1. One quick thing that comes to mind is the little sliding tabs on the windows, suprisingly useful... Also you have consistency, which would be revolutionary for the linux desktop.
2. Other systems are catching up, partially. Name a file manager that makes use of filesystem attributes like the BeOS Tracker, or any system that makes comprehensive use of these filesystem features. Additionally you have kernel level node monitors, querying on indexed fs attribute values, and a design that considers low-latency concurrent access of a disk. Beyond the filesystem, the overall design is meant for real-time applications. Most *nix varieties are not, and this becomes a serious limitation in real-time systems.
3. The BeOS kernel is written in C, absolutely no C++ in the kernel or device drivers. The engineers at Be understood what C++ would do to the kernel and hence there isn't even runtime support for C++ in the kernel. As far as the InterfaceKit goes, there have been numerous third-party OSS extensions that fill in many missing gaps, namely a layout manager.
4. X needs to die, bad. It gets the job done, and is very powerful, but has been developed in an incremental manner and provides capabilities that are overkill. There are aspects of X that high-level libraries can't hide, only making matters worse. There is considerable difference between "reasonable" and good or excellent. The BeOS GUI has its limitations, but it far surpasses X in providing a satisfying user experience. Additionally the BeOS programming models tend to be restrictive, and can artifically limit a program's design.
5. Hopefully an X replacement becomes viable soon. AtheOS seems to be a step in the right direction, but it doesn't seem that other systems will see much benefit from it. Trying to do too much is a good way to kill a project, things need to be done a bit more incrementally, for the sake of the implementors and the people who would need to write and use programs for a next-generation GUI.
All-in-all, the BeOS is rightly hyped on certain points ("buzzwords"), but fails to meet the hype of being TheOS. Hopefully some of the more advanced features of the BeOS, and the willingness to try something new will bring benefits to a wider community of computing.
Slashdot Mirror
1. One quick thing that comes to mind is the little sliding tabs on the windows, suprisingly useful... Also you have consistency, which would be revolutionary for the linux desktop.
2. Other systems are catching up, partially. Name a file manager that makes use of filesystem attributes like the BeOS Tracker, or any system that makes comprehensive use of these filesystem features. Additionally you have kernel level node monitors, querying on indexed fs attribute values, and a design that considers low-latency concurrent access of a disk. Beyond the filesystem, the overall design is meant for real-time applications. Most *nix varieties are not, and this becomes a serious limitation in real-time systems.
3. The BeOS kernel is written in C, absolutely no C++ in the kernel or device drivers. The engineers at Be understood what C++ would do to the kernel and hence there isn't even runtime support for C++ in the kernel. As far as the InterfaceKit goes, there have been numerous third-party OSS extensions that fill in many missing gaps, namely a layout manager.
4. X needs to die, bad. It gets the job done, and is very powerful, but has been developed in an incremental manner and provides capabilities that are overkill. There are aspects of X that high-level libraries can't hide, only making matters worse. There is considerable difference between "reasonable" and good or excellent. The BeOS GUI has its limitations, but it far surpasses X in providing a satisfying user experience. Additionally the BeOS programming models tend to be restrictive, and can artifically limit a program's design.
5. Hopefully an X replacement becomes viable soon. AtheOS seems to be a step in the right direction, but it doesn't seem that other systems will see much benefit from it. Trying to do too much is a good way to kill a project, things need to be done a bit more incrementally, for the sake of the implementors and the people who would need to write and use programs for a next-generation GUI.
All-in-all, the BeOS is rightly hyped on certain points ("buzzwords"), but fails to meet the hype of being TheOS. Hopefully some of the more advanced features of the BeOS, and the willingness to try something new will bring benefits to a wider community of computing.
Shanti,
Agni