Be Inc. IPO-bound 105
Dr. Tom was the first to send us
the Be Inc. IPO announcement from E-Trade. Very cool OS, and I hope the sale goes well. E-Trade will be accepting apps for distribution to members, and also notes that while the registration statement has been filed, it's not been accepted by the SEC. Check out the Yahoo Biz story for more details.
Re:Who uses Be anyway??? (Score:1)
Go Be!
Anything you can do, I can do better? (Score:1)
How do you know they aren't doing anything with settops? Be is fairly well behaved when it comes to vapourware, but that doesn't mean they don't have settops in development. Besides, BeOS' small, tight, fast kernel would scale wonderfully to a settop.
Failed to innovate? (There's that "I" word again.) Granted, Be hasn't "integrated" NetPositive or made their UI widgets skinable, but BeOS' API is absoultely brilliant. It has a logical object model, complements the architecture wonderfully, and is simple enough for an "idiot Visual Basic" programmer like myself to understand. Besides, the real innovation and the real killer apps will come from competition in the application space, not from one company building things into its operating system.
It's hard to "screw away" advantages that are so intrinsic to the OS. Any well-written app for any platform will gain from that platform's advantages.
You're right about advocacy, though. BeOS attracts many Mac and Amiga partisans by its very nature, so it's easy to envision Team OS/2 calibre religious fervor. Just like any other OS, BeOS advocates must build up BeOS, not tear down [Windows | Mac | Linux | etc].
There's still plenty of work for Be to do (accelerated OpenGL, more hardware support, Java, and SBLive drivers (HINT, HINT), just off the top of my head), but this IPO may give them the infusion of cash they need to get those things done, and reach the critical mass Linux has.
Keith Russell
OS != Religion
Running Linux applications under Be (Score:1)
But for text-mode applications, as far as I know the port isn't hard. I believe there is now mySQL for BeOS, for instance.
D
----
Re:So what's the _real_ reason y'all hate Be? (Score:1)
Amen (Score:1)
Be was up and running in just a few minutes (release 3, 3.1, 4 and 4.5) and the _ONLY_ text file I had to fart with was the hosts file.
(Having to edit a TEXT file to tell your WM what options to put on the on-screen menu, who thought that up?)
Be on non-standard hardware (Score:1)
But I will note that BeOS supports my AMD K6/300 on my IBM Aptiva just fine. This is a more or less random "open box" system I bought at Best Buy for $ 559.
The main reason co-existing is so important is that someone will say "Okay, I'm interested in doing cool media stuff, but at the end of the day I need to use Microsoft Office." Instead of antagonizing that guy by saying that you have to give up Office, JLG says that you can keep Office, but if you want to do cool digital media, we have the right way forward.
I think BeOS appeals to the more pragmatic side of us: Want to run cool software that doesn't crash and burn all the time? Check out Be.
D
----
Re:Actually it's more like $60... (Score:1)
Fear (Score:1)
I *think* (and I could be wrong) that they are afraid that Be will steal Linux's thunder and Linux will be an also0ran to yet ANOTHER comercial OS.
Of course it could also be the strong neo-communist "if it ain't free it's crap" ethos in the Linux community.
Re:Who uses Be anyway??? (Score:1)
I'd rather not rely on the numbers you pull out
of your ass...
BeOS is a very young OS. (And don't anyone tell
me it has been around since 1991, because *IT* hasn't... the company has, not the OS). x86
is the most popular platform available, and it's
only been out for x86 for about a year and a half
now (R3).
For chrissakes, they haven't even put the OS out
on store shelves yet! You can't compare it to any
other OS's in that league yet, like Windows, Linux, Mac, etc. Wait until they get more money
for distribution, advertisement, and of course,
engineers!
You ain't seen nothing yet.
-WW
P.S. I bet you didn't know that a large portion
of the EBAY stock holders are the loyal customers
and fans of EBAY. EBAY shot through the roof for
that very reason. BEOS will do the same. I'm going
to be putting my money where my mouth is, too.
--
Why are there so many Unix-using Star Trek fans?
When was the last time Picard said, "Computer, bring
Re:Good move (probably their only move) (Score:1)
yet that looks any good -- and they all go through
the roof. They have to list all the possible RISKS
in the prospectus, so they usually aren't a very
glowing report on the company's chances.
However, I'd never feel more comfortable betting
my money in Vegas -- the stock market has much
better odds if you know what you're doing.
