Interview with OpenBeOS Leader Michael Phipps 167
Gentu writes "Koki from the japanese site jpbe recently interviewed Michael Phipps, the project leader of OpenBeOS, the open source re-implementation of the BeOS. Read here for the english version of the interview where Michael is discussing the roots of the project, the current status, the roadmap, the choice of the MIT license, its relationship to YellowTAB's Zeta and the other efforts to resurrect BeOS, BeUnited and the Sun Java port and more."
Great! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Great! (Score:2)
I demand you re-moderate this as the troll (or possibly flamebait) that it is.
Oh, and just in case anyone has a bebox they'd like to find a good home for, please consider me for the role of caretaker. I refuse to try BeOS until I can run it on the real hardware...
really a shame they're so stubborn (Score:2, Insightful)
He even says in the interview that the kernel is one of the 2 areas most in need of development help. Wake up!
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
"just a matter of time" (Score:1, Redundant)
even on large projects, developer time is a finite resource. much more so for marginal projects like this one.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:really a shame they're so stubborn (Score:3, Informative)
Well, I don't know if it's realtime, but you might find this interesting:
http://l4ka.org/projects/pistachio/
Re:really a shame they're so stubborn (Score:3, Interesting)
I'd rather see a unified and open driver interface that multiple operating systems and architectures could use without the porting. Then you'd only have to implement the interface, and just nick the drivers from somewhere else.
(oh, OT: yeah my website is down for the moment. Working on it)
Re:really a shame they're so stubborn (Score:2)
maybe you read the news also.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:really a shame they're so stubborn (Score:1)
Re:really a shame they're so stubborn (Score:2)
'sides, if they are smart enough to write an OS, i'm sure they are smart enough to target an OS like freebsd or netbsd, or even linux, and port the drivers over.
Re:really a shame they're so stubborn (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:really a shame they're so stubborn (Score:3, Interesting)
So that the system feels faster. Which is when you think about it perfect for a desktop user since they rarely actually need any true performance. The mouse was responsive, things appear on the screen in a blink... to a desktop user that's heaven, even if it takes 4hrs on to apply a basic gaussen blur to an image in photoshop on a 3ghz processor with a gig of ram.
BeOS performance. (Score:3, Informative)
I've had similar experiences with audio effects. BeOS was written to speed up multimedia opperations as well. I don't know where you got your idea that BeOS traded multimedia performance for desktop snappiness. That's just not t
Re:BeOS performance. (Score:2)
Photo editing really isn't a multimedia effect, it's generally math crunching (although admittedly on newer video cards it's becoming more and more crun
Combine this thread with another: (Score:2)
Well, once you get a few more CPUs, and you learn to push the vector math to the vector processor [slashdot.org], then you begin to feel the difference [apple.com].
BeOS predicted that eventually, Moore's Law would begin to fade or would periodically dip so that SMP systems would be employed to gain performance. The heavy threading will make it trivial to scale performance approaching linearity with the number of processors.
Think about fiber busses on the system board. Think stackable external CPU modules. Think Beowulf... (sorry
Re:Combine this thread with another: (Score:2)
BeOS predicted that eventually, Moore's Law would begin to fade or would periodically dip so that SMP systems would be employed to gain performance. The heavy threading will make it trivial to scale performance approaching linearity with the number of processors.
Think about fiber busses on the system board. Think stackable external CPU modules. Think Beowulf... (sorry,
Re:really a shame they're so stubborn (Score:3, Informative)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it wasn't. BeOS didn't have fibers at all (fibers are lightweight user-scheduled threads on NT), and its scheduler started choking at around 400 threads on a 300MHz PII. What made BeOS feel fast was:
1) A preemptible, low-latency kernel, which Linux has now,
2) A scheduler that was really good at seperating interactive from non-interactive processes, which Linux is gett
Re:really a shame they're so stubborn (Score:3, Insightful)
I for one am very glad they don't, I really don't like *nix (or MS for that matter, but that's another topic altogether)
Re:really a shame they're so stubborn (Score:2)
Re:really a shame they're so stubborn (Score:5, Insightful)
The whole time, being a Linux user and developer, I was talking about opensourcing this and that, there was so much opensource in BeOS to begin with, why not take the bull by the horns. Be used Linux as a host platform to develop beos. Be used GCC. Be carped driver designs, and an OS platform from GPL libre software. Nothing ever happened. I even wrote to the company and explained it, the response is that we don't want to help linux, we want to be Be. Now the community is doing this and they are still against Linux; their FAQ even mentions that OpenBeos on linux would be an extension to linux and that is somehow a bad thing.
