Slashdot Mirror
OpenBeOs Developers Talk About Progress
DeltaSigma writes: "Michael Phipps, of the OpenBeos team, recently hosted a public Q&A Session where many of the public musings over a completely new open source operating system have been addressed. The answer to all the 'is there room in the market?' questions was answered in a way: 'We are an OSS project. Marketing is not our job.' Perhaps more /.ers could keep this in mind ..."
People switch off from "commercial" operating systems to *NIX/open source operating systems because it benefits their company in some way. If BeOS can benefit someone more than their current OS, it will find its niche. It has to become unique and offer advantages though, in order to become a player in the OS market today.
It would be a great shame if Open BeOS didn't succeed.
...but there's room on my hard drive.
Alas, Babylon.
I've noticed that Slashdot tends to post articles, like this one, that link to "IRC logs". I'm not familiar with this particular application, but personally, I use AOL Instant Messenger, and so does everyone I know. I think the quality of these stories would be greatly improved if they could be posted in AOL-IM format for "the rest of us" to read. I know that Slashdot was recently picked up by Forbes magazine; now that Slashdot is reaching a wider audience, maybe it's time to accomodate other readers?
Other than that, an excellent technical article. Bravo.
Thanks, and a thump on the head to the people who moderated this as redundant.
I used to be a cynic, then I got disillusioned with it.
You don't have to be a Kreskin to predict BeOS future: BeOS is dying ...oh shit ! It's already dead.
i can haX0r better than donald knuth. me and phreak and joey will take down your gibsonX0rs!!
This is an operating system that hsould be developed even if there isn't "room" in the market for a new OS. Because as it progresses there will be room. As the OS becomes more usable people will make an effort to use it. Linux is a great windows alternative but starting completely over and not building off anything else is something that should really be done with most technology every so often. There is so much progress made in computer science why should we still be building off old systems and code. Build anew and you get a faster sleeker more efficient more reliable OS. This is great news even if it might take 6 years before it has the functionality of current OSes that are offered.
Dan Mayer: my blog, essays, art, etc
So Let me get this stait...
I'm a OSS developer. I'm not doing any marketing.
I'm just holding a Public Q&A Session.
Could you please post this Q&A session to Slashdot
so all of the OSS world knows about what are goals
are?
kthxbye
Sounds like good marketing to me!
Accomodate other readers eh... lets see... what accomodates more people. A plain text document that can be read by pretty much every computer capable of accessing the Internet, or a proprietary binary format that is only viewable by Windows AOHell users... hrmmm.... tough choice.
Seriously, though, I think right now is a key turning point in the platform wars. Simply put: thanks to widely-available and cheap networking and a proliferation of cross-platform applications (even on the desktop, at least until MS decides to pull the plug on Apple), the platform you're running on means less now than ever. That's the point Apple's trying to make in their new advertising campaign. Given that, it might just be that there's room for an OSS desktop.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
What about the OSDN self-serve add service?
But hey, isn't the marketing what we buy anyway? I guess that's why the call it free software.
It's good to BeOS is still kicking around. That OS had great potential for desktop use. Linux is great, but overall I thought BeOS had a better "feel" to it. It was Macish yet PCish. Good for newbies. I hope they can get things working to give even more alternatives in the world of OS's.
"Marketing is not our job"?
Well, that's his perogative, but not necessarily one that will lead to a successful project.
What's the goal of this project? To create a new open source OS that no one uses? If so, marketing is definitely not their job.
But if one of the goals is to create a new open source OS with a strong, active base of users and developers, then marketing MUST be part of the job and project plan.
Marketing goes far beyond advertising for the sake of increasing revenue. Marketing is all of the PR work you do with the development community, IT decision-makers, not to mention the media (including Slashdot).
Too often, open source advocates only associate marketing with profit-making companies, while forgetting that non-profits have marketing people too.
From museums to charitable foundations, the most successful ones are those that can successfully market their 'product' to the world. Open source software is no different.
OSS has grown up in many ways. Because of this, it's time we stopped acting like children and took responsibility. As a group, we decided to adopt restrictive licenses in order to prevent our creations from being used in a manner we did not approve of and we decided that we actually cared who adopted our operating systems, our programs, and we decided that we were going to compete against organizations like Microsoft.
Now you may not have liked those decisions, but as a group, that's where Open Source went.
Down that path lies marketing (including FUD, which we seem to have adopted quite easily), profit (which we still claim to want, even if we debate how it's actually obtained under this model.), and responsibilty (since we presume people will use this O/S to do business.)
If you don't want to take the responsibilty to handle the tasks that aren't fun (such as marketing), please don't complain in a few years that the project died of lack of support and adoption.
No Zen is good zen
As we've seen in OS land of late, your OS needs some serious financial backing to get it off the ground. Even linux was just another hobby OS until the big boys got involved. While I'm a fan of BeOS, it seems like its main target market, media applications, is already well-filled by Apple and Microsoft. They also have the additional hurdle of starting several years behind these other mature OS's. If they can overcome these obstacles, then all the more power to them, but at this point it's an uphill battle. Good luck guys.
Who did what in the where now?
Be all you can be. BeOS.
The few. The proud. The BeOS.
There's a little BeOS in ev-ery-one.
Personally, I'm waiting for C-OS.
As everyone knows, Open Source software is the wave of the future. With the market share of GNU/Linux and *BSD increasing every day, interest in Open Source Software is at an all time high.
Developing software within the Open Source model benefits everyone. People can take your code, improve it and then release it back to the community. This cycle continues and leads to the creation of far more stable software than the 'Closed Source' shops can ever hope to create.
So you're itching to create that Doom 3 killer but don't know where to start? Read on!
2. First Steps
The most important thing that any Open Source project needs is a Sourceforge page. There are tens of thousands of successful Open Source projects on Sourceforge; the support you receive here will be invaluable.
OK, so you've registered your Sourceforge project and set the status to '0: Pre-Thinking About It', what's next?
3. Don't Waste Time!
Now you need to set up your SourceForge homepage. Keep it plain and simple - don't use too many HTML tags, just knock something up in VI. Website editors like FrontPage and DreamWeaver just create bloated eye-candy - you need to get your message to the masses!
4. Ask For Help
Since you probably can't program at all you'll need to try and find some people who think they can. If your project is a game you'll probably need an artist too. Ask for help on your new Sourceforge pages. Here is an example to get you started:
Thousands of talented programmers and artists hang out at Sourceforge ready to devote their time to projects so you should get a team together in no time!5. The A-Team
So now you have your team together you are ready to change your projects status to '1: Pre-Bickering'. You will need to discuss your ideas with your team mates and see what value they can add to the project. You could use an Instant Messaging program like MSN for this, but since you run Linux you'll have to stick to e-mail.