-WW
--
Why are there so many Unix-using Star Trek fans?
When was the last time Picard said, "Computer, bring
Re:Wow. Now if only they could kick the Mac's a**. (Score:1)
You call yourselves Geeks?! (Score:1)
You little boys call yourselves Geeks? Come on.
I use Linux as my web server/e-mail host/Internet presence. That's what Linux is good for. If you want Unix at home, there ya go.
BeOS is a consumer-ready, personal computer OS. It is faster than Linux at anything graphics and media-intensive, and is quite capable.
Note that I also have Win98 installed on my x86 BeOS Pentium III PC and have 2 blue & white G3's and an iMac to boot (pun intended). Let's just say that in the time it takes any of my other machines to boot, BeOS can boot approximately 14 times (I tested it out).
Not to mention that (like Linux), BeOS rarely ever crashes.
Linux is not going to be a consumer-ready OS any time soon. Unix is simply not ready for consumers -- my parents could install BeOS in a few short minutes just as I did.
And let's not go there with regards to the API! BeOS is the finest API in the land, bar none, for any kind of consumer/client-side software development. Apps with full GUI's can be built in under 100K and there's a nice POSIX interface layer which makes porting all your favorite Linux apps a breeze.
All Be needs to beat Apple is more apps (coming soon, including some from my company, Buzzlabs [buzzlabs.com]) and better hardware manufacturer support/bundling deals.
It *will* happen -- it's just a matter of when. BeOS is the finest operating system developed for consumers TO DATE, Linux most definitely included.
With the next major release of BeOS, y'all Linux weenies will be running for cover. The net networking system will make BeOS just as capable a server as Linux.
Let's work and play together, folks. Wake up and check it out. It's not evil like Windows, it's not arrogant and outdated and crap like Mac OS. It's the best of all worlds, Linux features included.
Steve Klingsporn
steve@buzzlabs.com
http://www.buzzlabs.com/~steve
short memory (Score:1)
intel are not dissimilar from microsoft in their competitive practice, and so it's important to keep them onside as well. don't worry, you'll see beos get the market position they deserve when the market is ready for it.
Re:Please read the prospectus before speaking for (Score:1)
IIRC, BeOS has some market penetration in the digital media area, seems like Be should try and sweet talk Adobe and Avid into supporting BeOS.
Re:You call yourselves Geeks?! (Score:1)
BeOS might have a lot of features and maybe (soon) some great apps. However, it is going to have to create a HUGE hype to get even near the size of the linux community.
I have nothing against BeOS, the more OS's the merrier, im anti-monopolistic (if thats even a word heh).
Re:You call yourselves Geeks?! (Score:2)
A *single-user* server? Yeah, sounds great.
--
BeOS primetime? (Score:1)
Umm... no. It's not ready for prime time.
Look at the list of things Be doesn't support:
* DVD Playback - the number-one reason I don't sit in BeOS all the time.
* SCSI Support - very poor, the variety of devices is very narrow.
* Consumer 3D Hardware - No TNT? No go.
* Consumer 2D Hardware - Be needs video drivers, badly.
* Multiuser - Or even multiple user profiles!
* Remote administration
Don't get me wrong, I like using the BeOS. It's a well-crafted piece of closedware, with a clean interface, an absurdly straightforward installation procedure, a nice API, fantastic multiprocessor support, and lots of potential. But those things don't make it ready for prime time. A boatload of drivers are still needed before Be has anything other than a really, really cool toy to offer.
I admit this is getting better as we speak, but it's blatantly incorrect to state that BeOS is ready for prime time. It only runs usably on less than one out of three machines, and even then, there are some things missing here and there.
I'd write some drivers myself, instead of just bitching about it, but I know fsck-all about good driver coding, and I'd be sure to do more harm than good. And of course, like everyone else, I can fall back on the "no time" excuse, too!
Re:What happened to the Be website (Score:1)
x86 SMP (Score:1)
Re:BeGone (Score:1)
a quick buck and thats the bottom line."
I think you don't know what you're talking about,
and that's the bottom line.
They will make 50-60 million on this IPO,
regardless of how high it skyrockets, or how low
it falls on the first day of trading...
That 50 million will be spent pretty quickly on
advertisements, distribution channels, engineers,
etc.
And just how exactly do you think a public company
can make a "quick buck"? It's not like Gassee can
just split up the 50 million with the rest of his
employees -- a public company is answerable to
its shareholders.
