Is BeOS dead?

[RampRat]

Is Be giving up with their OS product?

 

[IamDavid]

Yes, they now are only working on the BeIA.

 

[Workin']

I guess a dead horse can be flogged for only so long before even the dumbest jockey gives up...

Yet another good idea consigned to the dustbins of history...

 

[HansXP]

I don't think BeOS ever had a niche like all the other OS did.

MacOS-graphics/video, fruity people
Linux-high end servers and 'real' geeks
Windows NT-corporate desktop OS
Windows 9X-normal consumer OS
BeOS-???

 

[Buddha Bart]

was it ever alive?

bart

 

[HansXP]

Well...it had some potential.

 

[tigerwannabe]

i've got the personal edition on my home machine. it's a good product but the MS juggernaut was just too much for Be to overcome.

 

[caballo]

Technically feasible - Marketing futile in the presence of MS, MAC and Linux.
Even OS2, with all the IBM money went nowhere.

 

[ugh]

I thought it was a bit more alive when they release BeOS 5 Personal Edition which I really looked forward to. But after that, it was still back to Linux... Heh

 

[DoctorPizza]

It was stillborn.

"Hey, let's release a media OS with no hardware 3D acceleration and negligible sound card support!"

Uh huh.

 

[Lucian]

DoctorPizza that is sort of like hitting the nail on the head? Or actually pounding it through the truth board.

Good idea bad implementation.

 

[MGMorden]

I ran BeOS when the free version came out and I REALLY like it. The GUI was easy(and permiated the whole OS), it had a commandline for programming, and the system was just generally "snappier" than Windows or Linux. If there was app/hardware support for Be like there was for Windows then I would likely use it exclusively; sadly, that is/was far from the case.

 

[danielshoes]

A agree with MGMorden (he ever has good opinions...). It is a little bit different than the usual. We are too acostumated with the "Windows way of life" that we blind ourselves from seeing other horizons, like BeOS intended to be. It is easy to use and mounts FAT16/32, NTFS and ext2. I liked it too.

But the truth is: In this world, only the strong will survive...

 

[dfloyd]

Linus's
Incompatible
Nerd
User
X-Interface

 

[TimeThrash]

BeOs was focused mainly on graphics professionals, but they didn't work hard enough promoting it in its initial stages. I'm surprised they even got Metrowerks' Codewarrior to back it up. I ran it and it was very fast and stable, but there was no program availibility. So oh well.
Tt

 

[MGMorden]

<< Linus's
Incompatible
Nerd
User
X-Interface >>



Linux has seen the greatest surge of hardware drivers (hence increasing compatibility) in the last 2 years or so that it's almost as compatible w/ new hardware as Win2k. As for nerd, there are those that would call everyone on this board a nerd. There are those who will call anyone who can make higher than a B in school a nerd. Funny who someone who uses the term always adjusts it to include only people who are smarter than them, suggesting a feeling of self-stupidity on their part.

 

[cmonster3]

BeOS (the OS that comes without a calculator) is extremely fast at what it does -but there is too much it doesn't do. I have the full version of BeOS 5 which I bought as a curiosity, my video and sound hardware was fully supported and it installed find on an IDE drive - I was very impressed. However, my SCSI adapters were not supported, not my Advansys Ultra Wide, and not my Adaptec 29160 -not even generic SCSI support.

System boot time was 8 seconds.

 

[lucidguy]

<< As for nerd, there are those that would call everyone on this board a nerd. >>



I think the word you're looking for is &quot;geek&quot;.

A geek is someone who is good in a technical or scientific discipline, most often related to computer software, computer hardware or information technology. Geeks are also often antisocial, too skinny or too &quot;husky&quot;, have poor verbal skills, but make tons of money doing what they do best.

A nerd is someone with all the negative attributes of a geek, with the difference that a nerd isn't much good at anything.

Given these definitions, everyone on this board is either a geek or a nerd. Geeks post useful advice, nerds post questions or useless crap.

 

[Elledan]

BeOS never stood a chance. Like said before, it was stillborn.

Both MS with Windows and the increasing attention for Linux distributions drew all attention for BeOS away.

Heck, I reguarly meet people who haven't even the faintest idea of what Linux is or what it does. Their idea of an OS is limited to Windows.

