BeOS does it better. Period. Hooh.

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Deleted member 5324

Guest
  • #41
    Just to clarify, I wasn't really speaking of the economic viability of Be releasing its source code; I was only mentioning that it cannot serve my purpose in its present state. <P>And yes, that doesn mean I don't use it--but it doesn't preclude me from being disappointed anyway. :)<P>One thing to note, though: I hypothesize that there would be fewer problems with piracy making the source open and still restricting redistribution (as per today's licenses) than there would be simply restricting licenses to a binary. There aren't very many people who own a compiler, let along who would download the source of an operating system and figure out how to compile it and run it. Heck, give me a windows box and the linux source code, and I couldn't even figure out how then use linux as my operating system.<P>My point here is that it's likely Be could release the source code to their kernel/API/GUI under the same license that their binaries are under now (much like UNIX is the old days), and their would experience little problems with "sharing" of source code.<P>At least then I could learn...<P>Jeremy
     
    C

    Cloudy

    Seniorius Lurkius
    7
  • #43
    Hi everybody<BR><BR>I'm using BeOS at work on my PC, it serves as a lan web server for files and MP3 streams. The Network crashed more times than I could count, main reason is when I Telnet out, especially to a telephony switch board and some1 kicks me out of the switch (windows of any kind doesn't suffer from it). I'v also managed to crash the system completely more than once.<BR>I'm very happy with BeOS whatsoever and I'd recommend it to anyone because of it's stability, simplicity (!!!) and flexibility, not to mention it's always responsive (unless I'v crashed it).<BR>I'v heard that on the next release Be is planning on embedding the network in the kernel which might prevent the network restart on the fly. If I'm correct it'll be a pitty.
     
    B

    beme

    Seniorius Lurkius
    2
  • #45
    Fast boot times are pretty nice if you dual boot. I can't imagine any OS taking on Windows in the game market any time soon, so being able to quickly get back to work in the BeOS after a game or two is kind of nice. Overall, though, they aren't that big a deal (but why wait when you don't need to?). Especially since the BeOS has been so stable for me (never _have_ to reboot). Now if only Windows had as fast a boot time...
     
    S

    SB

    Ars Centurion
    357
  • #46
    I love the BeOS. I can't lie. I like it because it reflects most closely to the kind of OS I would personally design... if I knew how. View image: /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif To me, it is robust, clean, simple, and a pure joy to use. As Beosman has mentioned, of the things that Be can do, it does it well. Among other things, I'm learning to code C on BeIDE. Nothing fancy, it's just a side hobby. That alone is worth the price of admission. But again, that's just me.<P>However, I think there are several legimate concerns with BeOS, some I agree with and some I don't. I still use Windows more than I do with Be because Windows has the programs that I need to run. For example, while the printer does work, driver support isn't up to par. So, I still use MS Word. I currently use MS IE 5.x for my browsing needs because, so far, it seems to be the best tool available. I am, however, keeping my hopes up for Maui.<P>As for Be being proprietary, I actually don't mind that. Proprietary technology can bring stability and focus to the table. The downside, of course, is that you're under someone else's house rules. A word about landlords: Not all of them are bad. All things considered, Be has been quite benign and helpful. Microsoft's traditional paradigm seems to be along the lines of, "My way or the highway." But Be is friendlier in terms to trying to make you feel at home. Rome has thrived when the Senate listened to its people, but fell when they stopped communicating. There is a lesson to be learned.<P>And I think that's what the mainstream wants. Unlike most folks on here, the mainstream public doesn't want to tweak or tinker. They just want to turn on the power and be able to run the applications they need. And I think Be's corporate paradigm has the right combination of top-level coordination on system critical issues and low-level cooperation on grass-root developments.<P>Oh, and Be is just plain fun. View image: /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<P>As always, only my $.02 worth.
     