Long story short, I've got no sour grapes, I don't care about the money, time, effort or anything else, I think some of the ideas behind beos are cool. What chaps me is the unwillingness to play ball and the simple lack of a techincal explanation as to what Linux or BSD kernels (which ones did you look at?) doesn't do that the be kernel needs. Are we talking new APIs? Are talking messaging queues? Latency isn't there (I call bullshit on this one, especially with 2.4 and now 2.6) what exactly is it? In the interview he even says outright that he hasn't gone very deep, pretty much just dismissed it.
Be's problem as a company and a community has always been lot's of talk with no beef and some awful fear of playing with others. "Pervasive threading this," "media OS that" what does that mean? Why is it good? You'll never get an answer with numbers, at best "it feels" will be said. Further, in specifics, what is it that you need the linux kernel to do and why is it easier to start from scratch rather than fix linux to do that? Even if it isn't rolled into mainline, look at ucLinux, rtLinux, and other "forks." I'm simply asking as an engineer, which problem space is bigger? Again, I wish them well and have no real sour grapes other than I really want a project like this to succeed and from the information presented to me from them they aren't making good engineering decisions and aren't making a plan for success. If it's simply an experiment and they want to do it all then say that, but they aren't saying that and that makes me think they either don't know or it's some cultural flaw and either way I don't think it is a good thing for their success.
Re:really a shame they're so stubborn (Score:1)
# Quote from Ximian's Robert Love interview on OSNews.com (http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=5459)
OsNews: Where would you like to see kernel 2.8 or 3.0 to go towards? Are there plans to implement a "visual" method and help users install easily third party drivers, like nvidia's or winmodem drivers instead of using the command line to achieve this?
Robert Love: There is definitely no plans to make binary drivers happier. Linus has made it clear: he and many other kern
Re:really a shame they're so stubborn (Score:2)
Re:really a shame they're so stubborn (Score:3, Informative)
The Linux kernel is used be the BeOS community (Score:5, Informative)
Discussions on Slashdot are good, but sometimes sterile. Do you think the Linux kernel would be a better kernel for OpenBeOS? Cool! Go help the BlueEyedOS guys. Of course, that would involve a lot of donated work to a software that may never see the day of light, but, if you enjoy coding, go for that.
Open Source that you can't modify? (Score:2)
Better they decide. (Score:2)
otherwise they lack any credibility due to the confussion....
Re:really a shame they're so stubborn (Score:1)
the original beos had excellent multitasking and multithreading support (you could run 20 mpeg movies at once.. and 50 mp3's... and there wouldnt be system lag.. at ALL.)
this is what these guys are trying to re-implement, and the last thing we need is yet another linux or bsd based system
the point of opensource is to be innovative. not to copy and work off someone else's technol
Re:really a shame they're so stubborn (Score:1)
Re:really a shame they're so stubborn (Score:2)
The Kernel is what makes BeOS behave like BeOS. If you use a Linux kernel on it, it'll just be a different skin for Linux.
Are you suggesting.... (Score:2)
Are you suggesting they make BeSD?
BeGone (Score:1, Interesting)
Ok not to sound mean but aside from niche markets why would someone want to take BeOS serious, and I'm asking this as if I were a CTO'ish person. For one, with all the garbage being funneled into things *Open Source* by companies like SC(um)O and Mickeysoft, the entire *Open* anything is something I would (if I were purhasing) stay away from until the smoke clears.