Don't forget that YOU are in charge! If your team doesn't like the idea of giant robotic spiders just delete them from the project and move on. Someone else can fill their place and this is the beauty of Open Source development. The code might end up a bit messy and the graphics inconsistant - but it's still 'Free as in Speech'!
6. Getting Down To It
Now that you've found a team of right thinking people you're ready to start development. Be prepared for some delays though. Programming is a craft and can take years to learn. Your programmer may be a bit rusty but will probably be writing "hello world" programs after school in no time.
Closed Source games like Doom 3 use the graphics card to do all the hard stuff anyhow, so your programmer will just have to get the NVidia 'API' and it will be plain sailing! Giant robot spiders, here we come!
7. The Outcome
So it's been a few years, you still have no files released or in CVS. Your programmer can't get enough time on the PC because his mother won't let him use it after 8pm. Your artist has run off with a Thai She-Male. Your project is still at '1: Pre-Bickering'...
Congratulations! You now have a successful Open Source project on Sourceforge! Pat yourself on the back, think up another idea and do it all again! See how simple it is?
it is a unch of stuff botled on to a linux kernel. Beos was great because of the underlying architecture made it good for audio/video. This will suck, and it will still be vapourware in 5 years time.
If you have trouble reading the one linked off the front page, here's a mirror of the log in HTML.
http://www.kupoflux.com/tmp/beoslog.php
---
I support spreading santorum
"We are an OSS project. Marketing is not our job."
Translation: "No."
It hurts when I pee.
Aren't Freshmeat and Slashdot OSDN sites?
here
The question the guy asked was "What plans have been made to succeed in the areas Be failed in, the marketing, the lack of drivers, and apps? Without these we could be in for a repeat...."
Marketing is not the job of OSS, useable software is. I'm not entirely sure whether Phipps wasn't reading all the way through, or answering little bits, or...
Be didn't die because it was great software, Be died because it couldn't do the job. Or, another way of putting it, you couldn't do the job with Be.
Given that BE is relatively new, and as yet (I would assume) under-developed, what would be the challenges in getting it to work natively using windows drivers? In other words, why re-write every driver for every peice of hardware, when one could change the OS once instead?
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
With quotes like 'We are an OSS project. Marketing is not our job.' it's no wonder why 98% of the public have never heard of BeOS.
That kind of attitude certainly isn't going to get your OS on any desktops, and pretty soon you won't have any job.
**News Flash** Marketing works - especially if you have a solid product like BeOS was. Do you think MicroSoft and AOL would spend the wads of cash on marketing if it didn't work? Hell I'd be willing to guess that 40% or americans think that America(n) Online is the Internet.
While it may not be the developers' job to market BeOS, they need to be more aware that marketing plays an ever-increasing role in the success of any product - including Operating Systems.
There are 01 types of people in this world. Those that understand binary, and me.
Cover up your Open Sores software
http:\\www.opensores.com
I'm positive they'll be taken care of in meta-mod....
Jaysyn
There is a war going on for your mind.
I go to the site, I want screenshots...Is this going to be another AtheOS? Good idea, Be was gonna be the best once upon a time. It had a ways to go, such as being truely multi-user and such.
It was to close to a mac in that regard.
/* oops I accidentally made a comment, sorry */
Actually I did use BeOS at one time..
But while its journalizing system was good..
It lacked other nice functionalities usch as multi-user..which was not added until the ned and other missing features..
ah the OpenSource Market has already spoken.. BeOS is RIP..lets give it a nice rest..
Don't Tread on OpenSource
It seems to me that Linux is and always has been a server and power-user OS. It's become more user friendly in recent years, with the caveat that the ease of use depends heavily on the under-the-hood stuff operating correctly -- my mom will never, ever be able to tweak her kernel or reconfigure an XF86Config file.
Isn't is possible that an OSS-type BeOS is a better option? It provides an environment that is ground-up designed for desktop users. It can still give us all the Good Things that a OSS OS brings (compliance with standards, innate resistance to embrace-and-extend, etc). Why limit ourselves to only running over a specific kernel and using a specific (UN*X) basic paradigm?
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
Errr.... how is this more readable than the original? It looks about the same to me. If you don't like the font on the other page, change your damn fonts. :)
Wheres the results of the naming contest? my suggestion was 'cockinmouthOS'
In other words, this is just another case of programmers indulging in a hobby and not really trying to provide users with a genuine, useful. and usable alternative to Windows.
Either you're helping save users from MS's clutches, or you're helping MS maintain their monopoly. There's no middle ground. Perhaps that's something more /.ers should keep in mind...
Yes. concentrate on the code and ignore the bigger issues at hand. The express lane to success.
-linux... they can't *give* that shit away.
I agree with you -- when I tried BEos (once upon a time), I found it MUCH easier to use than linux. But I guess it comes down to -- which has a better chance of success - taking BE and making developing it to the point where it can compete with windows, or taking Linux and covering up all those under-the-hood traits that have held it back so far.
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
Comment removed based on user account deletion
some people's browsers don't properly handle .log files, and they don't feel like downloading the file... having the text right here helps.
If your heart is in it and it brings you joy, then go ahead. Chances are others will see the love you put into the project and give it a try.
If not, you still learned a lot in the process and quite possibly added to the pool of knowledge and others will still benefit.
"God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
OpenBeOS founder Gene Kan has taken his own life. He was also one of the designers of GNUtella. Very strange. More information availble in this Wired article for all the details. I must say, Drano is one hell of a way to check out.
nuff said
If someone were to start another project to implement the Be API under Windows and Linux, much like X11 runs under Cygwin, maybe more people would begin developing for it because there wouldn't be so many hardware issues to deal with. It would be much easier for the casual programmer to play with without much of a commitment. Once the full OS becomes more mature and drivers become more readily available, people can begin recompiling the apps to the real OS and gaining the performance benefits it brings at that time. I think Amiga is doing something similar.
excuse my naivety, but it just seems as though any new Open Sourced OS will first take developers and users away from Linux (as opposed to Windows or even OS X). This viewpoint is due in large part to seeing Apple's move to lure Linux and Unix developers. Getting Windows users to switch seems like a secondary goal. If Be's got such superior technology, is it possible to integrate their ideas into the Linux development? given that they're considering open source, if their technology was so superior, won't this happen anyway?
Be is dead and gone. Its assets were bought out by Palm earlier this year. BeOS died a horrible death along with the company and is now partially owned by Palm- who won't release it since it doesn't suit their business well. They bought it to get the development team who is now working on PalmOS.
This article is about OpenBeOS, which is currently vaporware. They don't even have a functional kernel yet. They've taken the NewOS kernel and badly maimed it... there aren't many competant kernel hackers on their team.
Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
Is there any evidence that does a damned thing?
There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
Max V.
NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
are you a dumbass?
look at it again. There are NO NAMES, you cant tell whos talking. JESUS.