    D

    Deleted member 9070

    Guest
  • #49
    I can't see your logic. I agree with you: BeOS is the most technologically advanced OS out on the market. But MacOS X will surpass it this summer (and I haven't heard Steve lie about a release date once). It won't supass it technologically, granted. It will tie it however. MacOS X boasts everything that BeOS has. <P>1. MacOS X has Quartz, but I'm sure Be can catch up to that.<BR>2. MacOS has more market share.<BR>3. MacOS has more software.<BR>4. MacOS X has full support from major developers.<BR>5. MacOS X has more awareness.<BR>6. Apple has more resources to improve MacOS<P>Though the OSs are just about tied, Apple will win against BeOS due to external issues not relating to the actual OS.<P>How does Be even have a chance?<P>Gandalf the White
     
    B

    Beosiman

    Ars Tribunus Militum
    2,698
  • #52
    First of all Gandalf, Nice name.<P>"How does Be stand a chance?" Well considering Be runs on 486 and OS X doesn't I'd say that one advantage would be that Be has a shot at penetrating a much larger user base. It will run on most new desktops being manufactured today. Plus add in the fact that while OS X may contain key, buzz word compliant technologies the MacOS has been missing, as you said...it's not out yet. <P>Lastly, unless you opt to pick up one of those Orange Micro cards, I think I can run a LOT more software on my BeBox than you can on a G3/G4. <P>I like the Macintosh platform, but don't come on here trying to say that OS X is going to mean the death of the BeOS. One has nothing to do with the success of the other.<P>ps. I'd rather have a dual PIII 700 box over a G4 running at 450mhz ANY day. (And I've actually USED macs for the last 5 years so don't use a lack of knowledge rebuttal).<P>Hey resteves, in regards to why I posted the link to my desktop on that other thread was <BR>because a LOT of the BeOS desktops that I've seen have been kinda dull looking and I'm pretty proud of my BeOS desktop. Granted, it couldn't compare to my Kaleidoscope based scheme I had on my Powerbook, but hey, Be,Inc. is working on allowing the end user to modify the look of the BeOS.
     
    Made in Hurry

    Made in Hurry

    Ars Praefectus
    5,122
  • #54
    Be has spent $60 million since September, so i would think the next version of Be will have a lot more features than anyone here knows about<P>MacOS X? More apps??? Yes, if you consider MacOS pre X apps to be included, then you have a lot of apps. Now, are you going to buy those apps for OS X? The only thing you will do then is make the OS emulate system 9x <P>Now, mention all the MacOS X native apps that is shipping.. <P>Hmm. aint too many huh?
     
    S

    Shallnpotential

    Smack-Fu Master, in training
    74
  • #56
    Aldebaran said: "Be has spent $60 million since September, so i would think the next version of Be will have a lot more features than anyone here knows about".<P>I totally agree. Be appears to be one of the few OS companies that doesn't seem to over hype upcoming Operating Systems. They've been pretty silent on what's coming along. <P>I'm going to try not to judge too much about OS X. It's a long way off. I don't think we are going to know just how well or not it performs until it's released. <P>There are however, a few things I'd like to know about OS X that I haven't got information on yet. Gandalf256, since you are making performance claims about Mac OS X vs BeOS, maybe you could answer them for me. Here goes:<P>Does it have a 64-Bit, Multithreaded, Fully Journaled Filesystem? <P>Pervasive Multithreading? BeOS is quite admirable in this area, especially in relation to SMP. Will OS X require multithreaded apps for it to utilize more than one CPU? If so, how efficient is OS X with a second CPU and up? The last I read, Microsoft's Windows NT still required multithreaded apps to written for it. Even with these apps, it only uses around 80% of the second CPU. Where does OS X stand on all of this?<P>Audio Latency? BeOS is damned impressive and not easy to beat in this area. OS X?<P>Dynamically Loadable Device Drivers (I'm sure it has this, but..), and how far can OS X take this? Alien Filesystems for instance?<P>Can it read an 18,000 petabyte file? Not that this matters too much, but sorry, I just had to throw that one in since it's so COOOOOL.... :^)<P>BTW BeOS users, inspired by that picture over at BeGroovy, I've now managed to get 4 emulators running at once. I just couldn't resist giving it a run. Still no crashes yet! View image: /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <P>
     
    S

    Shallnpotential

    Smack-Fu Master, in training
    74
  • #57
    Here's a question for the long time BeOS users. Since I'm pretty new with the BeOS, I'm not sure if I'm imagining this or not. Are the daily apps & drivers increasing in volume over at BeBits lately? It seems to be about somewhere around 3 or 4 apps per day now. Today for instance, it is at 8 new or updated apps/drivers. Has it always been like this, or is the BeOS really starting to pick up developers?
     
    G

    gollem

    Ars Tribunus Militum
    1,926
    Subscriptor
  • #58
    OK, I've read all this and Be seems to be very cool, fast and stable. What about user friendly, as that is the reason linux hasn't come out of the nerd niche yet. How easy is it to learn to use? And I don't mean installing the OS because I can have linux running in no time but that doesn't mean I can do something with it.<BR>Let's say install the OS, browse, e-mail and using some wordprocessor and graphic progs, how hard would that be for a new (non-geek) user?
     