In other words, a flawed argument on your part.
"I bought the BeOS 4 OS for 59 bucks to try it
out and their lack of drivers sucked as much as
their technical support."
You act as if the information on what hardware
was supported was kept hidden... they practically
SCREAMED that Release 4 was for geeks and
enthusiasts, and was only supported on a limited
amount of hardware. You could even look up what
drivers were available from 3rd parties on their
BeWare site. If your hardware was not supported,
and you bought it anyway, then that is your
problem.
As for their tech support, I have had good results
from them in general, as I have heard from other
users as well.
"The lack of security on the OS is also a joke."
So I assume you've broken into a BeOS machine
over a network? How'd you do it? Seems like it'd
be quite hard and all, considering it ain't
multi-user nor shipped with a whole ton of
servers.
--
Why are there so many Unix-using Star Trek fans?
When was the last time Picard said, "Computer, bring
Re:BeOS primetime? (Score:1)
>it's blatantly incorrect to state that BeOS is
>ready for prime time. It only runs usably on
>less than one out of three machines, and even
>then, there are some things missing here and
>there.
Someone isn't listening. As I said, the lack of hardware support is a function of low profile which is a function of poor marketing (the "complement to Windows" crap). If they had challenged Windows vocally, like Linux has, they would have gotten media attention-->high profile-->lots of developers. Aside from which--one out of three machines wouldn't be bad, if they had actually marketed themselves onto all those machines. They failed by not being vocal, and they boxed themselves into a niche. But I'll address a few of your points anyway...
>Look at the list of things Be doesn't support:
>* DVD Playback - the number-one reason I don't sit in BeOS all the time.
So, you usually sit around watching DVD movies all the time? Most of us have better uses for our computers. I mean, DVD support is *fun*, but won't be a necessity for another few years--by which time Be, as long as they pull their marketing act together and start shouting, will surely support all major DVD-ROMs and DVD-RAMs. Being the "Media OS", I bet they're working on it hard right now and will support a few major brands in the next release.
>* SCSI Support - very poor, the variety of devices is very narrow.
They're right not to have SCSI support, because SCSI is as good as dead. There are FAR TOO MANY different SCSI devices which lack any real compatibility standards--this isn't Be's fault, it's the fault of SCSI manufacturers everywhere. Aside from which, SCSI is a dying market--USB is kicking it around now. Many USB implementations actually outperform SCSI implementations in real-world performance tests--just look at all those peripherals tests in PC magazines. And how many of us have SCSI racks at home? I didn't think so. USB is the future, SCSI is the past.
>* Consumer 3D Hardware - No TNT? No go.
They're working on it. You can't expect them to have all this support for hardware when, as I said earlier, they shot themselves in the foot with marketing and lost out on the chance to recruit a lot of the chaps who are now developing in the Linux community.
>* Consumer 2D Hardware - Be needs video drivers, badly.
As I said above...
>* Multiuser - Or even multiple user profiles!
>* Remote administration
These last two--how many of us need them? Only corporate administrator a**holes or people who can't be trusted to run a machine (i.e., the stupid or malicious) need remote administration. Lack of remote administration is NOT what's preventing them from being a challenger for the desktop market--as I said, *low profile* is. Low profile is *also* the source of their lack of drivers and hardware support. As for user profiles--the same is true: not an obstacle to the desktop market. They suck anyway by just taking up useless space; standard configurations should work for each user of a multiuser machine, and if you're talking about security then nothing beats using encrypted volumes for each user anyway, with the passwords held by administrators as well as employees. My understanding is that Be will support encrypted volumes soon.
Re:Wow. Now if only they could kick the Mac's a**. (Score:1)
Re:x86 SMP (Score:1)
S3 Trios are 'obsolete' as of 4.5 (Score:1)
Re:BeOS primetime? (Score:1)
While you've raised some pretty good points, I think that BeOS R4.5 does have an adequate level of hardware support for common configurations. Not a good level, but an adequate level.
Would it be better if it could do hardware-accelerated OpenGL on TNT-based cards? Sure, and I suspect there'll be drivers that support that for non-Voodoo cards before R5.
But even if you just subscribe to the "media" schtick, the lack of 3D hardware acceleration isn't that important if your definition of media is, say, audio or video editing. With those the framework is already there, and in practice, not just theory. (Visit Cirque de Soleil in Orlando, or the Broadway production of "Ragtime," or the video-editing demonstration at the ZEUM hands-on museum in LA.) What about web design work? Or 2D "cel-style" animation with Lost Marble's Moho, a program I haven't seen the likes of on any other platform yet?
