Slashdot Mirror
Free Be
Big Al writes "Be announced today that starting with the next release of the OS (R5) it will be free for private and non-commercial use - downloadable from the internet. There will still be an 'enhanced version' but the free version is the same as the enhanced without some additional tools and utilities. "
Further proof that Open Source has made the Operating System Free (as in beer) but what about speech?
I tried BeOS about 3-4 months ago, when I first put together my current system. A Friend had the 4.5 CD, all my hardware was supported, and trying a new OS is fun :-)
The install was the best OS install I've ever seen. Had a spcial version of Partition Magic to partition, and clicked about 3 buttons and it was installed. The Bootloader was the best I've seen. Detected all my hardware and was up and running on the net as soon as I typed in my network info and clicked "restart networking".
Then I did what most people do when they install linux for the first time. Looked at my computer and said "now what"? Didn't have much for a web broswer. Net+ was so-so, and when you have to point at Opera as your top broswer, that's never a good sign. Mozilla is beign ported, but it was slow as nuts on a dual celeron 458 with 128megs RAM.
Then I thought, who would buy this? Although very user-friendly, it was $60. the OS itself offered ALOT of nice features, but didn't have any aps to warrent spending the $60 to get the OS. I mean, you thought Linux didn't have ap support. BeOS has about the same ratio of aps to Linux as Linux does to Windows. Thier market was soposed to be mediaphiles and professionals, but any media aps they had was done better elsewhere.
I wish that those rumors of RedHat buying Be Inc. went though. The BeOS has ALOT of fine advancements in thier desktop GUI, SMP support(which was excellent), and their internal media code. Such advanements combined with linux, could push a BeOS with a linux kernel very far on the desktop.
The "freeing" of the browser has resulted in everyone running to the same destination and realizing that it's just a tool. Other than adding support for the most current standards, how much innovation does one need in a browser? In fact, I think I'd prefer less innovation in browsers; I'd like them to all render HTML in the same way, at least.
Will the same thing happen to operating systems? Maybe. However the free operating systems we all know and love were not dreamed up as "killer apps" that would be profit centers. They were created with the expectation that they would be useful to their users. This is what drives true innovation in the free software movement, I think.
If Linux, *BSD, BeOS and NT all ultimately end up undifferentiated, there will always be someone who wants to do something useful not supported by these crusty old OSes and will start their own initiative.
Of course, I could be wrong. Maybe we should all just give up and preorder Win2K.
Troy Denkinger
TD
Once a GPL program has entered a market, like Linux has in the OS market, commercial revenue margins come under assault. The hugh margins that some may view as extortion cannot be maintained. Of course can one say that the "innovation" in windows has kept up with its cost. I don't think so. I think the majority of software companies are in for a shock as in the coming years the margins that they have enjoyed will be greatly reduced.
Q: As stated in the FAQ it runs in windows and does not need repartitioning... what's this?
A: If you read the FAQ, it states "you'll be able to download BeOS 5 via a Web browser and store it as a file within the Windows file system." so the money is it on being a filesystem implemented as a file under windows that the kernel will be able to mount."Thats able folks, not have to so you ll still be able to use BFS in a partition as most geeks will want to.
Q : I still don't think that it will gain widespread acceptance until it is Open Sourced.
A : Why? look at all the major OS's that are commercial successes - Windows, MacOS, qnx et al. They have not needed open source. Linux does not need open source to be used. How many users actually use the source. It aided its development and growth, but not its usage. If you wish to argue about the closed-ness of api's for writing drivers etc on the BeOS, dont worry as Be are very good at supplying full documentation and sample code as required
Q : Is Be doing well from a commercial viewpoint?
A : At the moment, not especially, but are heading towards critical mass steadily. People try to compare linux companies IPO's with Be's - this isnt really relevant as the stock price in linux case was brought up by hype and is not a true indication of revenue coming into these companies and is a debatable point whether it ever will be.
Q : But it's difficult to find anywhere in retail outlets.
A : But very easy just to call be, order one and have it arrive on your doorstep
Q : But how free will this be?
A : RTFFAQ - totally free for non-commercial and personal use.
Q : But is this an attempt to garner marketshare by giving the product away?
A : Probably. Who knows or cares. The fact is that unless you are microsoft, desktop OS's dont make money. Embedded ones do.