Now I'm not saying BeOS is garbage in fact I have an older cd lying around somewhere, and it's pretty neat, but why (aside from geekiness) would
Re:BeGone (Score:2, Informative)
Re:BeGone (Score:3, Funny)
If Windows and the UNIXes are to survive at all, it will be among OS dilettante dabblers.
Re: Here, here! (Score:2)
The thing that bothers me is that I wish I could treat
I always notice things I wish I could revise but don't have the ability to. Oh well. Fuck it.
Re:BeGone (Score:2, Insightful)
and make he all-in-one super-ninja-hop-chop-socky OS]
According to what standards ? or better whose standards?
Do you honestly think that all the needs of the diverse environments can be filled by a single os? Think of the difference between the server , desktop and mainframe,
Second, is the cross-distro-platform thing desirable always? doesn't it also mean that you get the denominator of all but not the 100% for the particular pla
justify your love (Score:3)
Priorities (Score:2)
but why (aside from geekiness)
For godsake dude, where are your priorities?!?!
-- MarkusQ
P.S. I am serious as I ever get.
time ? (Score:3, Redundant)
I've done some small-scale OS projects, and even those took a serious bite out of my spare time, up to a level where I was getting sloppy in my day-time job... I could not, in any way, manage such a huge project unless some company paid me for it. (and even then i'd probably wouldn't have the skills, but thats another matter)
Re:time ? (Score:1)
Can't they see... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Can't they see... (Score:2)
Advantages? (Score:2, Redundant)
Re:Advantages? (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't know if those feature are impossible to port on Linux, but so far they haven't been replicated on Linux:
1) fast boot time: BeOS booted to the GUI on ~10s (to a usable GUI! Not like WinXP..), on Linux it take far longer, booting the kernel is slow, and KDE is quite slow to start too.
Usually, after this, someone remarks that with Linux, you don't have to stop your computer, true, but my computer is very noisy and I like to sleep at nights!
So fast boot time is quite interesting for desktop users, and no LinuxBiOS or equivalent doesn't count
2) responsiveness: BeOS apps felt very responsive, you were never "blocked", I think that the extensive usage of thread in the apps was the reason.
As a counter-example, there is Mozilla: if it doesn't manage to reach a server for a new page, the whole window can become freezed, in a responsive application, I should be able to continue browsing with the other tabs..
Unfortunately I don't really think it was a BeOS kernel thing, otherwise it would be easy to replicate, I suspect that BeOS guidelines for programming apps were pushing the usage of thread which explains the smooth end-user experience..
And changing the design of Linux applications to become smooth will take a looonnng time, if ever.
Oh and I'm not trolling against Linux, I just explain what my end-user experience of BeOS was: much better than any Linux so far, but with too few apps!!!
All BeOS technical prowess meant nothing as there were far too few apps..
How does a multi-threaded GUI work? (Score:5, Interesting)
While Java tries not to be tied to any one OS, you kind of see the OS poking through. Java too has a single-threaded GUI, and you are not supposed to invoke methods on any GUI object from other threads apart from InvokeNow() (guess what -- SendMessage()) and InvokeLater() (also guess what -- PostMessage()). The advantage of the single-threaded GUI is that any GUI method is in effect synchronized -- each GUI method is essentially its own critical section that won't get stepped on or poked at for the duration of its execution, and variables won't get changed unless you SendMessage() or PostMessage() (i.e. cooperative reentrancy) to somewhere else.
How does this work when you have a multi-threaded GUI -- are you declaring entire methods "synchronized" or have to have locks up the wazoo, or are there some easily-understood protocols?
Now apart from the single-threaded GUI, Windows has a way of "going away" for 10's of milliseconds at the system level -- disk reading is very coarse grained, and they say it is for performance reasons. These hyperthreaded Pentium 4's are creating very cheap context switches while the processors are getting so much faster that what used to be 10's of ms is now in single digits, so Windows and Linux and whatever are perhaps getting to multimedia Nirvana by brute computing power. Moore's law, yes BeOS can do it all on a 60 MHz Pentium I, but no one is running a 60 MHz Pentium I these days.