1. Profiles are little more than eye-candy without permissions to enforce policy on said profiles. Without some sense of multiple users, one user cannot restrict read and/or write access from other users. Even home users have something to gain from little brother not being able to delete big sister's homework. Not to mention keeping users from deleting or changing key system files.
2. The multi-user paradigm allows services to run as other than "root." One of the big weaknesses of most home flavors of Windows is that a compromise in any program is a "root" level compromise. I feel much more confident knowing that if a back door happens to be in my irc client that my exposure is limited to my personal files. Losing data sucks. Having to reinstall the OS sucks worse.
Regards,
-l
Don't forget, however, that at the moment there is nothing to market. Right now OpenBeOS is vaporware. There's no functional kernel (there's a derivative of the NewOS kernel in the works but few competant kernel hackers on the OBOS team), little networking code, no window manager or graphics subsystem, only a somewhat functional file system driver, etc. etc. etc.
IF the project ever gets anywhere significant, it's going to be years from now.
Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
YATBIDT (yet another trite BSD is dying troll)...
... the alternative, WinCE, would make me slit my wrists, or join the ranks of the unwashed minions of the Dark Side...
who cares?
NetBSD works great on my MIPS laptop
i rather have a dead BSD on my computer than the latest POS software from the software monopoly...
Still not perfect, but much better:
:)
:) :)
;-)
:) so, Private message me away, I'm waiting :) :-) Someone, ask something! :) /msg captcpu Your question here :-) :-) While I first said, no, I have to say that it feels like we are giving birth. ;-)
;-)
;-)
;-) I don't see anything in our way to having driver level compatability. No bus_manager compatability, though.
;-)
;-)
:) but wait..there's more...
:-)
:) and I've agreed to help as I can :) besides that I'm a pretty normal guy.. I think..
:-) Honestly, I haven't heard from RobMed in months. GK is one of the items on the list for the poor unfortunate soul who signed on to be the "C++ code finisher".
;-) select will depend on the new kernel it's not properly fixable on R5. The networking stack, as it is today, runs as a kernel module. Is this BONE like? No. BONE had it truly built in, I think (I wasn't on the beta list). The select issue is very easy, with source code. The OBOS kernel will handle select right, out of the gate. It remains to be seen if our networking stack will work properly with R5's kernel's select. I doubt it.
;)
;-) Few, honestly. We are an OSS project. Marketing is not our job. I expect that OBOS will have a "RedHat". Some company to come along, package our source with a dozen CDs of apps and sell them. Driver wise, we are helping and supporting anyone who is interested in writing them. Scott is doing an awesome job at BeDriver, and BU is working in that area, as well. I am hoping that with the shrinking of the hardware market, there will be fewer drivers to write.
;-) API wise, I haven't hear a whole lot. Any proposals, thoughts, ideas go to Glass Elevator.
:-) It all depends on what you mean. ;-) For example - If you mean "I want to log in and have my own email settings, home dir, etc", then that is an R2 thing. If you mean "I want OBOS to be just like my Linux box where I can have all of my 1337 friends log in and download warez", than no.
;-) Seriously, though, folks. One way is to volunteer at some of the other BeOS groups. Many of them are always looking for *GOOD* help. Translators can always mirror and translate our site (or others). Being helpful in the community. Being on IRC and answering questions. And also doing testing. We are (slowly) getting toward another release. We would like more people testing and looking at things.
.....and if so, what tools are being used to documen<El-Al> Is anybody working on OBOS API documentation? sorry abou the repeat there at the end :)
:-) Nice. Localization (which we touched on briefly above) is an issue for R2+. I know how important it is to you. But it really should be done right. And that means when we have the time and freedom to do it the Right Way.
;-)
;-)
:-) I put BeIDE in the same catagory as a number of other apps (browsers, mail clients, etc) - every distro should have one. But they are not necessarily the realm of the OS group.
:)
:^) :-) I just got some mail about this, actually. Hopefully, we will have an annoucement of where the name issue is going soon... Folks - this has been a lot of fun. I appreciate you all taking time out to come here. I do have to go, though.
<Captcpu> and now.. we are starting.
<mphipps> So I want to ask any people in the north americas to let the Europeans ask questions first. Just to be nice.
<Captcpu> good evening everyone, I'm Captcpu and I'll be you're moderator this evening
<Captcpu> and that's mike if you didn't know
<mphipps> Hi! Even though we are starting early, I will stay until 8 (my time) unless we run out of questions.
<Captcpu> the way tonight's chat is going to work is, you can private message me your questions, and I'll foward them to mike
<mphipps> What if we threw a war and no one showed up?
<Captcpu> we'd be in trouble
<Captcpu> it's simple
<mphipps> monolith - no estoy embarrazada.
<Captcpu> Hey Mike, Monolith would like to know if you're with child.
<mphipps> Monolith asked if I was pregnant.
<Captcpu> <lillo> first Q: is someone already working on the kernel VM? It seems like a very urgent task to be completed before other things can be touched...
<mphipps> Yes. Next question.
<Captcpu> <Matzon> Since newos is nowhere complete, why did we fork this soon? is he willing to divulge any rough specifications on what the VM will and will not support? ie. integrated VM/FS cache and/or mmap/munmap?
<mphipps> Good question. I am wondering that myself.
<Captcpu> and to add to it, he has to say... <Matzon> Why rename all newos methods to be BeOS compatible (thus making obos kernel undiffable with newos), when we could have provided an abstraction layer?
<mphipps> Truth is, Travis et al have a lot going on in their lives and they haven't been making major changes to NewOS. If you go back even 4 months or so, there weren't a lot of check ins. And we are getting to the point where we need to spread our wings and fly.
<Captcpu> here's our next question from <BlueOS> When do you join B.E.OS? and a secondary more serious question: <BlueOS> What about binary compatibilty in the driver side?
<mphipps> As for the second part, we are doing the easy stuff ATM. There are bigger changes to be made that will make the question irrelevant. BlueOS - when will you join us?
<Captcpu> here's another one mike... <AnEvilYak> is he willing to divulge any rough specifications on what the VM will and will not support? ie. integrated VM/FS cache and/or mmap/munmap?
<mphipps> Yes to both of those features. I would not want to ship without. At least, that is the plan ATM.
<Captcpu> Here's a nice one from: <mwilber> Why did you decide to start the OpenBeOS project?
<mphipps> Insanity.
<Captcpu> good answer
<mphipps> Seriously - I had a project that I have been working on for years on BeOS. The short version of the story is that it is an object oriented paradigm in which every class is a process and every instance is a thread. It needs hyper fast messaging and process/thread swapping. No other OS will do that. Even R5 wasn't the best. So, when the Palm announcement was made, I looked at Linux and the BSD's, but none of them were as fast and as easy to use. So I decided that BeOS must continue on.
<Captcpu> here's an interesting one from: <shatty> the new font engine is going to be freetype right? when can we expect things to reach the stage where that is working? it's part of app_server, so we need to wait for app_server don't we?
