Ars Technica on Zeta 1.0

Quantrell writes "Ars Technica has posted an extremely in-depth review of Zeta 1.0 (/. saw another shorter review a month ago, but this new one is worth a look by anyone into things Be). Looking at the state of the OS more closely, it looks like it has a long way to go, maybe too long. Also, the author (rightly, IMO) raises the issue of whether or not Zeta will see success in the face of open source projects like Haiku. Is there anything but a hobby going on here?"

Comments

Do they have legal access to the BeOS source code?

[CyricZ]

There has been some speculation in the past that yellowTab does not have legal access, if any access at all, to the BeOS source code. They apparently wouldn't confirm nor deny that when asked. Has the situation changed recently? Have they made a final statement about their possession of said source code?

Sounds good, but...

[j_cavera]

Can we hear from someone who has used a BeOS or derivative for more than the 1 week, I'll-use-it then-write-a-review-about-it period? While I'm as willing as the next guy to try out a new OS, I'm not going to play early adopter potentially burn up a perfectly good machine with an install that renders it only marginally usable.

Re:Sounds good, but...

[Saeed al-Sahaf]

Yeah, well, then, don't install this OS . You'll hate it.

Linus would never approve of such an OS.

Re:Sounds good, but...

[rmjohnso]

I actually used BeOS 4.5 and BeOS 5.0 for more than a week. I actually used it for over a year as my main OS. I could surf the web with Opera (no real stable Mozilla port back then), an AIM client (BeAIM), and an ICQ client (can't remember the name). I also had an mp3 player very similar to Winamp/XMMS, and it even supported Winamp skins. I never got into using the Gobe office suite. I also had a Hauppauge TV tuner card which I could watch TV with even in BeOS. If you wanted to do multimedia, BeOS could do it.

This was all while I was in college. I took an intro C programming course, and I did most of my labs in BeOS. I wrote, compiled, tested, debugged, and uploaded all of my work from BeOS.

BeOS was great. It booted in less than 15 seconds on my P3 500 MHz and 128 MB of RAM. It had services that were much simpler than Windows services. For example, if networking was misbehaving or sound stopped, just restart the sound server. No reason to reboot (as you would Windows 98, which was the standard home desktop OS back during this time).

So why did I stop using BeOS you ask? Well, my Dell had come with a Riva TNT2 video card, and I eventually upgraded to a GeForce 2. When I did that, there weren't any drivers other than VESA drivers to support the card, and 60 Hz refresh rates on a 17" monitor give me a major headache. Eventually the 2D drivers for GeForce boards were released, and I tried to go back to BeOS, but I had already moved back to Windows and was jumping into Linux more and more. School was picking up for me, and I didn't have as much time as I did during my freshman year.

Why don't I check out yellowTab or Zeta OS? Well, I'm pretty much Slackware at home and XP at work. I don't have the application choices for the new BeOS variants that I do with Windows and Linux. I also have a gut feeling that I'd have to worry more about hardware compatibility with newer hardware than I would with Windows or Linux.

BeOS was fun, while it lasted.

beos

[dottedlinedesign]

What chance do operating systems like BEOS stand against Mac and Windows? What advantages are there to using BEOS?

Re:beos

[MrHanky]

It doesn't really stand a chance. But it certainly has some advantages. There's always an advantage to run something other than Windows, because of spyware, viruses, and so on (and I'm sure you've heard all the arguments, so let's stop there).

Against OS X, it has the advantage of being an easy to use, lightweight desktop OS. OS X takes about 3 GB for the default install, and that's with very few apps. I don't think Zeta takes that much, even with all the bundled apps, and there are plenty. It also boots quickly, and feels quite fast even on slow computers with little memory.

Of course, it also lacks some features (don't know if Zeta has a good network stack, but BeOS's sucked), and has relatively few applications, often unfinished shareware. If it fits your needs, it's very good.

Re:beos

[commodoresloat]

you can watch 4 pornos at once!

I was excited for a second...

[Anonymous Coward]

...but then I realized it was Ars on Zeta 1.0 and not Ars on Zeta-Jones 1.0, which promised to be much more insightful and interesting. I really like a nice Ars.

It's not just about technology

[mustafap]

Hobby or not, it succedes in other areas. Like many small OS's it has built a strong community, a group of people sharing a common interest. During my time looking after Menuet ( www.menuetos.org ) at times the 'family' aspects were almost as much fun as the technology. It's probably true here too.

Mike.

I found this line interesting

[aftk2]

The company decided to switch to a software-only strategy and ported BeOS to the Macintosh platform. There were other reasons to justify this switch: it was clear that Apple was always going to be able to ship the latest PowerPC hardware faster than Be, Inc. could

Contrast with...

Apple decided to switch...and ported MacOS to the Intel platform. There were other reasons to justify this switch: it was clear that Intel was always going to be able to ship the latest CPU hardware faster than IBM, Inc. could

Now, you'll notice I removed the words "software-only" from my conversion. Does that mean something? I'm doubtful, but I thought the parallels were interesting. At one time it appeared that Apple might sadly go the way of Be; that is thankfully no longer the case.

Re:I found this line interesting

[Jeff DeMaagd]

One key difference is that Apple eventually closed up access to the hardware documentation, so Be couldn't support it anymore. So Be had to abandon the PPC port and dedicate themselves to x86.

Re:I found this line interesting

[Textbook Error]

Well, "closed off" in the sense that nothing changed. The reality is that Be lost interest in the platform as they had their eyes on x86: technically they could have found a way, politically they were looking for an out.

At the time they came out with a fairly spurious argument that the GPL might somehow contanimate them if they so much as looked at the N various flavours of Linux which could all boot on the machines they didn't want to support.