Re:How does a multi-threaded GUI work? (Score:2)
Only if the bottleneck is the CPU: if your application is busy waiting for the disk or the network, a faster CPU won't help you..
That's why I'm quite pissed at single threaded applications which freeze the whole window when they access the disk or the network: in Windows explorer if I click on a directory with lots of file inside, the whole windows freeze, if I made a mistake, I cannot choose
CPU bottleneck (Score:2)
That Explorer freezes on a file-tree expand is the fault of Explorer, and it would be Explorer's fault under BeOS if it were written that same way. The kind
Unresolved issues (Score:5, Interesting)
At this point I don't know whether I consider BeOS to be worth defending. I guess it comes down to these questions: is BeOS fundamentally a more efficient platform for multimedia development? Is Linux architecture so different as to be incapable of matching BeOS performance in regards to MIDI performance, audio processing, nonlinear video editing, or 3D development? Is the performance gap substantial?
Even if the answer to all of these questions is "yes," surely it is not so when comparing 64-bit Linux to the BeOS (with the exception of MIDI performance). And if 32-bit Open BeOS is so difficult to realize, then how much moreso for a 64-bit BeOS?
BeOS has a potential market in that there is no other "multimedia OS" as defined by Be, and for that reason there are hangers-on. Sadly, the implications brought up in previous BeOS discussions suggest that BeOS itself fails as a multimedia OS. If anyone has any encouraging counterpoints, please share.
Re:Unresolved issues (Score:3, Insightful)
With the increase in corporate interest in many open source projects, I think sometimes people miss the point about OSS. To qoute your post:
I guess it comes down to these questions: is BeOS fundamentally a more efficient platform for multimedia development? Is Linux architecture so different as to be incapable of matching BeOS performance in rega
intolerance of other poeples business (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:intolerance of other poeples business (Score:3, Interesting)
Linux gets some new kick-ass threading? WAH, it breaks Wine. Bruce Perens is coming out with a new distro? WAA, just use Gentoo. Oracle is making Linux their primary platform? BOOHOO, use mysql. RedHat has a new C++ compiler? MOMMMY, it's not an official release.
Basically you are dealing with the Technology Taliban here. The only stuff that's "good" is Unix and Perl and other "Back To Basics" fundementalist crap that's older than
Re:intolerance of other poeples business (Score:2, Interesting)
People fear change in general, and when you've invested a lot of time & mental effort in learning a certain OS or language, the threat of having to learn something new, and all the associated stress can cause people to enter whine mode pretty easily.
Re:intolerance of other poeples business (Score:1)
I understand it's difficult to be kicked when you are down but perhaps they should have thought about that while they were on their way down.
Every OS community has their share of asses including Linux/*BSD. Of course, if the bottom drops out of a FOSS OS, the rest of the community isn't scrambling to re-write thin
Re:intolerance of other poeples business (Score:2)
Yes linux isn't as fast in terms of audio and
Re:intolerance of other poeples business (Score:3)
And what would you say if I told you that a one-OS-fit-all approach is flawed, and that 1000+ node SGI "cluster" (you got that wrong, SGI isn't into clusters but large NUMA monsters) will not do for a destkop OS any good?
I know, you have your Linux and that must be everbody's pet project, or else... 'cause you only like or/and know Linux. It's hard to understand things
Re:intolerance of other poeples business (Score:2)
Try again:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF - 8&oe=UTF -8&q=SGI+linux+cluster&btnG=Google+Search
"What would you say if I told you that I tried Linux 2.6.0 on the same computere where BeOS is installed, and BeOS still felt much snappier?"
How can you feel snappier than instant response? Unless your test system is under 1ghz or doesn't have much ram (the ram being far more important on a linux system, which won't g
Re:intolerance of other poeples business (Score:2)
I am convinced that there are different OS-es exactly because one can't perform in all the roles efficiently. If I was wrong on this one, today all computers would be running the same identical OS, but they aren't.