 

[dfloyd]

MgMorden,

I compltely 100% disagree. Yes Linux is getting better but it has a million light years to go before it catchs up with Win2k in hardware compatibility. Even video cards that are supposedly supported hardly work out all. Still cant get half the USB mice to work with it that I try.

And I only posted that as I had just tried installing Mandrak 8.0 on several different machines with different hardware and all with the same result. X would work half the time and crash others.

I used to argue for Linux. Saying it was the future and all, but if anyone just takes one quick glance at Redhat's current stock they will realize Linux was a fad. And will stay a fad until one very big company gets behind it and redsigns quite a bit about it. And no I am not a Linux expert (Although I have worked with and set up quite a few systems with it). This is just my opinion.

 

[Sunner]

Lucidguy, LOL, very good descriptions

Dfloyd, you must be doing something wrong man.

Last time I had a problem setting X up was several years ago on my, at the time, top of the line Riva128.

Since then I've installed it on laptops, servers, workstations, etc, has allways worked fine.

 

[MGMorden]

dfloyd: Hardware compatibility is there. The drivers may be hard to setup (I've been using it for years so I normally have little trouble, but I can understand the difficulty for a newbie), but that's a usability issue. Virtually all new sound and video cards (and darn near 100% of the network cards) are supported now under Linux. I even got my scanner working under Linux which I could NEVER get working under Win2k. Again I say, Linux's hardware support is gettting better, but in many respects it's pretty close to where it needs to be. All that need be done now are usability enhancements (which the KDE team is doing wonders with). As for checking Redhat's stock, I don't judge Linux's sucess by a company's stock price. Linux isn't a true commercial product, and hence can't be judged in the same fashion. Linux got to where it is today with little to no help from all these vc's and such. They noticed it was successful and tried to make some cash. That didn't work. Does that mean Linux is not suceeding? No. It means that people aren't making money off of it. That's it.

 

[danielshoes]

<<Saying it was the future and all, but if anyone just takes one quick glance at Redhat's current stock they will realize Linux was a fad>>

Linux isn't just a fad. Maybe it is a fad too, but is proving day by day all its potential by being a fad for 11 years, growing up fast in compatibility and features. And even ophan (the most incredible), because it is not a product from a company! Only now (the giant) Microsoft is finally being capable to present a decent operating system (well... even though my scanner doesn't work too in w2k) and it is being menaced by a free operating system!

For me it is more than a simple fad. It is a victory of a good (or should I say better?) product.

In fact, we cannot see (today) all kind of software, games and cool stuff avaliable for Linux. (This comparisson is not even fair) But everything is a progress. And this progress is still stepping forward. I agree with MGMorden 100%.

Oh... BeOS? Yes, I liked it and will keep it installed on my machine. It was a good shot! But I feel sorry. Only the strong will survive. This is the true.

Who remembers OS/2 Warp history in 90's?

 

[TravisBickle]

I had BEOS on a demo disc from a year or two ago, but I never saw the point of installing it. I mean, what would I do with it?
come to think of it, what would I do with Linux? what is the point?? you can't tempt me with free apps, my apps are free already
Windows works!
all the same I think I will try linux just to see WTF people keep going on about, but I don't expect an improvement...

 

[MGMorden]

TravisBickle: Don't expect a revolutionary new experience by using Linux over Windows: there is none. It's just an alternative to Windows (which means that it in many cases does exactly the same thing as Windows), which is all it's really aimed to be (actually, it was originally just an alternative to the commercial Unices). It's the little things that make you use one over another. You say Windows does the same things as Linux so why switch? Well, you could look at it from the other side too. Linux does the same tasks as Windows so why would I use Windows instead? There's always going to be some small things to push you to one side or the other. For me I like the programming advantages in Linux and also like the more homebrew feel of it (computing is fun again. I have wonderful memories from years ago when I'd search down replacements for ansi.sys and mscdex, and ms's mouse driver for dos so that I could free up more conventional memory. that was fun. now what's there to do? RC5 and SETI, which I don't find interesting. Linux revives this atmosphere for me). For those reasons I spend most of my time in Linux, rebooting only to play a game every now and then. If you have no needs for Linux then you have to incentive for using it. The point though is that it is there for people who want it.