Re:Do they have legal access to the BeOS source co

[Mr. Cancelled]

There has been some speculation in the past that yellowTab does not have legal access, if any access at all, to the BeOS source code. They apparently wouldn't confirm nor deny that when asked. Has the situation changed recently? Have they made a final statement about their possession of said source code?

The last time I raised this question, someone pointed out that they're claiming to have overcome the 1GB limitation, which to some at least seems to indicate that they have control of the kernels source.

But I've not seen anything official from Zeta to indicate this. Just BeOS fanboys...

Re:Why?

[Timesprout]

Why do open source advocates ask this question? Do you have a problem with people having a broader choice?

HobbyTown

[Anonymous Coward]

"Is there anything but a hobby going on here?""

Isn't the majority of OSS a "scratch an itch" hobby?

Haiku mislinked`

[cianduffy]

BeUnited is the standards body only, the actual site for the Haiku Operating System is here:

Haiku

YellowTab is targeting wrong market s/b embedded

[HighOrbit]

As I have commented previously, YellowTab is going about this the wrong way. They seem to be trying to market this as a general purpose desktop, but that is a hard market to break in to with incredibly strong established competitors (MS, Apple) and a generally conservative (i.e. not open to drastic change) base of potential desktop customers.

The low system specs and mulitmedia capabilities scream for this to be put into a TV-set-top box like a DVR or even a game console. The low system requirements might even be good on appliances, medical imaging, kiosks, and ATMs. I think they should be trying to sell their stuff to Sony, Panasonic, Scientific-Atlanta, Deibold, etc instead of trying to break into desktops. The desktop market is just a loosing proposition for them.

BeOS doing just fine

[Orrin Bloquy]

...on Amigas.

Seriously, the gist of TFA's conclusion is that Zeta's usefulness will only be proven by porting Linux software to it.

I hate to sound like David Spade, but I would be excited by this because...?

I had an early PowerPC Mac in the late 90s and was excited by the prospect of running BeOS on it... until Be announced that their binaries were platform specific, which essentially meant they'd have to decide on one architecture or another.

As it stands right now, even the reviewer is pointing out that all the useful multimedia software is *nix ports (which I'm betting are not optimized to Zeta's kernel).

Kudos to Be for making a lightweight OS. Unfortunately, at the same time Steve Jobs and Linus Torvalds were figuring out that their respective successes would come from pulling a Microsoft and putting a GUI to a vastly popular, proven CLI environment and getting to keep the multitudes of software already designed for UNIX.

Had Apple gone with Be, I think it would have lasted about three years before going tits-up. Five years of Classic compatibility ensured OS X's survival, and I strongly doubt Apple could have made BeOS and Classic coexist as peacefully without compromising one or both (witness Vista's back-and-forth on evolution v. backwards compatibility).

Why no review of multiprocessor support

[kgruscho]

One of the primary tenants of BeBox/BeOS was multiprocessor.

How can this be an in-depth review if they don't check it out on a multiprocessor system?

Also does it support hyperthreading?

Re:Do they have legal access to the BeOS source co

[Nahooda]

A recent German issue of c't magazine says, that YellowTab already owns _ALL_ rights of the source code.

Regards,

Dennis B. Schramm

I think you mean...

[wernst]

One employee lost a whole project due to Zeta corrupting our filestore.

You mean one employee lost a whole project due to his inability to make regular backups, I think.

This reeks of a FUD post...

Re:I think you mean...

[nazh]

This reeks of a FUD post...

No, it's a troll. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slashdot_trolling_phe nomena#Minor_trolls Look at the bottom at the minor troll list.

Re:Do they have legal access to the BeOS source co

[Nahooda]

Sorry, there's no online version of the article available.

Here's the paragraph in German, taken from c't magazine issue #14/2005, page 88:

"Als der BeOS-Erfinder Jean-Louis Gassee vor vier Jahren das Handtuch warf und seine Firma inklusive der Urheberrechte an Palm verkaufte, war das Original-Betriebsystem trotz aller Fan-Bemühungen zum Tode verurteilt. BeOS-Adept Bernd Thorsten Korz investierte trotzdem Geld und Nerven in seine Firma YellowTab, um ein Nachfolgesystem im Bündel mit aktualisierten alten sowie neu entwickelten Anwendungen auf den Markt zu bringen. Mittlerweile hält die 38-Mann-Firma sämtliche Rechte am Quelltext des ursprünglichen Betriebssystems und hat nach eigenen Aussagen annähernd 90.000 Zeta-Pakete verkauft."

That's in Englisch:
"When BeOS inventor Jean-Louis Gassee quit four years ago and sold his company including copyrights to Palm the original operating system was doomed despite of all efforts of the BeOS community. Nevertheless Beos-initiate Bernd Thorsten Korz invested money and nerves in his company YellowTab in order to publish a BeOS-successor bundled with updated old and newly developed applications. Meanwhile the 38-man-company owns all rights of the source code of the original operating system and claims to have sold nearly 90.000 Zeta packages."

Since German is my mother language, I hope I didn't make too much mistakes ;-)

Regards,

Dennis B. Schramm

Re:Why?

[gothfox]

BeOS was always a single-user operating system, and ZETA appears to be the same... That, in and of itself, is sufficient reason to completely ignore ZETA

Naah. The reason to ignore Zeta is that it's an obscure and incompatible proprietary platform that doesn't have any market share and will never have. They aim for consumer desktops, so multiple users are not really needed anyway.

One of my biggest complaints about Windows is that it is derived from a single user operating system

No modern Windows is derived from a single user operating system. You don't know what you are talking about, lookup Windows NT.

The problem with single user is with support for remote applications, e.g. running a thin client...

Wow. Just wow. The depth of your knowledge of Windows platform is astounding.