<mphipps> The font engine is indeed going to be freetype. Proto 6 is in development right now. I don't think that font handling is in it, though.
<Captcpu> Here's one: <macdonag79> Why are people writing custom versions of basic CLI tools when they could be obtained from, eg, *BSD?
<mphipps> Good question. Many of those custom CLI apps are little tiny things to help us develop. I doubt that they will be part of the final "release". But since we don't have bash, et al, yet, some little things to help us work and test make sense. The whole shell is scheduled to go out the door.
<Captcpu> <elver> How is the name choosing going? Will we stick with OpenBeOS (unlikely) or do we have a list of possible names already?
<mphipps> We have been cutting the list of names down. Many that we submitted were not usable for one reason or another. It hasn't been our top priority, but it is getting there.
<Captcpu> Here's an interesting one: <linn> question: who are you? you = captcpu. may I answer Mike?
<mphipps> sure
<Captcpu> I'm a web developer and college student from Las Vegas. I'm Kurtis Kopf's Business Partner in real life, the guy that's designing the new website for Open-Beos
<Captcpu> Someone (forgive me for forgetting your name) wanted to know about the Game Kit, what's the status?
<mphipps> Game Kit. Ahh. The poor, misbegotten step child.
<Captcpu> Here's one: <Matzon> I read a review of TuneTracker, wherein Dane Scott mentioned that obos would have a first release this year - ofcourse he is only speculating... but what is our (roughly) timeframe?
<mphipps> Sigh. So many ways to answer this. There is the Commodore answer "when it is done". There is the Microsoft answer "Q3, 2002". There is the real answer... I very strongly feel that we could finish this by the end of 2002. It will mean some long nights and hard work. But I think that it could happen. What would it take? Some more *REAL* help. Some people willing to really dig in, grab some piece of work and ride it until it is done.
<Captcpu> Ooooh.. question about networking: <z3r0_one> Question: I've seen recently that the network stack is being moved into the kernel (if it hasn't already been done), and that sockets will be file descriptors. Does this mean that the net team borrowing ideas from BONE, and trying to recreate it? Has the problem with select been fixed yet?
<mphipps> Where is David when I need him?
<Captcpu> Here's we go...
<Captcpu> <DragonSoull> 1. I've heard requests to make server applications like mySQL run in OBOS. Are you doing any work in that direction? And if so don't you think that's outside of the "Desktop OS" focus of the original BeOS?
<mphipps> *Excellent question*.
<Captcpu> I figured
<mphipps> mySQL would certainly be required on a server. But I can see, too, where it would be cool to have it on a client. For developers, for one thing. So I don't think that doing some small amount of work to make mySQL work is a bad thing. But that is different from major work or porting it ourselves. I ***STRONGLY*** believe in the focus on the desktop. BeOS wasn't, isn't and shouldn't be a server OS. Does that mean we shouldn't be able to run ftpd? No. But the *FOCUS* is on the desktop.
<Captcpu> Here's an innocent question: <x-gh0st> Will R1 support localization or is this feature reserved for R2?
<mphipps> R2. Localization is *VERY* important. And it *has* to be done right. And it really needs a whole ball of other features, like GUI with a layout engine.
<Captcpu> and now we have hit the 19:00 hour. Oficially starting =) <M_BeOS> can i ask, 'What plans have been made to succeed in the areas Be failed in, the marketing, the lack of drivers, and apps? Without these we could be in for a repeat....'
<mphipps> That is probably an FAQ.
<Captcpu> Here's one from: <coolbear> What are the GUI Interface plans for after version 1.x, are they in consideration now? I have some proposals, where should I send them, and in what format?
<mphipps> Yes, we are thinking about a number of things.
<Captcpu> " <coolbear> I refer to API and features. "
<mphipps> There are a few proposals out there, now, for new looks and feels. I have certainly heard about Gonx enough times.
<Captcpu> here's a long one from: <misza> Do you agree that it would be better to clone the current UI (Yellow Tabs, same functions like double click a tab minimize it) and implement all those functions exactly, and provide an interface to skin the UI(e.g change position of buttons, implement light skinning) having the current UI as the default one because that is familiar to alot of users, Rather than to create an entirely different UI that may be infl
<mphipps> For R1, there is no promise of skinning. The only "promised" feature is that it will look like and work like it does today.
<Captcpu> Here's a good one from: <AlienSoldier> As to help the community and OBOS in itself, does the OBOS team will suggest a line of hardware so that futur buying streamline the community to have easier driver transition in the first release R1.
<mphipps> Sigh. ATM, this is a tough one. We have the Matrox driver "in the bag", so for video, that is my only promise. If the kernel boots on it today, it is likely that it will tomorrow, too. As for other stuff (networking, sound, etc), we can't really say. If current R5 supports it, esp if the driver is publically available (i.e. source), we probably will, too.
<Captcpu> and now <sdrsolo> states "Out of the 214 listed programmers how many are contributing?"
<mphipps> Not enough. In fact, we are reworking the web site to make it more representitive of those contributing. Let's put it this way - there are 32 people with CVS write access. And none of the team leaders are beating me up because they have to submit so many patches. OBOS is still a place where *1* person can make a huge difference.
<Captcpu> and... <mwilber> have you been contacted by any corporate/government/educational organizations that are interested in OpenBeOS?
<mphipps> Yes. A few corporate. And we are working with those.
<Captcpu> this reminds me. there. that fixes that. anyway.. here's one from: <z3r0_one> Question: Another tough one: Is true multiuser support in the future of OpenBeOS?
<mphipps> Nice.
<Captcpu> Here's a good one: <M_BeOS> I can't program, and neither can many of us... How can we help on other ways?
<mphipps> Just like a kid at camp. Send money.
<Captcpu> Here's one from the Dark Side of the Mac: <mdvb747> Are there any plans for a PPC version of OBOS?
<mphipps> When Steve Jobs calls me and asks for one. Seriously, though - I love PPC. I *want* to give my Mom an iMac and have it run OBOS. The question is time and resources. I can't justify dropping VM or other "generic" work for a port to a platform that doesn't really want us. If someone wants to do it, I am more than open to helping in any way. But I can't justify "assigning" people to it.
<Captcpu> and an interesting question from: <miloshe> When can we expect USB support and a nice media player?
<mphipps> USB - Hopefully with R1. I have a good USB book and I have done some preliminary work on it. "Nice Media Player" is somewhat vague. I would have to ask what is wrong with R5's.
<Captcpu> <El-Al> Is anybody working on OBOS API documentation? <El-Al>
<mphipps> OBOS API documentation has a team, yes. What tools? Not 100% sure. We are using doxygen inside the code.