I am not karma-whoring, I couldn't care less about Karma. If I wanted to, I'd be praising Linux in all circumstances, as that's what most Slashdot readers and moderators would find appropriate. But I don't think as the majority, but rather a
Re:intolerance of other poeples business (Score:2)
"I am convinced that there are different OS-es exactly because one can't perform in all the roles efficiently. If I was wrong on this one, today all computers would be running the same identical OS, but they aren't."
I'd counter that what is and what's best are not always the same thing. Your own logic supports my case better than yours since there are alot more computers currently running linux in all 3 of the major markets than BeOS, including the desktop.
I
Re:intolerance of other poeples business (Score:2)
That said, I would like to remind you that for real-time applications, the Linux kernel has to be compiled with special patches and mo
I would say... (Score:2)
Re:I would say... (Score:2)
Re:intolerance of other poeples business (Score:2)
Be isn't about features, it's about feature-set (Score:2, Interesting)
Shared experience. (Score:2)
If I see a felow pedestrian going to fall in the same hole in which I just falled in, what I am suppossed to do? Warn him or wait there to laugh at him once he falls?
User: OpenBeOS or the original? (Score:2)
I thought they changed the name (Score:4, Funny)
Sockets! (Score:2, Interesting)
Linux Performance Issues (Score:1)
Re:Spot the trend (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Spot the trend (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Spot the trend (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Spot the trend (Score:2)
Re:Spot the trend (Score:2)
Re:Spot the trend (Score:2)
Niche markets (Re:Spot the trend) (Score:2, Interesting)
Image all those webpads or Tablet PCs and arrange a setup of those components (TC 1000 or a cheap webpad) it will cost about 2000$/EURO, put a Open Source OS and a Point-of-Sale software on it and safe money
I think all embedded solutions with OSS have a big potential.
Re:Niche markets (Re:Spot the trend) (Score:1)
For the rest of it, you're comparing the price of all the parts with the price of a completed (and hopefully supported) unit. Being able to remove the cost of the OS from the price is nice, but a small part the total
Re:Spot the trend (Score:2)
Well, I won't be convinced until I see the Netcraft results to prove it. I'm no Kreskin.
Re:Please give us Firebird first (Score:5, Insightful)
This is not a development effort of "just because I want to". A new OS that is open source increases the size of our OS ecosystem...this is one of the greatest threats that Linux poses against MS. Linux today enjoys widespread support, but having more choices out there is a very good thing. Who can say what the OS landscape will look like in 5-10 years? Think back even five years and you'll see what I mean!
As a supposed Linux user, would you then bash OBOS because it wasn't Linux? That's hypocritical at best, and spiteful at worst.
Age of Spiritual Machines (Score:5, Insightful)
In Kurzweils excellent book Age of Spiritual Machines [amazon.com] he is referencing some computer experiments on developments of Artificial "Lifeforms".
One of the unexpected things the researchers found (can't remember who it was) was that increasing the "Mutation rate" was not enough. You needed a complex and rapid changing Ecosystem.
OS's that finds it way into new application areas provides presicely such an Ecosystem that the dominant OS might later adapt to.
As an axample we can look at embedded devices. The pressure from Symbian in the Smartphone market causes Linux and Windows for that matter to change and adapt. The adaption does not need to be Monolithic as is the case with Windows but an OS bifurcation is fine and actually more akin to the real world evolution. In that sense OpenBeOS can be a real plus to everyone. User or not
Well, Your point is well taken
OS "ecosystem"? WTF? (Score:1)
This whole "re-inventing the wheel" NIMBY bullshit is why Free Software is a huge joke in the corporate world.
Re:OS "ecosystem"? WTF? (Score:3, Insightful)
Even if I agreed with you, which I do not, you are wrong even on your own premisses.
Problems can be solved in two ways. A point solution and a general solution.
Point solutions as you advocate tend to created further problems down the line so they are sub-optimal when looked at in a larger context.