    Made in Hurry

    Made in Hurry

    Ars Praefectus
    5,122
  • #59
    Well, before i installed BeOS I was a Windows 98 user ( notice was) who had never touched anything but Windows, Macintosh and very little NT. I Installed BeOS, and within the first hour, i was allready reading my E-mail, surfing the net and playing around with the demo apps, or the 3rd party apps that's included. People say that you really can't do much with BeOS, but i think it's because they haven't been looking.BeBits and BeWare are full of apps now, allthough their name isn't Macromedia or Adobe. I am downloading apps right and left and i really don't need much more than this (except for Java and more Internet stuff)<P>We built BeGroovy using BeOS about 95%, and we are planning to maybe host it using a BeBox as soon as possible ( maybe in the next few months, gotta wait for Maui first) <P>BeOS is damn intuitive to use, very userfriendly IMO. As for graphics apps, I have not ventured much into those on any platform * Gee, at least one person who doesnt use Photoshop* but from the moment you boot it up the first time, everyting is easilly accessible, and changing any settings anywhere is a no-brainer in most cases.<P>I leave the graphics question to those in the know. ( comparisons)
     
    R

    resteves

    Ars Tribunus Militum
    2,841
  • #60
    <BR>Beosiman, don't get me wrong, it is a cool looking desktop. (cooler than mine anyway View image: /infopop/emoticons\icon_wink.gif) I was just wondering if you were making a point or just showing something cool. <P><BR>Shallnpotential. Sorry, but your questions are above my knowledgebase. I agree that BE is a nifty OS, I have not used it, but I hear very little bad about it. I am afraid, however, that its success or failure may have little to do with its quality.<P>
     
    D

    Dan

    Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
    7,102
  • #61
    Listen, the Mac guys are gonna POO-POO Be, like they do everything else not MacOS, though their vaunted OSX isn't even out yet. Win2K is out, resteves, by the way, not for mere mortals like you, but it is boxed and wrapped in cellophane and ready to ship. <BR>I have say Gandalf is very sanguine about something that hasn't even reached BETA.... Also, he is ignoring history when he says a company can't face long odds and make it. Witness Apple. Be is better than Mac OS9 -by far-I use both and them's the facts m'am. We'll see about OSX when it finally is available. Remember though, Be is hard at work on version 5 which will probably be released about the same time.<BR>Gasse has already proved that he can face down the powers at Apple and will continue to kick that ass!<BR>Dan<BR>
     
    S

    Shallnpotential

    Smack-Fu Master, in training
    74
  • #62
    Well gollem, to start things off, how does an 11 minute install sound? Moving on, forget comparing it's ease of use to Linux, it's a good deal easier to learn and use than Windows 98. Even Mac users are happy about how easy the BeOS is. It took me about 1 minute to set up my network card (only because I didn't even read the instructions). DHCP. Nice. Then you don't even have to reboot. You just press one button, and your ready to browse the internet. The email setup was simple. No different than the usual settings in other OS's. Fill in the blank.<BR>As for the graphics programs, a few are already to go from the initial install. They aren't the greatest ones, but going online, downloading, and setting up programs is even a fewer clicks than Windows easy. There is about 3 clicks of a mouse and you have downloaded, unzipped, setup & installed the program, and are ready to use it. <BR>For the Office stuff, there is a demo of Gobe Productive installed for you. It's zipped. Double-click it, press install, and execute the program. Nothing to it. You will also get some other kinds of cool demo's pre-installed, plus as a nice added bonus, there are around 200 Unix type terminal apps on the cd, if you feel like playing with that stuff. You don't have to ever touch the terminal stuff if you do not want to. It's not required.<P>The only thing you should make sure of beforehand, is if your hardware is compatible with BeOS. They tell you that information at the Be, inc. site. Apps & drivers are still the weak point of BeOS, though that too appears to be changing for the better lately. If you ever think about getting it, look online because there are some great deals (BeOS & a 916 page book) for around $43 total cost. My Christmas package came with Gobe Productive too, which is a real nice office suite program. <BR><P>[This message has been edited by Shallnpotential (edited January 13, 2000).]
     