<Captcpu> Here's one from down under: <SmallStepForMan> Well, OBOS has been going for just over 9 months now. How do you look back on the last 9 months, and is it according to expactations, subpar or way beyond expectations. BTW - good morning from Australia
<mphipps> G'Day to you! The last 9 months have been unimaginable. I had no clue what I was in for. None of us did. It has been a fun trip, though. My only regrets are a) that I can't do it full time and b) the price that my family (and others) have paid.
<Captcpu> and from: <el_d00d> Will there be localized versions of OBOS, and can some of us help translating OBOS?
<mphipps> el d00d, huh?
<Captcpu> Mike, Monolith has informed us that our spanish sucks.
<mphipps> I didn't make that one up.
<Captcpu> but.. onto the next question: <grim> How's progress with the change of team structure going? Are the leads working on todo-list-type pages? IMO, it would need to be pretty fine grained to allow people to pick up a smallish task, work on it, submit it and be happy:-) Rather than TODO: Finish the kernel...
<mphipps> The team structure didn't really change all that much. Adding people to the teams changed. And that went pretty quick. Some TODO lists are done. Some need more work. If you want to work in an area and can't find the todo list, ask the team lead. They will help you. And if they don't have one, they will get sick of people asking...
<Captcpu> Here's a long winded one: <lillo> currently there's a debate on wheter obos should be fully graphical or if it should have a text console as well just in case. It's sure that the second would be useful during kernel development, but it'd break the BeOS phylosophy... What's your opinion?
<mphipps> This is in reference, I think, to a conversation that we were having on the kernel list. For the average user, I think that the system should be just as it is today. I can see some value to a boot disk that is text based. For either emergencies or as a "download this, see what hardware it detects". But not for users to use every day.
<Captcpu> <M_BeOS> Are we going to have humorous API call's just like Be did?
<mphipps> I won't dictate that, either way. I certainly intend to extend the "is_computer_on" series in the kernel.
<Captcpu> here's one from: <Deris> Will there be a new OBOS update that will replace certain things (like apps and preferences)
<mphipps> I think that this is asking about an automatic update. Personally, I like that idea very much. I know that there has been a lot of interest in the community about that. I would love for someone to write such a thing. Can't promise that it will be us.
<Captcpu> Programming, Oh my!: <mmu_man> What about a BeIDE replacement ? (I suggest XEmacs >:-)
<mphipps> E$*#()#*Q)(? Begone you heathen dog! There is aught but one True Editor: VI!
<Captcpu> <mene> Will opentracker be moved into OpenBeOS CVS..and developed under OpenBeOS name?
<mphipps> I doubt it. That would "cut off" other groups that might want to use it.
<Captcpu> here's one: <scanty> What can we expect from the OBOS POSIX-layer ?
<mphipps> Hopefully, functionality. I would *love* to see it work as well as R5, plus mmap and select.
<Captcpu> cute. fuzzy. animals? <elver> Linux has Tux, BSD has their cute little demon. Should OpenBeOS have it's own cute animal? If so, what should it be?
<mphipps> OpenBeOS will not have a cute animal. Whether some other, different name has one or not is up in the air. The admin staff is about 50/50 split on whether it is a good idea or not. It would have to be a good one.
<Captcpu> <Zaranthos> Question for mphipps How much time do you spend on OBOS? Do you work full time and then work on OBOS?
<mphipps> About every waking minute. I do indeed have a full time job. (And a wife and 2 kids). I work on OBOS an average of 4 hours a day.
<Captcpu> Packages? for Me?: <RageMax> are there any plans for a _standard_ package format for program distribution, possibly for R2?
<mphipps> Plans? No. This is a veyr good idea. And I think that it ties in to the installer/updater mentioned earlier. (Pardon my dyslexia).
<Captcpu> Cash? Money?: <earlcp> How configurable will the VM and DiskCache be for users? Example I would love to devote 512K to just the DiskCache.
<mphipps> Ideally, not at all. Very briefly, the ideal VM/cache system would need no tuning and would always have the information you want to access in ram. I know that we won't be *ideal*, but very good would be nice. I would like to think that mundane details like disk cache and VM size would be something that the OS could handle on its own.
<Captcpu> <Der.is> Will you release a commercial version of OBOS (for companies), so that you can afford OBOS-update servers or such? <Deris> =) sorry!
<mphipps> I think that the question here is really "How will you afford to run OBOS without any money?" Part of the answer is that we will cross that bridge when we come to it. Part of the answer is that I am hoping that distro makers see good reason to "give back to the community".
<Captcpu> <elver> What about firewalls? Do people have to code their own firewalling software (like in windows 9x) or will the firewalling be built into the kernel or the net_server? (more like Linux)
<mphipps> When you say firewall, you could mean a couple of things. BeOS, by default, had all of the ports closed. Now, I am not a security guru, but that seems very secure to me.
<Captcpu> <monolith> does he aim to try and get market share in the desktop arena, taking from MS, or does he plan on creating the best possible OS, with no compromises made for the less technologically-capable folks that make up the general public?
<mphipps> This is really a marketing question. Think about Linux for a moment. We are more like Linux (the organization) than Be. I am not here to change the world, necessarily. I am not here to sell N boxes per year. I am here to make an OS that I want to run and that you want to run. But I also want to make it work for my Mom (a non-techie). I don't believe that these two things are mutually exclusibe.(exclusive)
<Captcpu> and now.. for the last question for this session.
<Captcpu> <Zaranthos> Is there a timetable for an official OBOS name so we can start grabbing up domain names?
<mphipps> I am assuming you mean "to help out the project".
<Captcpu> I would also like to express the many private messages I've recieved thanking Mike and his team for all the hard work they have put in.
<mphipps> I think that we will probably do this either weekly or every other week. We will get the logs posted shortly... Bye, all! Thanks again!
<Captcpu> And that ladies and gentleman is the end of the session. Thanks for Attending!
is there any news at all on what Palm will do with BeOS?
i wonder how much BeOS will influence the PalmOS.
i seems a shame that such a good OS should die like this. i applaud OpenBeOS for their work at "reviving" what once was, even if it is stil linux.
I want 2D games back.
I suppose in a world where people spend a lot of time writing PDP-10 and game console emulators, another nostaliga-driven software effort won't matter much. But just imagine if all that effort were directed towards doing something new and original: coming up with new kinds of user interaction, figuring out entirely new ways of organizing kernels, rethinking the way kernels are implemented.
If it has to be a clone of a system that has been done before, why not clone and create a better implementation of something that differs more from what we already have than BeOS?
It makes perfect sense to reinvent the wheel again. It is totally obvious that we need another completely new operating system. The other ones certainly are not suffering due to lack of time, money, resources, or talent. Let's put another small group of talented people together to work on another splinter of the open source world. Let's not team more people up to work together to build something which has a chance at gaining/taking market share from a proprietary solution. Hazzah! A completely new effort is a brilliant solution!
Check out our infosecurity industry blog: http://securitymusings.com/
There is nothing to market. OpenBeOS is vaporware right now. There's very little done besides a lot of talk.