Sure, there are holes there, but it's not like the initial Intel release anymore. We're talking potholes now, not gaping sinkholes. And, I agree with the commenter who disputed that remote administration and multiuser capability are make-or-break features for a large percentage of the audience. (They're certainly not important to me--I'm running Linux now, but I'm just one user, after all. And maybe your office is better than mine, but at work I really don't want my company's IS department trying to adminster my PC for me. NT is annoying enough without SMS futzing with it, thank you very much!)
Re:seriously though (Score:2)
Something that appeals to me about Be, as opposed to, say, Yahoo or Excite, is that that Be actually has a product, a physical "thing" that they can sell. Rather than being a nebulous, non-producing company, they do have something to sell. Now, that may not make any difference if the operating system ends up being another OS/2, but it does make them somewhat more traditional than the current crop of Internet companies.
That being said, I can say that I have no intention of investing my money in Be. I don't think that they are poised to step in as a replacement for anyone. They certainly don't compete with Microsoft and they aren't the media darling that is Linux. But perhaps they will find a niche.
Oh, and I do use BeOS 4.5 on one of my systems, but only because they sent it to me for free!
=h=
seriously though (Score:1)
Re:seriously though (Score:1)
Hemos and gold coins and chicks by the pool (Score:1)
Who uses Be anyway??? (Score:2)
Just a bunch of daytraders looking for the next 'tech' IPO they think that they can schmooze a buck from.
I'd bet more people use FORTH than Be.
My personal doubts about IPO (Score:1)
My main problem with public companies is that it tends to degrade the character of a company. Whenever you give up a part of your control (as the head of a company) to a guy with money, you lose a lot
When big money starts to get involved, the main focus of the company is going to shift from making the best possible OS, to the most profit. This is a general statement. Of course, private companies seek to make profit too, and yes, sometimes profit and making a better products are not mutually exclusive.
When it comes down to the line, and there is a tough decesion to make between short term profitability, and the general health of the product, the publically controlled companies will generally choose the former, while the private company has more of a probability of taking the hard road (depending of course, on the head)
I have nothing concrete to lay down, these are just my feelings about the issue.
Laxative
Re:BeOS (Score:1)
Stan "Myconid" Brinkerhoff
Good move (probably their only move) (Score:1)
Can you imagine a partnership between Creative and Be Inc? If Creative (along with EMU and Ensoniq) built a mega-featured music workstation using BeOS, I know I'd be drolling.... I'm picturing something that looks almost like an iMac, only with lots of wonderful analog knobs all over the place... yum...
Anyhow, a big influx of cash never hurt anyone (ehem). I just hope that E-Trade knows what they're doing with this offering...
-NooM
Re:Good move (probably their only move) (Score:1)
The underwriters are Volpe Brown Whelan & Company and Needham & Company.
After reading through the prospectus, I have to say that I'd feel more comfortable taking my cash to Las Vegas and throwing it down on the craps table. They definitely have a very, very weak position in the industry, both with their (only) product and with their large accumulation of debt.
=h=
Wow. Now if only they could kick the Mac's a**... (Score:2)
But I think what's really hurt them in the long run is their very "niceness" and lack of aggression. Yes, they're the "Media OS" extraordinaire, and marketing themselves as that got their feet in a lot of doors. But they should have expanded on that once they did get a foothold--they should have started a long time ago to market themselves as a mainstream OS, and the perfect choice for "grown-up Mac users" so to speak. As someone who started out on Macs, at a college full of Macs, I have a special liking for BeOS which is everything MacOS *should* have become. But, thanks to the stereotype of Be as a "niche" OS, few people outside the technobubble ever even hear of Be. If they'd been aggressive, said and done a few of the things the Linux community has done and said about Microsoft and their kind of software, then they would have gotten the press necessary to raise their visibility a long time ago.
Think about it: Linux has the visibility, and is waiting on the GUI-liciousness to move into the seat occupied by Windows. BeOS, on the other hand, has the smoothness of silk and is easy enough for WebTV'er to use, while incredibly robust and capable--but it lacks the visibility of Linux. Of course it also lacks the hardware support which Linux offers, but *that* is also a function of visibility--Be would have lots of developers, if it were more visible, and so higher profile would have given it enough hardware support to seriously push on Windows right now.
