Everyone assumes that BeOS is doomed because it is not Open source. I say they have been eating too many brownies and smoking too much rope. For those who are too young to understand these references, ask your parents. Also, the problem wihth Linux is that it is inherently complicated to use. My father was looking to replace Windows on his PC because of all the problems he has had with Windows 95 for so long. He is currently using Windows 98, but is still not happy with that OS. He is tired of reinstalling every two or three months. Personally, I think he is lucky. I have reinstalled once a month with WIndows. BeOS just doesn't have this reinstall problem. I would like to add, though, that the UNIX flavors have not 'sucked up all the hacker talent.' I test out different OSes before letting my father use them. I know his temper, and if he can't get something to work right, he will more likely smash it than call tech support. That's why I bought BeOS. Please note, I BOUGHT BeOS. The main reason people are frustrated with BeOS is that they feel it should be free until their hardware is supported. That makes no sense to me. Be is a company, and they have employees and bills to pay. IF they gave away their work for free, then the progress would be made more slowly than Microsoft advancements. Look at Linux. When it first was developed in 1991, only programmers knew about it. Now, everyone who knows how to turn on a computer has heard of Linux. Unix, an even older OS which is now referred to by most distributors as BSD, is still a mystery to many people, as the equipment required to run it originally was only available to large companies and universities. Now, though, with the computer asserting itself into everyone's life more and more, and people tiring of spending tons of money on upgrades for Operating systems that came with their PC's, they are looking for something cheapoer to maintain. I have always felt that Microsoft had a problem with their pricing schemes anyhow. Why charge for an update? Why should the OS need an update? Well, the latter is an easier question to answer. The update is necessary to keep up with technology changes on processors, and other devices. The fact that the Unix variants run on OLDER equipment is not surprising. BeOS requires a more recent machine, and, no, it is not for everyone... yet. BeOS, however, has a much easier User Interface than Linux does, and the applications are based on the more familiar ones that people already use. These ideas will help people to move more comfortably to BeOS than to Linux. Also, the various support groups for Linux-- namely the #linux chat channel on the EFNet IRC network-- have a tendency to argue over distributions more than provide support. Don't get me wrong, I have tried Slackware, and Caldera, and like Slackware better because of some system restrictions that Caldera forces one to adopt. I have my opinions of the best Linux Distribution, and will share it with anyone like I just did. I am also guilty of hassling Red Hat users from time to time, mainly as a joke. I don't doubt I'll be spammed for this, or at least flamed. My point, though is, that BeOS has a place with computer users. IT lies between Linux and Windows as far as ease of use. Anyone with an IQ of 60 can run Windows, but it takes someone with an IQ near 100 to run BeOS, and somewhere above 100 to run Linux-- though Red Hat and some other distibutions can be installed by lucky idiots. All in all, I think more people will move to BeOS as soon as it has proven it will not go away like most Linux companies and fans wish it would. The fear is that the Be File System is more robust than any that Linux offers, and that the multi-threaded OS that Be has produced will appeal to more game producers than Linux's single-threeaded apps. Imagine a game that can be run on a network, kill the sound, and not stop the game play to do so. You can also write a game that has a voice-over-IP communication system built in, for an intercom-like system that can be enabled and disabled on the fly. Also, the ability to change workspaces in the middle of a game-- while not attractive to many hardcore gamers-- would be possible, and the game would continue in the background on its own thread. Also, ZDTV has announced that BeOS handles SMP systems more effiiently than Linux (this was on The Screen Savers when Leo LaPorte booted his "Ultimate Over-The-Top PC"). If BeOS has so many more advantages than Linux, why would it just go away? Microsoft even purchased several copies of BeOS for some reason... presumably to steal things from the BeOS and claim that they are new Microsoft inventions, not that they have EVER done that before. Companies that have checked into the BeOS recently include Real Networks, and I've even spoken to a CISCO Systems engineer who was working with BeOS at home. Now, if these people think BeOS is worth trying, shouldn't everyone?