Q : If there's no less than 3 different Linux distros that run on G3 Macs, why can't Be get BeOS on 'em?
A : Because Be have no support from the hardware vendors. If they are have a commercial product that has a problem for a user, they are liable. Hence, if thats due to lack on info they cant get, they are stuffed. Linux etc. dont have this problem because if it doesnt work, it doesnt work, and no-ones liable.
Q : Whats missing from this "cut-down" release?
A : Well, it hasnt been announced but its easy to make a good guess - not a lot. The faq states We do plan to offer for sale an expanded edition of BeOS 5 containing a variety of special software components and other valuable utilities. The dev tools etc are there and as the distro is 40-60M (and all the be system binaries are only 20M) it should all be there. The missing things will likely be extra non-vital tools + utilities. The cut down bits are likely to be all the sounds/videos/images + source that are normally on the cd (an separately available anyway)
Q : the free version is really like a demo
A : No its not. Go read the FAQ before talking rubbish.
Q : Now that Be is concentrating on the Internet, what about the JDK promised here?
A : Well, I've heard its taking them a little longer due to the Stinger/IA push. Expect something RSN.
Well, thats about all I think I can add for now. Hopefully this should blitz some of the speculation and unfounded rubbish people have posted so far :-) That is assuming people read others posts as well as just posting their own opinions hoping to appear knowledgable.
Peace out, and try tasting the OS sometime soon if you havent already,
~Pev
While I agree it's a double edged sword, Be is doing this for one reason only, to acheive developer critical mass. I've run Be before (not currently) and the reason I'm not running it curently is there are no interesting apps. Personally I think that Be is the coolest media system I've ever seen. Even their simple utilities are astounding. (Playing 6 mp3's simultaneously at different speeds, some backwards using a SB 16 is some pretty cool stuff, not to mention their video stuff) But the high quality apps are not (or were not the last time i checked) there. Anyone who does media would gladly pay for a 'professional' Be if they were able to get their apps for it. To get the apps for it you need to get it in people's hands. Making it gratis will get it into people's hands. Then the developers will port the apps, then the people who need the apps wil switch the OS. Charging for upgraded capacity or more driver support, etc, will start to bring in the revenue.
-Rich
No. On the other hand, some of us don't subscribe to the notion that selling a proprietary product is akin to extortion and theft.
Personally, I feel like ESR - I want to use software that doesn't suck. Unlike ESR, I believe that 'lack of suckiness' isn't an exclusive property of the open source movement - that there exists proprietary software which doesn't suck. BeOS is a very good example of that software. Well architectured, easy to program for, and has technology that Linux either is only beginning to get, already has but in a very immature form compared to the BeOS implementation, or won't have for a long time (journalling file systems for the first, MIME-based file types for the second, and system-wide file translators for the third).
Unfortunately, the zealots have convinced the mainstream media that operating systems are a generic product. Perhaps it's true; perhaps it isn't. What that amounts to, however, is that a product that fits my needs far better than Linux can (now or for the forseeable future) has effectively been driven off the market by PR. It smacks horribly of the same tactics Microsoft is berated for by the Linux community.
When I first got into the Linux community, I was amazed at how farsighted it was. No stone was left unturned, nobody was ignored, and every possible repercussion was considered, both in software and in politics. Yet, in the thirst for a taste of Microsoft's blood and caught up in its own delusions of grandeur, the Linux community is acting more and more like the very people they claim to despise. Any action is sanctionable as long as it furthers the goal of open source. Great products, whose only technical "flaw" is that they aren't open-sourced, are gone after with the same ferocity and tenacity as if they are the latest incarnation of bloatware from Microsoft.
Freedom my ass. Paraphrasing somebody else in another article yesterday, if it were left up to the OSS community the only choice I'd get is which open source, free UNIX OS I want to install on my machine.
Maybe tonight I'll back up my BeOS files, format the disk, and install the latest version of Slackware. That way, I can hang out with a bunch of superhumans who know everything.
Why should anyone pay for an OS when there's a free one, and why should anyone expect to get paid for an OS until they can provide something better than the free one?
You could just as easily say that the release of Quake1 under GPL destroyed the market for companies selling Wolf 3d-era games.
I think a quote says it best...
If a company can't beat the free products, made by the users themselves, they don't deserve sympathy.