There's the Catch-22, which can be reduced to what I said in the beginning--Be got its foot in the door by being "the Media OS", but once they did they should have become as vocal as the Linux community, as persistent about the superiority of their OS, and they should have actively dragged potential developers to their camp through the media attention they could have gotten. But they missed out, and now Linux has come up from behind and become *the* challenger which Be could have been. Just my 2 cents...
* * * *
"Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficient..."--Justice Brandeis
http://homestead.dejanews.com/user.sirwinston/f
Al the people that think Linux is too overwhemling (Score:1)
users. So, Be has a HUGE userbase. Check out some
of the IRC channels, the web sites, all the companies porting software, and the software base as of right now (Yes, there IS a ton of software available!). I personally use BeOS because I know the OS and GUI are locked source and will always be under control, so I wont have any incompatabilities like I did with Linux and E. There is finally a TRUE saviour, and it sure isn't Linux!
Be platforms (Score:1)
Sorry for the rambling, but two things I loved, BeOS and the alpha, just the thought of them together is enough to well....i get all warm inside
Re:Good move (probably their only move) (Score:1)
However, I really do think that they have technology that they can work with to become successful. The world doesn't really *need* another general purpose operating system, although if they start out working to penetrate a very specific market (i.e. your average techno artist) they could probably undercut problems with compatability and a lack of applications since they initially only need one well written app. (yes, I was serious about the possibilities making music workstations).
Assuming there are enough people to throw their money on the metaphorical craps table, it might give them enough resources to switch directions. But if they still think that they'll be able to sell people yet another general purpose operating system, they're seriously deluded.
By the way, thanks for correcting my assumption that E*Trade was the underwritter (rather than Volpe Brown Whelan & Company and Needham & Company). From the post, it looked like yet another attempt at one of those lame dutch auctions.
-NooM
Re:It's over. (Score:1)
This IPO is a last gasp, IMO. It just follows on the heels of all these other IPOs that are tech-related. Let's see if it tanks like half of them.
Reason why we dont make noise like Linux people. (Score:1)
of being overhyped, overtalked, and generally the people that support it are mostly all pompous jerks (Ever try and get help from a Linux user on IRC or via email? Maybe even off one of the many web sites?). Granted, thats such a large generalization, but the news scene is definately seeing it, with reports how Linux really isnt any faster than NT, etc, etc... We dont WANT to think we are the best OS, we dont WANT to try and say how much better we are, we just want people to give it a try and see for themselves. We shouldnt HAVE to make noise.
BeGone (Score:1)
The lack of security on the OS is also a joke.
Just my opinions, flame away.
root@regret.org
sil@macroshaft.org
sil@antioffline.com
Re:To everyone who evaluates IPOS based on "profit (Score:1)
People bought AMZN and EBAY because they took advantage of a new medium, the Internet. BeOS has been trying to break into the OS market for far too long. If you're trying to buy a software company based on hype and promise, buy Red Hat. The technology community has far more faith in Linux than BeOS.
Sorry to burst your bubble.
Re:Who uses Be anyway??? (Score:1)
Re:dude! u don't know jack. (Score:1)
>right? I am running Beos on my Amd k6-2 450 on
>my system. did you try out the beos demo yet?
*Your* mobo and glue chipset are supported, obviously; but my motherboard and chipset are *not*. Nor is my video card--it has a different chipset than any of the cards Be supports, so as they themselves say in the video card compatibility section: "if it isn't on the list, basically identical to a card on the list, or it doesn't use the same chipset as a card on the list--don't ask if it'll work; it won't."
Re:Who uses Be anyway??? (Score:1)
Now that linux has woken people up to the idea of alternatives to windows, BeOS's ease of use and dead simple install put it in a great position to to appeal to Windows refugees. As a computer geek I learnt alot (and enjoyed) the challenges of installing & using linux( i started with linux back in 0.9.18 with a slackware install) but even today with much better installs & desktops available, your average user doesn't have (or want to have) the skills needed to properly use linux.
Although BeOS makes a great general purpose desktop OS, their 'Media OS' strategy is a good one: ports of products such as Bryce 4 & Cinema 4D as well as the various professional A/V mixing & editing tools provide Be with a toehold that will (hopefully) keep their head above financial water long enough for more general user type apps to mature (and these are coming along nicely)
The bottome line is that the BeOS is just too good to go away no matter what happens to BE, Inc.