    D

    Deleted member 5324

    Guest
  • #63
    Yes, BeOS does have "pervasive multithreading". And that's all fine and dandy for the people who have an original BeBox or dual celerons. The problem here is that this "Pervasive multithreading" wastes cycles on uniprocessor machines. Yep, you heard me right: unlike some other platforms, context switches on the x86 architecture is pretty expensive. And since a UP machine can only work on 1 thread a time, that's a lot of context switching. <P>Sure, it's great to be "pervasively multithreaded" when you've got more than one processor, and don't have to context switch as much, but when you're on a uniprocessor box, all that switching is just a waste of time.<P>A perfect example of something being optimized for the uncommon case.<P>Jeremy<P>-----EDIT-----<P>I just remembered that threads are kept in the same memory space as their parents. This does reduce the cost of context switching somewhat, but the point remains, ignoring possible (and unlikely) I/O waiting, a single threaded app with be faster than a multithreaded app on a UP machine<P>jeremy<P>[This message has been edited by jemfinch (edited January 14, 2000).]
     
    J

    Jonte

    Seniorius Lurkius
    29
  • #64
    Maybe this is correct...on other SMP-OS's. But since it is not possible<BR>to compile a GUI app under BeOS and *not* get atleast two threads (one<BR>for the GUI and one for the Appserver-client I think) this can't be benchmarked under BeOS. But the impact of multiple CPU's on running<BR>software can be tested with the "Pulse" app. It has a switch for turning<BR>processors on and off...on the fly. It's an obligatory part of any BeOS<BR>demo on multipleCPU-machines to do this. And by just the look and feel<BR>of it the only degradation in speed is that of the lost numbercrunching<BR>power of the second CPU. Even if the context-swithes of the X86 is expensive, it certainly isn't noticable under BeOS. I'll try to get some<BR>confirmation of this from the more knowledgable than me and get back to<BR>you on this. My gut feeling is that this is somthing that the Be Engineers<BR>*have* thought about.<P>/Jonas
     
    S

    SecretHero

    Seniorius Lurkius
    13
  • #65
    jemfinch, unless you are talking about an operating system that doesn't support multitasking you will have context switches no matter what you do. <BR>BeOS is actually constructed from the ground up to do very fast context switching on a thread level. Most unix operating systems are not all that well suited to thread level context switches even though most support it, often via POSIX system level threads.<P>The BeOS kernel is always mapped into the "thread teams" (BeOS process concept) memory and therefor only requires a protection mode change to perform a system call. This makes for fast, reentrant system calls greatly reducing context switches at kernel traps as well as reducing unwanted "synchronization" on the kernel.<P>The BeOS documentation tells me that BeOS has a quanta of only 250 us, the Irix 6.5.6 machine I'm on now reports 10 ms quanta (using SCHED_TS of course =). <P>Since I am the kind of person that have several applications and system services running at the same time while using my computer I prefer fast, many thread level context switches compared to slow, few process level context switches. But hey that's the kind of jerk I am.<P>//SecretHero
     
    J

    Jasper

    Seniorius Lurkius
    2
  • #68
    hobo<BR>Be really isnt overpriced at all.. If you buy r4.5 from Buy.com it will cost you $35.95. If you want the BeOS bundle which includes the BeOS Bible (a really good book and I would recommend it) its $41.95. Be does not have DVD currently (I guess its because of the licensing) I dont know if they are working on it but I will assume yes. Be sound wont sound any better to you and me, but if your into sound editing ect.. You will love be's audio latency because it is so low. Your 3rd question if be impliments more features.. That is a good question, I have thaught about that one quite a bit also. For right now, it seems like for every new release be comes out with, its boot times are getting smaller, and be is getting faster. If this trend can continue ? dont know!
     
    F

    FriarPuck

    Ars Praefectus
    4,053
    Subscriptor
  • #69
    My opinion of BeOS is that it is completely useless to me right now because of it's lacking in the networking department. It has a very nice GUI and seems to perform very well. Linux, however, has become my alternative OS of choice. I'm not saying that GPL is the best thing ever or anything but it has helped me use Linux more. Look at it this way, I've spent god knows how much money buying software for Windows, am I now supposed to spend even more money buying similar applications for BeOS? Luckily with Linux I don't really have to since most of the software is free. I'm not saying that proprietary software is bad and I'm definitely not saying that charging money for software is bad. But when an alternative OS is trying to get ahead it helps when the users can easily obtain enough software to use.<P>All of that being said, I am anxiously awaiting the release of R5 and it's networking changes. If they are as good as they sound I will be using BeOS a hell of a lot more. Take care and remember only you can prevent forum fires.
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.
    Jump to latest Follow Reply
    Jump to latest Follow Reply