Since you seem to value the Eco-system comparison, your suggested point solution is like the Koala Bear only being able to e
Re:OS "ecosystem"? WTF? (Score:2, Insightful)
what makes you think the problem is "solved"?
has any OS achieved perfection?
Re:Please give us Firebird first (Score:2, Offtopic)
That's the fun with hobby projects. Programmers work in their spare time on what they like and see as worth doing.
I like BeOS and I help out with an open source project for it. Would I work on another project that you think requires more support ? Only if it's fun. It's my free time and I don't get paid for it, after all.
Re:Please give us Firebird first (Score:1, Offtopic)
license
language
audience
scope
For a fact, if all of the Open Source intellect converged on a One True (Relatively Small Set Of) Answer(s) to the above bullets, it would arguable be a Good Thing, but figure the odds.
Have you extensively used linux? (Score:2)
This is not just an example, this is exactly what I have had to do with all the distros I have tried on my laptop.
Re:Have you extensively used linux? (Score:2)
And what happens when you get a wireless card that isn't supported by windows 2000 or XP. (like the wifi card in my thinkpad isn't supported) You have to download the driver, and force it to install, even through windows says that the driver isn't signed and that it doesn't match the hardware. Oh, except that windows doesn't
Re:Have you extensively used linux? (Score:2)
Re:Have you extensively used linux? (Score:2)
No, I didn't even have drivers for either of the network interfaces until i went online and downloaded them. Of course, with no network access, the only way to do that is to boot into linux and burn those drivers to CD.
No drivers available in the default install == not supported by windows.
Linux supports all my hardware right out of the box, why can't windows?
Re:Have you extensively used linux? (Score:2)
Re:Have you extensively used linux? (Score:2)
Unsigned drivers do work, it's just Microsoft's way of shifting the blame for hardware crashes. Drivers run in kernel mode and a bad driver is the most common cause of a crashing OS.
You are comparing the available hardware support of the Linux kernel with the hardware that is supported on the Windows CD. Considering Windows still comes on one CD (Debian has 3 binary CDs) it has support for quite a lot of hardware.
I can name you at least two pieces of hardware wh
Re:Have you extensively used linux? (Score:2)
Most new computers come with windows restore disks (which spew all sorts of nasty software into your system), not with driver disks.
You are comparing the available hardware support of the Linux kernel with the hardware that is supported on the Windows CD. Considering Windows still comes on one CD (Debian has 3 binary CDs) it has support for quite a lot of hardware.
Debian comes on 3 CDs only if you want the 14,000 or so packages that come with debian but don't
Re:Have you extensively used linux? (Score:2)
All drivers for Windows are binary only. You never need access to a compiler, until Linux is in that position (and 2.6 does make that partly possible) it will have limitations.
I run Linux with 2.6 on my main computer and love it, however there are times when I wish I
Re:Have you extensively used linux? (Score:2)
Sounds like you don't have hotplug or discover installed. They do exactly that. No wizard, though; You just plug the hardware in and it works.
Re:Have you extensively used linux? (Score:2)
Waste of Time? (Score:3, Insightful)
No they are not required to contribute
Re:Isn't this stupid ? (Score:1)
OpenBe is wonderful. Having numerous OS choices to select from is wonderful. Cheers to everyone who wants to and does make their own Operating System
Having all these OS's around will serve one purpose: it'll devaluate the OS market. Good.
That needs to happen.
Re:Isn't this stupid ? (Score:3, Informative)
Be was not immune from making mistakes - their 'focus shift' to an embedded OS cost them their company.
If OpenBeOS focuses on being the happy medium between Linux and Windows, I can see it making great strides.
If Linux could get the raw speed and a consistent GUI interface that BeOS has, I could see it being a waste of time. I don't think that's going to happen. Linux and its GUIs are tryin
Your group-think is to narrow... (Score:1)
Because it wouldn't be "BeOS" then?
"Every BeOS project owner waiting for a fortune will get demotivated sooner or later."
Maybe there are more important things then 'fortunes' that motivate people...
Re:Your group-think is to narrow... (Score:1)