Re:Some thoughts on Be's viability (Score:1)
Dude, I *tried* it on a different system, and I like it. I am *not* miffed that my hardware isn't supported--I had my computer made-to-order just a month ago, so if I'd wanted to run BeOS on this particular box I could have used components which are explicitly supported. *I didn't want to*, because now that Linux is being GUI-fied I'm going to be putting Linux on it. Why? Because as much as I like Be, as good as it is, its lack of a ton of coders (which Linux has) means that I'm not going to get the stuff *I* specifically want for Be any time soon, whereas it's available for Linux *now*. Linux is going to expand in market share; Be won't, unless it starts being VOCAL. Now, I refrained from saying anything bad about Be in my above posts, because I *like* Be and because *there isn't anything bad* about Be. only mentioned some of its *drawbacks*, which are all true.
"Regrdless, please refrain from posting FUD like the content of the first paragraph of your post."
Well, FUD you, too! But seriously, don't mistake honest critique for FUD. The fact is, I think Bf*cked up by not being more vocal and shouting to the hills the merits of their product. That caused them to have fewer developers than they would have gotten if they'd garnered attention by saying "We're better than Windows, easier to use than a Mac, and as reliable as Linux." Lack of developers in turn (compared to, say, the Linux community) led to lack of broad hardware support. They specifically target themselves at high-end users which, even when they support mid-range users, is annoying. Like when they said that sh*t about AMD on their hardware compatibility page--they may be compatible with a fair number of AMD chipsets, but it still pisses me off that they'd say it. And *not all alternative chipsets work fine*, as you imply above. Many do. *Many don't*. Grow up and accept an honest critique as an honest critique, and look at the good ramifications of some of my suggestions instead of crying FUD.
OS/2 is much better supported (Score:2)
OS/2 also has 10 years of hardware support. Lots of IHV's still write OS/2 drivers (Crystal Semi, Matrox, 3COM, Adaptec, etc) but don't even care about BeOS.
A Be engineer said earlier this year that he think s there are 25,000 BeOS users out there. 25K!?!?!? That's tiny!!! OS/2 has easily two orders of magnitude more users than that (granted, a lot of them are in banks, but it still counts).
Many of you might think that OS/2 is dead. Well, if you just compare the numbers, then it means that BeOS is stillborn.
Timur Tabi
Remove "nospam_" from email address
Some thoughts on Be's viability (Score:2)
But for the long term, I think there are some interesting factors at work here.
I think BeOS is a compelling solution for the type of person who just wants to do things with their computers. They can dabble in graphics with the arty programs available, try out sleek and smooth video editing systems, and even write documents and spreadsheets with GoBe. The weakest point is the web browser, which cannot access web sites relying on JavaScript. But that will change once Bezilla and Opera appear on the scene.
I see BeOS sneaking through the back door of computing, and I'm betting this is exactly what Jean-Louis Gassee wants. If I had a balanced stock portfolio of $ 50k or more, I'd throw $ 500 his way and let him run with the ball. I think it will be one heck of a ride.
D
----
IPO Mania! (Score:3)
"I welcome you all to the first shareholders meeting for Transmeta Corp. I would like to tell you how our product development is going, but then I'd have to kill you. Thank you all for investing, and don't worry! We'll release something, someday!"
When's the Slashdot IPO? I'd invest... "Buy now! Own your stake of Rob! Traded on NASDAQ, symbol SDOT!!"
:)
jason
Net Stocks (Score:1)
_
"Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"
It's really the concept, not the current result. (Score:2)
If a company had to be extremely successful, popular, and reliable before they IPOed, trying to have a startup (especially tech startups) in this world would be extremely different than it is today. Companies such as Yahoo (NSDQ: YHOO) and Amazon.com (NSDQ: AMZN) are fairly accurate examples of this situation.
While Be doesn't currently have the application base to be a strong competitor against the other OSes, one should evaluate the possibilities that will evolve as the company (and software!) develops.
--
Daniel Baker - dbaker@cuckoo.com - dbaker@distributed.net
Re:Who uses Be anyway??? (Score:1)
Re:Good move (probably their only move) (Score:1)
So what's the _real_ reason y'all hate Be? (Score:1)
I don't understand why so many /.ers seem to have a big thing against Be. I don't want to start a flame war, but I don't understand the feelings. Remember that Be is an end-user OS, designed to compete (or complement) Windows 9x or the MacOS. It's not designed for geeks. True, us geeks like it and mess with it but it's easier to install and configure than any *nix variant. Here's what else y'all seem to be saying:
So other than the fact that it's not some flavor of *nix, what are the real arguments... or is that the only beef?