Slashdot Mirror
Everyone assumes that BeOS is doomed because it is not Open source. I say they have been eating too many brownies and smoking too much rope. For those who are too young to understand these references, ask your parents. Also, the problem wihth Linux is that it is inherently complicated to use. My father was looking to replace Windows on his PC because of all the problems he has had with Windows 95 for so long. He is currently using Windows 98, but is still not happy with that OS. He is tired of reinstalling every two or three months. Personally, I think he is lucky. I have reinstalled once a month with WIndows. BeOS just doesn't have this reinstall problem. I would like to add, though, that the UNIX flavors have not 'sucked up all the hacker talent.' I test out different OSes before letting my father use them. I know his temper, and if he can't get something to work right, he will more likely smash it than call tech support. That's why I bought BeOS. Please note, I BOUGHT BeOS. The main reason people are frustrated with BeOS is that they feel it should be free until their hardware is supported. That makes no sense to me. Be is a company, and they have employees and bills to pay. IF they gave away their work for free, then the progress would be made more slowly than Microsoft advancements. Look at Linux. When it first was developed in 1991, only programmers knew about it. Now, everyone who knows how to turn on a computer has heard of Linux. Unix, an even older OS which is now referred to by most distributors as BSD, is still a mystery to many people, as the equipment required to run it originally was only available to large companies and universities. Now, though, with the computer asserting itself into everyone's life more and more, and people tiring of spending tons of money on upgrades for Operating systems that came with their PC's, they are looking for something cheapoer to maintain. I have always felt that Microsoft had a problem with their pricing schemes anyhow. Why charge for an update? Why should the OS need an update? Well, the latter is an easier question to answer. The update is necessary to keep up with technology changes on processors, and other devices. The fact that the Unix variants run on OLDER equipment is not surprising. BeOS requires a more recent machine, and, no, it is not for everyone... yet. BeOS, however, has a much easier User Interface than Linux does, and the applications are based on the more familiar ones that people already use. These ideas will help people to move more comfortably to BeOS than to Linux. Also, the various support groups for Linux-- namely the #linux chat channel on the EFNet IRC network-- have a tendency to argue over distributions more than provide support. Don't get me wrong, I have tried Slackware, and Caldera, and like Slackware better because of some system restrictions that Caldera forces one to adopt. I have my opinions of the best Linux Distribution, and will share it with anyone like I just did. I am also guilty of hassling Red Hat users from time to time, mainly as a joke. I don't doubt I'll be spammed for this, or at least flamed. My point, though is, that BeOS has a place with computer users. IT lies between Linux and Windows as far as ease of use. Anyone with an IQ of 60 can run Windows, but it takes someone with an IQ near 100 to run BeOS, and somewhere above 100 to run Linux-- though Red Hat and some other distibutions can be installed by lucky idiots. All in all, I think more people will move to BeOS as soon as it has proven it will not go away like most Linux companies and fans wish it would. The fear is that the Be File System is more robust than any that Linux offers, and that the multi-threaded OS that Be has produced will appeal to more game producers than Linux's single-threeaded apps. Imagine a game that can be run on a network, kill the sound, and not stop the game play to do so. You can also write a game that has a voice-over-IP communication system built in, for an intercom-like system that can be enabled and disabled on the fly. Also, the ability to change workspaces in the middle of a game-- while not attractive to many hardcore gamers-- would be possible, and the game would continue in the background on its own thread. Also, ZDTV has announced that BeOS handles SMP systems more effiiently than Linux (this was on The Screen Savers when Leo LaPorte booted his "Ultimate Over-The-Top PC"). If BeOS has so many more advantages than Linux, why would it just go away? Microsoft even purchased several copies of BeOS for some reason... presumably to steal things from the BeOS and claim that they are new Microsoft inventions, not that they have EVER done that before. Companies that have checked into the BeOS recently include Real Networks, and I've even spoken to a CISCO Systems engineer who was working with BeOS at home. Now, if these people think BeOS is worth trying, shouldn't everyone?