BeOS For Linux 309
Bob Gortician writes "The BlueOS guys have posted a few screenshots of their progress in porting the BeOS interface to Linux. Note that this is an intermediary step toward a BeOS clone OS. " I actually had a Be machine for a while, and played with it - nice OS, and well thought out, just a problem of very little applications for it.
The user interface should Be better (Score:1, Interesting)
OT: Wow, no ads rock!
This should cause atleast two main benefits (Score:5, Interesting)
* Linux and other *nix's will gain another easy to use, mature, comprehensive GUI.
* BeOS will gain from more exposure and may get new development.
This is a great way to continue this great product.
Re:Fragmentation... (Score:2, Interesting)
Sure, they might be the lesser of evils as far as usability goes, but I don't think any C&D letter wielding corporation deserves to have its products plugged by a bunch of Linux users.
Re:Fragmentation... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Fragmentation... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:An OS without a niche (Score:1, Interesting)
Yes
Then why wasn't it designed as a toolkit for X, or as an X alternative?
See above.
Was BeOS supposed to utilize SMP better by dividing applications into more threads?
Then why wasn't it designed as an application framework?
Out of interest, what do you think an Operating System is, if its not an "application framework"?
Was BeOS supposed to have a revolutionary OS design?
By still using file systems, giving no thought or insight to security, and a Unix-like model in a new OS, I don't think so.
If it was a Unix-like model, why didn't they have any security? How do your organise your data if you have no filesystem? Hint: Even if you use some fancy relational database, you still need some way of otganising the data on the physical medium. In other words, a file system!
What the hell were they thinking?
What the hell are you smoking?
Licence? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Fragmentation... (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:This should cause atleast two main benefits (Score:3, Interesting)
This article is not about OpenBeOS, which is the work in progress, rewriting bits and pieces of BeOS as open source, and aiming to use the NewOS kernel eventually.
Dinivin
Re:Fragmentation... (Score:4, Interesting)
#2) Have you played with the KD3 beta2 yet? Did it last night and its gorgeous... has some bugs left, but we're talking beta software here. I think if we fix up the config file mess (slackware people excluded, because they like them
On a side note, my two little brothers accidently logged into my linux box. One didn't know he wasn't in windows and was using it fine and the other knew he was in linux but liked it better. Just something to think about.
A good UI is only as good as the apps (Score:3, Interesting)
The one problem I have with Linux is the fact that 90% of the GUI apps have simply idiotic user interfaces. I burst out laughing the first time I used Linuxconf. The dialog window that popped up the first time it ran had a "Quit" button instead of a "Close" button. That is a perfect example of the misleading, inconsistant and just difficult to use interfaces plague the platform. There needs to be some sort of effort put into implementing a consistant UI across all apps, or else all of this work will be for nothing.
On the Mac, and to a slightly lesser extend on Windows, almost every app is interacted with in the same way. A user knows what to expect when they start just about anything but a game. And while you can argue what paradigm is the best, the fact remains the consistancy is the key and Linux lacks not only that, but a core set of accepted design principles. You can argue this will somehow curtail your "freedom" or something all you want, but the fact remains it is a solution that offers much more promise than the embarassingly ameturisih one we currently have to suffer through.
Badly designed user interfaces make Linux look bad. It's simple as that. When Linux looks bad, it's adoption rate is affected. How do people expect to combat the negative stereotypes of the platform if they are unwilling to band together to overcome the easiest to fix, yet most glaring problem with the OS? This isn't as much about asthetics of Linux apps as it is about the success of Linux itself.
If you think "Oh, I just use the command line" or "Who cares, let them program it themselves" or "It's pretty, so what's the problem?" you are being ignorant of the demands and expectations of those you care attempting to bring over from Windows or wherever.
Drop the elitism, drop the selfishness, just realize what needs to be done and understand the awful truth of the computing industry, one that seems lost on most Linux developers:
Give them what they want, or they will go away.
It's not about what you want, it's about what they want, how they want to work. Never forget that. You can't force-feed them every paradigm change and excuse for every bit of laziness on your part. You have to adapt to their needs and adapt quickly. You only get one chance to make a first impression and pissing them off by acting high and mighty about changing things to make their lives easier is not the way to do it. Many a promising platfom has died because of this, don't for a second think Linux is immune to the negative effects of the choices made by its proponents.
People need to realize that ignoring this sort of thing forever will somehow fix the problem, or that we will slowly somehow overcome it. I don't think that meshes very well with reality. It's going to take a clear and consistant vision with a lot of effort on the part of the developers and users to overcome this impasse. And believe me, it is an impasse. The platform is currently reaching critical mass and a point where it decides where it wants to go, and what it wants to be. Sure, this is going to be unpopular, but I don't care, I'd rather get modded down to oblivion than let this go unsaid. Because it needs to be said, and it needs to be appreciated, if not neccesarily liked.
Re:GUI without the GUTS (Score:4, Interesting)
Linux Doesnt Need another interface (Score:1, Interesting)
BeOS filesystem for linux (Score:2, Interesting)
While I am not involved in the BlueOS project, I think my work is complementary to theirs. Eventually, it should be possible to boot from a BeFS volume, compile and run BeOS apps, and not know that it is the linux kernel underneath it all.
Also worth a look is the OpenBeOS project [sourceforge.net], who have their own implementation of the Be Filesystem [sourceforge.net] (which is actually progressing faster than mine).
please to it right (Score:2, Interesting)
A better way of doing it is to think carefully of how one can provide that functionality in a way that is natural to a UNIX and Linux environment, and then build BeOS compatibility on top of that. With that, there is actually a chance that non-BeOS ports will start using the functionality as well.