Hasn't made a dime? You mean like AMZN? (Score:1)
Re:seriously though (Score:1)
Looking into the future, "media" isn't a bad segment to be in. Although "media" sounds like a small segment, it's really a great marketing ploy that is much more general than it sounds. How many times do you read about multimedia, graphis, or other related buzzword? While the applications they target first (video production apps or high-end graphic modeling) are niche markets, they translate well into the broader segments.
I hope Be succeeds. It looks like a nice OS.
It's over. (Score:1)
Re:Some thoughts on Be's viability (Score:2)
I really don't think Be will make much headway unless it starts to make the same noise Linux makes--a lot of people try Linux for the same reason Apple sales skyrocketed after that Superbowl commersial where the hot chick throws a sledgehammer through the screen of Big Brother (representing IBM): they want to be part of the defiance of Microsoft, they want to rebel, and ride the wave of coolness and chic which accompanies rebellion. But Be doesn't rebel against Microsoft, they pussy out and say what a great complement to Windows they are. That's not the way to make a product attractive--they should say "We're better than Windows, and as easy to use as a Mac. We're the best of both worlds, and as stable as Linux." *That's* the way to make their OS attractive. *That* would have gotten them sales on par with those of boxed Linux distros--maybe even greater. But choosing the "safe" path, the "quiet" marketing, has carved out a small niche where they'll stay until they learn to hawk their wares as loudly as Linux.
Go back to Redmond,you troll... (Score:1)
That's not the point. BeOS does what it's designed to do extremly well, unlike NT, which is (trying to) be Jack of all trades, and master of none.
"As for set-top boxes, as I understand it, that's
just something they're saying for the IPO and they aren't really doing much in the regard"
HELLO? You can buy $200 set-top boxes NOW.
Sheesh, just look at MS roadmap for Neptune (MS next consumer OS) it looks like a brochure from Be. MS is starting to be worried, I suspect...
Jón
Actually it's more like $60... (Score:1)
J.
Re:Some thoughts on Be's viability (Score:1)
The wonderful thing about Be is that they are constantly under-promising, while over-delivering. For example, in R3 and R3.1, the main supported soundcard was the Creative Labs Soundblaster AWE64, and the AWE32 wasn't listed as working, because the driver didn't work with all of the board revisions of the AWE32. Nonetheless, many AWE32 and even SB16 users were completely surprised when they booted Be and their sound "just worked."
I demoed BeOS for a few of my coworkers not long ago and installed it on both an old K6-233 (with a crappy serial mouse made by a company named Kensiko) and a slightly newer K6-2 350. On both machines, neither of which had been designed to be BeOS compatible, nor was their hardware listed (verbatim) on the compatibility list, everything from sound, to network cards, to the SCSI card in the 350 machine, just worked. (I should mention that during the demo almost everyone in the building stopped by and said how cool BeOS looked, and they wanted to give it a try on their own machine)
Also, while many of their current users are alternative OS people, and hence more likely to buy alternative chipsets (which it works JUST FINE with, BTW) keep in mind that they are doing their best to target the OS at the media people. Most people involved in working with media, be it sound, 2 graphics, or 3d design, are some of the only people that can honestly say they need the fastest systems on the market to make themselves more productive (gamers notwithstanding
Regardless, please refrain from posting FUD like the content of the first paragraph of your post.
Please read the prospectus before speaking for Be. (Score:3)
We have only one product that may never gain broad market acceptance.
BeOS is our only product and we will derive all our revenue for the foreseable future from sales of BeOS. To date, BeOS has been used primarily by a limited number of enthusiast and application developers...
They go on to say on page 9:
Our success depends upon availability of third party applications that operate on BeOS.
Demand and market acceptance for BeOS will significantly depend upon the availability of an increasing number of third party applications that operate on the BeOS platform. These applications include video and audio editing programs, 3D games, creative audio and video content development and manipulation, and personal productivity applications.
We intend to encourage the development of an increasing number of applications that operate on BeOS by attracting third party developers to the BeOS platform and by maintaining our existing developer relationships through marketing, technical support and financial incentives for third party developers. However, third party developers are generally under no obligation to develop applications based on the BeOS platform.
---