?).

    I wish everyone would just stop whining and getting into childish BeOS-vs.-Linux “discussions.” They’re both great OSes in their own right, and that’s the key point. That, and they’re both better than Windows in many ways. :-P

  26. sadistic_mystic Says:

    In Response To Thomas Hochmann @ 12/22/2000 9:53:25 PM

    Re: Hmm…

    I have had this discussion in my head many times.

    I have concluded that Linux as a desktop blows.

    As a server it is great, but XWin is useless, it
    really doesn’t do a whole lot besides mirror the
    already present terminal. Not to mention, X is SLOW.

    BeOS is the only thing besides Windows that has a tolerably speedy GUI. And even Windows is pretty bad. Macs… well, I wont even go there.

    Linux may be good for a server, but if I was going to run a decent server I would go with BSD, OpenBSD or possibly Solaris.

  27. Ben Says:

    In Response To sadistic_mystic @ 12/28/2000 05:39:33 AM

    Re: Hmm… X is great and fast..

    You know, I get really tied of people trashing X all the time. It’s very fast, and can be quite small. The fact is that the X server can be stripped down so that the whole of X runs in under 1MB (for PDA usage) while it’s true that the system is more complex, the power it offers you with the networking capabilities easily make up for this.

    I’m running KDE2.1beta right now on my dual 4666 Celeron Linux box on a (cheap old) 3DFX Voodoo3 2000. It’s VERY fast, Konqueror is WAY better than any browser that BeOS is likely to get any time soon, and the whole environment is quite cohesive.

    I personally think that Corel had the right idea with their Linux distro. There’s tonnes of quality Linux apps that can be set up to be just as slick as Win32/BeOS, the problem is that 99% of linux users (myself included) like to tinker and add stuff..

    Linux us a great base, I’d dare say that if you were to take the Corel approach but stick with it you’d have a very slick OS that has great app support.

    Oh yeah, I’ve got good 3D support in X now too. Add that to my nice font support and I’ve got everything that I liked about BeOS, plus the power of Unix. My system is blazingly fast, X is fast, while it’s not easy or slick enough yet, we’re getting there.

    Sorry to carry on like this, but Be inc. has been so disrespectful of their user base that I’m quite astounded that there are still people out there flogging it. Be has some GREAT features. Help implement those in an OS that can’t be taken away.

    Ben

    Ben

  28. Thomas Hochmann Says:

    In Response To sadistic_mystic @ 12/28/2000 05:39:33 AM

    Re: Hmm…

    X? Slow? Guess that depends what hardware you use with it. But even with unaccelerated 2D running at 1024×768, I’d hardly call X “slow” … It works great with my GeForce 2 MX, with excellent framerates in 2D and 3D.

    I’m trying to make a point though — neither BeOS or X or whatever sucks. They have their strengths, and saying “X is slow” is simply not true. Perhaps it’s “slow” on your hardware, or maybe your setup was just badly configured. BeOS makes a better desktop OS than Linux, I admit, but this may change.

    They’re both great OSes, let’s leave it at that.

[powered by WordPress.]

Random Haiku:

New BeDope Linux
Version 27.1; Wow!
AVN ownz j00.

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

search BeGroovy:

BeGroovy Archives:

October 2017
S M T W T F S
« Jan    
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  

other:

23 queries. 0.102 seconds

[powered by WordPress.]