For instance: The kernel is a fork of the NewOS kernel, which is far from complete itself and there are few if any competant kernel hackers on the OBOS team. Also, fork has been changed so much (mostly superficial changes) by the few developers who are working on it, that changes to the NewOS kernel will not easily port to the OBOS fork.
Also, very little else of the OS has even been seriously started on. Check out the OpenBeOS website and see their progress indicators.
I'm not saying that the project will go nowhere (that's only my personal opinion), only that if it does it will be years before anything of significance is realized.
Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
Hopefully the person who meta-moderates this will spack the fool/idiot who modded it up with a +1.
Rereading that it struck me; Dustin Hoffman drove an Alfa-Romeo boat-tailed Spyder across the Golden Gate Bridge, not an MGB.
This is why Open Source isnt taken seriously by many real companies -- many of the majorly hyped projects take this type of opinion towards marketing, "not our job". The fact is, it should be if you want your product to be used, open source or not.
Marketing does not need to mean advertising. I believe for Open Source projects, they need to use marketing as a way to define needs of the market (or the wants of the users), and goals of the project. As well as a way to present the product to the end user/customer.
How can you develop something for which you do not understand its requirements, nor its goals? Just because it is open source, and a voulenteer effort, does not mean its a good idea to attack the project blind from 2 sides!
then you are either a fool or a liar. Riddle me this Batman - when IIS was determined to be faster than Apache/Linux, why was the linux kernal changed to allow it to serve pages faster? It was changed because Linux is competing against M$, and on the server market is where they are initially trying to compete.
With MS basically looking to try and force people into XP, I've been wondering what I'm going to recommend to these people. OS-X is a definate possibility, but apple hardware is rather expensive. And I'm not exactly a huge fan of the way apple handles things either. They are not exactly a model company either.
Honestly, I've never gotten a chance to use BeOS. I really wanted to give it a whirl, but it went under before I got a chance. From what I saw though, I think it might fit into that space very well, if they can get enough apps. (Binary support for other free OS's would be good there. Not sure how feasible that is though in this case.)
Regardless, they aren't a company. They have no need to prove market or profitability. If they want to do it, that's all that really matters. There's no need to justify your itch before you can scratch it.
"No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare."
--James Madison
Can someone explain me why they didn't go with the Linux kernel?
Is there a specific performance/design/... issue that is unsurmountable with Linux?
You better have a bloody good reason to redo the kernel, when you could for instance use the time to create a really good user interface or something.
Time is always limited. For everyone.
Seems to me that the upcomming GNU Hurd of servers, which
gives the users more freedom in user space while maintaining
networking security, opens up a whole new door of user interface
options, including "Smart User Interfaces"
The key to this is how the Hurd using IPC (inner process communication)
and how this can be tapped into in the user space and network
functionality so as to hook a "Smart User Interface" up.
Smart User interface = along the lines of the difference between a dumb
terminal and a smart terminal, where the Smart User Interface is it's own
Operating System yet able to use the resources and security of the Hurd
for number crunching functionality and external firewalled access.
I think even a project like the OSS AMIGA like project AROS would be
very useful here as user accessible IPC had pretty much been made a
standard on the Amiga - and follows in the AROS project
It would be nice to see the guys at OpenBeOS succeed and I am certain that to one degree or another they will. That seems to be the thing with OSS projects. So long as there is one guy still popping away at it the thing isn't dead and there always seems to be a chance that it might ignite.
BeOS had some real neat things going for it and it was sad to see it die like that. Not unexpected, just sad. I don't think I've ever seen a better example of an OS being the right thing at the wrong time. At every turn BeOS was just a little bit off but really impressive while doing it.
Still I wonder if it won't continue, albeit in it's new OSS life, being a tad late every step of the way. OSX is UNIX in a desktop package that kicks butt and Linux is getting it's act together on the desktop at a much faster pace than ever before. Even if they get it where they want to be where will OSX, Linux, and even Windows be by then? And who outside of some interested people involved in the project and us reading about it on slashdot will care?
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
I don't think getting that market share away from Microsoft is really their focus. They're doing what they want to and that's completely cool. No one is going to work on the "sanctioned" project for stopping "MS World Domination" (copyright Microsoft Corp. all rights reserved)who doesn't want to.
It's just not how this system works. The point though is that it does work.
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
"You are in the court of world opinion." Pretending otherwise is only fooling yourself.
You ARE in marketing just by being a part of open source.
Why just stop at linux? There surely must be room for as many OS as there are tastes? I like linux very much but it has to much layering to be efficient at the desktop. BeOS is the fastest OS ive ever seen. It was built with the desktop in mind from start. Thats something you cant say about iether windows nor *nix. Im not dissing linux, it has its clear advantages but also some disadvantages that follows with the old heritage from unix. BeOS has a future especially for graphics and games. Think of it as macos for the PC platform.
HTTP/1.1 400
If you want to see it in action, go to www.Centiare.com. If you have any tech questions, send me a private reply at karln@centiare.com. Oh, before I forget:
So, my wife wants to know why I think advertising on the Internet would be a good idea. But first, I should probably explain the family dynamic: she's an Ivy League grad and attorney while I have a UC degree and CPA certificate. Usually, she's the one who is right, so I figure I should probably listen (as if I have a choice).
I figure it makes pretty good economic sense, since many different sites with low CPM rates still get over a million page views per day. Problem is, she replies, there's probably only around 150-200k unique visitors at any of these respective locations, each of whom is triggering around 5-7 page views per person per day.
And besides, she continued, using the Jungean Archetype model to illustrate her point, the target audience is devoted to reason, not emotion. This, I concede, defeats one of my central tenets: applying a test to determine whether a person is Apollonian or Dionysian, left-brain or right-brain, etc. in order to assess the likelihood of downloading Centiare, my cool little cash management/forecasting program for individuals and small businesses.
Centiare quickly and automatically calendarizes projected deposits, payments and running cash balances over any time period selected - the output looks like a spreadsheet. But since transactions are stored in a database, the way it works is through a series of SQL pivot/transformation functions. The results are stored within multiple counter arrays to keep track of time periods, monthly totals, and grand totals. Once the recordset is complete, viola', the whole thing is formatted and printed - the flash report looks really good.
And besides, it's free to try, and only $20 to buy!
To be continued ...Centiare
Im sure that if the intent of the coders was, in fact, to produce an OS that could rival Microsoft, they probably would have teamed up with some of the already existing Linux projects. They could be helping with KDE, GNOME, or kernel dev. However, producing the M$ killer is obviously not their intent. They are just working on a project that they are interested in and are just saying hey, if you wanna use it, use it, if you don't, thats fine. In my opinion, it is best that these hackers stay out of the OS war so they can focus on producing a fine product/program. The consumer (user) will fight the wars through the final decision they make over which of these choices will be running on their desktop.
