Slashdot Mirror
GIMP, Civ:CTP, and low-cost box Coming to BeOS
In a frenzy of porting, Be.com has unveiled that both the GIMP and Civilization:Call to Power will be ported to BeOS. With the news of a new low cost Be system, I'm gonna have to look closely at getting one. Update: 06/22 11:14 by J : flaggz writes "We've posted a screenshot of the GIMP toolbox for BeOS. "
You don't have to read the source to care about it. I happen to read some of the source, and I edit some of the source, but I'd say I look at less than 1% of the source I use everyday (for example, it takes a special kind of person to wade through the X11 source). However, the fact that the source is available to the community at large is very important to me, regardless of whether or not I'm reading the source. It is clear to me that having the source available under a Free software license makes a huge difference in the quality of the software. I consider it very important to me. I am quite aware that there is well written software where the source is closed and secret, but over the twenty-someodd years I've been dealing with the computer industry, it is clear that they are the exception, not the rule.
----
Open mind, insert foot.
I've been reading this thread and have been pretty disgusted with all the Be zealots badmouthing Open Source.
Hm. There are certainly Be zealots out there, but most of us like Open Source. We badmouth the "Open Source is the only way to salvation" mindset. I respect the choice some people make to go open source all the way, but I don't buy the "you are enslaving yourself to proprietary software if you use it" mindset. I am fully aware of all the advantages of open source development. But just like I buy products with "no user serviceable parts inside" if that product does what I want, I will buy "closed" software if it is a superior solution. If you won't, that's fine, but I'm sick of having the more... mmm... energetic free software advocates tell me I'm an idiot for my choice.
I could go on, but the point of this message isn't to flame...
As evidenced by your use of "BeOS lusers."
So far I've found Be users to be the most obnoxious of any group.
To me "who gives a shit if it's not open source" is more obnoxious than "BeOS is really cool, let me fanboy about it," even if the latter is irritating.
If you're developing open source software for Linux, you just might be developing open source software for BeOS, too. That's part of what "open source" means. Isn't that ironic?
Actually, I can back up Brian here. I work for a printer company, and WE write the drivers for out products. BeOS doesn't support the [snip] printer line because WE haven't written one.
Be has crappy hardware, it is true. But it isn't all Be's fault.
It's a thankless job, but I've got a lot of Karma to burn off
I like the "UNIX + X" portability that exists now, with ease in compiling between all the BSD's, Linux, IRIX, Solaris, DEC-UNIX (whatever it's called now), etc... and I don't like seeing applications being ported out, when I would rather see support for existing GNU/GPL or BSD licenced UNIX + X OS's comming in.
Feel free to correct me technically, but it seems like "portability" between the existing "UNIX + X" OS's is very very good, it's just these "consept non-X microkernel" things that are fringe and difficult to port to, and I just don't see the advantages to these new OS's. I see merit to new open source (lower case generic, not "Open Source") OS's if they are UNIX + X, some are more secure, some are slicker, some are.... But, if were going to say it's "UNIX" but ditch X and make everything difficult to port, why not look at Berlin or something that could potentially be the next generation X for ALL UNIX, not just some new thing?
Aside from my potential mistakes in determining the differances here, I would like to hear someone support my view with some hard fact, or convincingly argue that a TOTAL diversion is needed and a small unpopular (even if it is cute and slick) startup OS is the answer?
QNX GPL'ed, or maybe HURD, and a next generation X that runs on all legacy UNIX boxes seems the smart move to me. But those things need to come from an open source community itself through evolution, not a startup indepenant OS, IMHO.
Closed-source coding does not necessarily equal bloated Microsoft software. Because of the hard work and coordination going on at Be, Inc., the BeOS is slim and quick. As an example, the BeOS boots in under twenty seconds on a PII 400 machine. Including the BIOS checks. As an OS, it's polished and honed in a way that is very hard to accomplish with the Open Source philosophy. I'm sure you all know of the merits and disadvantages of the BeOS (read: no software), but would you leave the Open Source maxim in the cupboard for once?
Wah!
Who cares if it is "open source" (which doesn't mean anything anyway, BSD or public domain software are the only types that are truly free and open) -- the important thing is that it runs well.
It has long been a goal to modularize the UI in GIMP for purposes of portability and server functionality. We are doing the port as a 100% BeOS interface kit application. Porting GTK+ to BeOS would be useful, but we thought GIMP wouldn't really be a first-class Be application in a non-native toolkit.
James
EventLoop
Hey folks, we've added a bit of content to our web pages. There's a preliminary screenshot of the main GIMP toolbox here.
James
EventLoop
I had some conern about Be. I am a converted-to-Linux WinSheep and I felt that another OS might overshadow Linux and my platform would be forgotton. Small wonder that when I saw things along the lines of more people supporting Be, I was concerned.
Then I got to thinking. What was the whole reason I decided for Linux as opposed to Win32? I wanted an OS that:
1.) Played Quake
2.) Was stable
3.) Was customizable
4.) Did what I wanted it to do.
So now came this BeOS as an alternative to Win32 and, of course, my Linux. I felt this was bad and all people porting to it would ruin my way of computing. Then I began thinking a bit more..
The development to other platforms is not *bad*. Lets say Be does shadow Linux and can do things Linux cannot. I feel that competition in this instance will be good for everyone, even if Be isn't free. If it does some neat feature, some Linux people might like it and support/emulate it. If Be raises the bar in technology, well... they raised the bar and now the world has more technology and Joe user has another choice. I feel that choice is much more important than my sentiment for Linux.
Just thought you would like to hear what a Linux user thinks.
-Clump
jtn wrote:
/. poll:
I'd say 98% of the Slashdot crowd doesn't care about the source...
I'd disagree with that number, but I'd be guessing just as badly as you are. I think it's a good topic for a
Having Source available under a Free/Open Source license is:
* Essential or I won't use the program
* A good thing, but I run a few programs without it
* A nice idea, but I really don't care
* Unimportant
* Bad
* Cabbage
* Huh?
----
Open mind, insert foot.
-jwb