You're right! No middle ground! I hereby call for a boycott of OpenBeOS! While we're at it, let's boycott Sourceforge; there are clearly too many software projects there that aren't meant to compete directly with Microsoft products! All those projects born of niche necessity or pure personal enjoyment... all those programmers indulging in their hobbies... it makes me sick!
What Open Source Zealots Don't Get
.doc file. I'm continually annoyed myself by people who send HTML mail, never mind the lunatics who use Microsoft Word as their text editor in Microsoft Outlook. Email is much more efficient as plain text. If Stallman had positioned his screed as "use the right tool for the right audience in the right medium" I would have been totally on board with him.
.doc format. It's a lofty and valuable goal. But until the day when Stallman or someone else can figure out a way to get open source developers to scratch someone else's itch with the same fervor and quality with which they scratch their own, it's just not a realistic goal.
The News Forge editorial, We can put an end to Word attachments [link via Camworld], by Richard Stallman of the Free Software Foundation, illustrates perfectly why the free software/open source movement is never going to penetrate the mainstream consumer consciousness.
Caveat: I like open source software. I like the concept and I support it. What I dislike is the zealotry of hardcore open source/free software advocates, like Stallman, and their total disregard for how consumers view and use software. These zealots are stuck in a dogma that is constructed from the viewpoint of someone who develops software, not from the viewpoint of consumers who use software for reasons other than developing more software (which constitute the vast majority). The zealots of open source/free software present the movesment as serving manking, but in fact they have an overwhelming tendency to ignore the needs of any user not like themselves. This essay isn't an anti-open source rant, nor is it flag-waving support of Microsoft's monopolistic practices. It is intended to be a pragmatic look at why open source hasn't lived up to the hype.
Stallman's point in his editorial is that people shouldn't send Word attachments via email. Much of Stallman's rhetoric is justifiable. In fact, I think it's not only counter-productive, but rude, to send Word attachments to people who use open source software incapable of reading a
However, much of Stallman's rhetoric is the usual open source/free software wheel-spinning that shows little consideration for or understanding of the vast majority of computer users. This part of the second paragraph sticks out:
Most computer users use Microsoft Word. That is unfortunate for them, because Word is proprietary software, denying its users the freedom to study, change, copy, and redistribute it.
There are all kinds of problems with Stallman's rhetoric, but this is the most glaring and is the ultimate of example of What "Open Source Zealots Don't Get." Here's the underlying concept that the open source movement has continually failed to understand. Ready? Here it is:
Most computer users don't give a crap about studying or changing software.
Get it? 99.985% of Microsoft Word users have absolutely no desire to view -- never mind modify -- the source code of Word. Why would they? They don't know how to code! Nor do they want to learn! It's like asking them to re-design the shovel to make it more appropriate to their needs. Hey, sure maybe 0.015% of shovel-users customize their shovels, but most people use the tool off-the-shelf, as is.
Stallman is right that people would like to freely copy and distribute software, but this is where we run up against the dirty secret of open source: open source developers like to scratch their own itch. And, unfortunately, that attitude doesn't jive with creating consumer applications, so those consumer needs get left up to businesses that need to make money off their product to exist.
Open source developers tend to work on projects that solve their own problems (which usually revolve around building software and working with others who build software). That's why we have great open source operating systems, web servers, compilers, etc., but are severely lacking in open source office suites, graphics and design tools, games, etc. Independent open source developers don't come together to develop those kind of applications like they do to develop web servers, compilers, and databases because developers typically don't have a desperate need for those kinds of apps. No itch, so why scratch?
Yes, I know there are some alternatives out there (primarily because the zealots have this mistaken idea that Linux will compete with Windows and Macintosh for the consumer desktop). I know about KOffice, AbiWord, GNOME Office, OpenOffice, and Sun Microsystems StarOffice.The only competitive contender on that list is StarOffice, which, of course, started as a proprietary application. Sun Microsystem's CEO, Steve McNeally, acquired StarOffice and open sourced it purely to attempt to spite Microsoft; Bill Gates just laughed. The Gimp is a fine graphics program, but it doesn't measure up (especially running under Windows) to Adobe Photoshop, or even Jasc Paint Shop Pro. And where are the competitive open source competitors for Adobe's Illustrator, ImageReady, PageMaker, InDesign, Premier, AfterEffects, etc.? What open source app would professionals choose over Macromedia Dreamweaver, Fireworks, Freehand, Flash, Shockwave, Director, Authorware, etc? Answer: they don't exist.
Open source developers don't care enough about those applications to develop them, and they sure don't care enough to develop them for the non-open source platforms (e.g. Windows, Mac) that most of the world uses. The bottom line is...well, the bottom line. If consumers want these kinds of tools that are of interest to consumers, but not of use to the geeks who know programming languages, then the consumers are either going to have to learn to code themselves (ain't gonna happen; we all have other careers) or the consumer will need to pay to have someone else develop them.
The demands for these consumer apps gets filled by corporations who exercise proprietary control over their intellectual property in order to recoup the development costs, because the companies have to hire developers to scratch someone else's itch. And that proprietary control means patents and copyrights1, because to make money off a product you must, repeat MUST, control reproduction and redistribution. And businesses are about making money.
If anyone had been able to demonstrate a competitive, scalable business model for a company that develops open source software, then I might get on board. But even RedHat, the open source developer with probably the most solid foundation and best shot, is still hemorrhaging money. Developing open source software works as a hobby; so far no one has been able to make developing open source software work as a business.
A bunch of developers might come together to develop a super open source web server like Apache to solve their own problems, but they don't get the same personal satisfaction from developing, for example, an open source consumer desktop publishing application or a GUI desktop -- witness the struggle to get KDE and GNOME to some usable point, and remember that Eazel tanked. Problems like those that have plagued the attempt to put an open source GUI on the Linux operating system illustrate another problem with open source: too many cooks in the kitchen screw up the menus. (Oooh. Pun!)
Choice is sometimes counterproductive to usefulness, and usefulness is paramount for a consumer application. This is where "network externalities" -- the economy of increasing returns -- comes into play. If ACME Industries makes ACME WonderSoap, the soap doesn't become more useful to the consumer (e.g. it doesn't clean your armpits better) if more people use it. That might be better for ACME, but my armpit gets just as fresh whether ten thousand or ten million people use ACME WonderSoap. Not so with software. If ACME industries makes a word processor, ACME WonderWord, then ACME WonderWord is much more valuable to me if ten million people use it as opposed to ten thousand, because we're all using the same tool. The best illustration of the concept of an economy of increasing returns is the Microsoft monopoly. People won't switch to Linux and StarOffice, because everyone else in their workplace or community is using Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office. In a networked environment where you have to share your output and input, life is more difficult if you're not using the same tool. This is where the open source approach shoots itself in the knew -- every Microsoft Windows XP desktop works the same, but if I want to get my officemate to help me with something, and I'm running GNOME and StarOffice and he's using KDE and KOffice, then we might as well be working on Windows and Macintosh. There's no increasing returns, when there's no consistency.
The open source response to that is "it's not the tool, it's the standard." If every tool adhered to an open standard, then they'd all work together. Which is basically Stallman's point -- use text or HTML instead of the proprietary Word
1I think copyright is an idea that has run it's course, but we're not at the point yet where it can be tossed out the window. And the little known fact is that Stallman has to support copyright, even if he won't announce it very loudly, because the GNU General Public License is founded on copyright. Putting software in the public domain doesn't satisfy Stallman's zealotry because someone can still use public domain software as the foundation or part of proprietary software. Instead, Stallman advocates copyleft, whereby instead of relinquishing copyright, the software developer retains copyright and licenses the software and source code under the condition that any changes or modifications also be licensed under the same restrictions. It's admirably clever, but I think Stallman ought to be as concerned as the RIAA about copyright. If copyright unravels, so does the GPL. [back]
What they mean with marketing not being their job is that marketing will be taken care of by others. Namely BeUnited as far as I've understood. So it's not like they don't care for marketing.
OK, maybe these guys don't like the work marketing, but how about promotion? A different slant on the same topic... Big boys do a pretty good job at demonstrating how to do things thir way (take Apple, for example)... So maybe BeOS should put some sucess stories, how to do things BeOS way, what tools are available for this or that, and if there isn't one, then write the damn thing... If you want to create a successful OS, then measure yourself against predetermined standards, for godsakes!!! I would like to believe that is what we are doing in GNU/Linux worldmaty least (or am I wrong?).... just my 2c....
I hate to ask a question on /. that my be heresy or brilliance or both:
Simply put, BeOS was an excellent operating system, but OBOS may (or may not) fall under some of the axes that fell on BeOS.
Boot Loader: Acceptance by OEM's I take it is not a concern, but should be in the mind of the developers, just in case.
OSS: Attracting developers did not seem to be a problem, but because of the politics involved with some binary compatability with OSS, there were *drivers* for hardware that were rejected because BeOS was closed. (don't pshaw, that is why you could not get anything beyond a 3com 905 to work despite drivers being written...I ran into that problem)
Not a fun place to be, you know the OS and hardware will work, but the person who wrote it gets smacked down. Grrrr.
The "B" in BeOS/OBOS: perhaps the B shoud be for BSD, that way the above OSS conundrum does not present itself. Think about it: forks and usage of the source w/o giving back are welcomed and would avoid the "show your source or piss off" problem.
This, I think, would also round out the BSD family (Open/Net/Free) with a Multimedia (crus of BeOS) quite nicely if the developers did decide to use BSD. (and this coming from a Slackware, and slight Redhat, fan).
Interesting that I found myself getting excited, but after the first round of being wowed and then let down when Be dropped BeOS, well, "once bitten, twice shy..."
.
Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
--An OS that is designed from the ground up to be VOICE ACTIVATED AND RUN. Not an OS with 'apps that run by voice badly", the actual kernel level, built in, from the gitgo, with that in mind, and etc.
THAT OS would r001!
what these guys are doing is REALLY re-inventing the wheel as a hobby, and I'm sure as they don't care about marketing, the landlord and grocer sure will.
This effort is beyond a waste of time.
That could mean it's vaporware, but past due? OpenBeOS hasn't made ANY release date promises, so how can it be past due and past a release date? They're recreating an entire OS from the ground up (and technicallly up to the ground). That's years of work. (Their goal is an R5 clone, so they have roughly seven years of work to do, I'm sure they'll move faster than that since they're not innovating it yet but you get the idea.)
Can you still get BeOS Professional? I checked out www.gobe.com but it seems they are out of stock.
http://www.gobe.com/
http://www.gobe.com/
Just to be picky: GeForce Ti 4600 = $300.00 or more. Windows XP corporate workstation $300.00. As you approach top of the line hardware, windows liscenses become a smaller fraction of the total cost. However, if you were to measure the cost of all software installed on a typical windows system it would likely dwarf the cost of the hardware. That statement may be less accurate for high-end Windows "advanced servers" like those pooped out by HP, Dell and IBM, but I do know the applications those servers usually run are priced in the thousands and ten-thousands (perhaps even hundred-thousands) of dollars (think Oracle or DB2 on a 16-node Windows 2000 advanced server with multiple TB SAN array).
While normally marketing involves a producer attempting to convince a consumer to either purchase or flat-out use what they have created, it's a different situation when it comes to Open Source Software.
The main difference lies in that you have to rely on publicity to market your project to fellow developers as well. I would assume the OpenBeOS team would like like-minded individuals to join in their development efforts. However, to do so, they have to answer questions. Why work on this project, and not develop for BeOS R5? Why not work on a different operating system?
Obviously, some of their work has been done by Be, since BeOS was a well-crafted product with a lot of potential. But looking over their website, there are many features that relate to marketing - such as a FAQ. It may not be in the strict definition, but I'd say any time you're convincing others to flock to your cause by extolling your project's virtues, it's a form of marketing.
Passion, learning, pleasure, hacking, fun, beauty: these things are still valued by some people. You can't kill rock 'n' roll!
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
if you are implying that the beos and linux kernels are nearly identical you are totally wrong.. if you want a beos like wm for linux, the blueos group is kinda doing that but still using X afaik.. obos really seems to be the only viable beos clone solution, so i haven't been following the "lets make linux into beos" projects that closely..
The "B" in BeOS/OBOS: perhaps the B shoud be for BSD, -=snip=-
This, I think, would also round out the BSD family (Open/Net/Free) with a Multimedia (crus of BeOS) quite nicely if the developers did decide to use BSD.
WTF? For this to be feasible they'd have to scrap the work they've done so far and restart again using a bsd kernel.. why would they do that.. that wouldn't make any sense seeing as they are trying to replicate beos r5 and eventually expand upon it, not make a multimedia bsd based system.
JESUS.
Yes, my son, what troubles you?
http://www.freelists.org/archives/openbeos/08-2001 /msg00015.html
---
Just noticed today that it has been accessible for download from its website for a while now. Going to take it for a spin tonight...
Regards,
Michel
Michel
Fedora Project Contribut
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I agree with you, that the most successful non-profit and profit organizations are the ones who market most effectively. However, I do not believe it is necessary. A key difference between meatspace organizations like these and an OSS project, is that they employ people and thus need to get money coming in or they will run out of cash. Most OSS projects--including OpenBeOS--have almost zero expenses. Thus they can spend zero on marketing and let word of mouth slowly spread the word as they improve the product. Linux did this and I think we all agree that it was a big success. But it did take time. Time is one of Open Source Software's best friends.
---=+=---
"Now if I were a landing thruster, which one of these would I be?"
-- Londo in Babylon 5