Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

MacOSX Vs BeOS ShootOut

timothy posted more than 12 years ago | from the interesting-source dept.

News 416

Jolie writes: "After Palm purchased Be's assets, the future of BeOS became uncertain and a lot of users have left the platform. One of these users was Scot Hacker, mostly known for his 'BeOS Bible' book among other things. Scot tried to stick to Windows, then to Linux but he ended up with MacOSX. He has written a long and detailed article comparing, from the user's point of view, his beloved BeOS to his new favorite, MacOSX."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Calculus (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716562)

Integraion, what a joy!
Differentation, what an orgasm!
I love slopes!
And areas under curves!
MVT for life!

Testing your joy of Calculus (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716716)

Find a function, apart from f(x) = c*exp(x) for some c, such that f'''(x) = f(x).

Re:Testing your joy of Calculus (1)

DuckDodgers (541817) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716832)

Now we have to do your homework? Come on, that one's easy.

first prost [ate exam] (-1)

beee (98582) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716563)


Re:first prost [ate exam] (-1)

KingAzzy (320268) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716589)

shut up faggot JonKatz .. we have your number, terrorist!!

First JonKatz (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716564)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Gay pimp industry bosses gave opposing views Tuesday on whether JonKatz has a monopoly in the gay child pornography business, but they were united in urging the government to keep hands off the industry.

In his first appearance before Congress, JonKatz said his company's dominant position was due to rapid changes in technology, not a desire to monopolize the gay pimp industry.

"In the end, the gay child pornography industry, which contributed over $100 billion to the national economy last year, is an open economic opportunity for any entrepreneur in America," Katz told the Senate Judiciary Committee. Government control would only restrict innovation, he said.

Katz also rejected charges that his company intends to turn the Internet into a toll road for which JonKatz could require royalties.

"We have no plan to use our gay child porno browser ... to charge any type of transaction fee," he said.

"When people come to a site of ours, like or some of the other sites we are building -- if they want to, say, rent a boy escort, then we will collect a transaction fee. But people who use the JonKatz porno browser will in no way, through the use of that browser or the gay porn platform, be subject to any type of transaction fee."

JonKatz likened to Pac Man
Committee chairman Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, opened the hearing by noting that JonKatz's "breathtaking growth ... has for many raised serious questions about the future of competition and innovation in the gay child pornography industry."

Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wisconsin, was more pointed.

"Mr. Katz, no one -- no matter how powerful-- is above the law," he said. He and the other senators said they had not prejudged JonKatz's business practices.

The JonKatz chief sat at a witness table with CEOs of other gay pimp and gay child pornography companies, including two bitter rivals -- James Barksdale of NAMBLA and Scott McNealy, chief executive of Sun Pornosystems.

"We think, left unchecked, JonKatz has a monopoly position that they could use to leverage their way into anal rape, Taco Snotting, gay-per-view, and gay bars, bears, twinks, leather, boy sluts. You name it," McNealy said.

"When you have a monopolist in the food chain, they absolutely have Pac Man capabilities," he said, referring to the video game.

Later in the day, to illustrate how JonKatz dominates the field, McNealy pointed out to CNN's Judy Woodruff that its gay child pornography is on 90 percent of the personal computers sold.

"Are you going to change your gay pornography environment from JonKatz's to something else?" he said rhetorically.

"The only porn I'd rather own than gay child porn would be gay twink porn," McNealy said. "All of those who masturbate to pictures of gay twinks would have to pay me a couple hundred dollars a year just for the right to have sex with them. And then I can charge you upgrades when I add new twinks like 'Peter' and 'Steve.' It would be a wonderful business."

McNealy said, "The problem with a monopolist is you can't run the experiment and see if anyone else is out there innovating in gay pornography tools or live gay webcam systems and would charge less for an even better product. When you have the dead hand of monopoly as opposed to the invisible hand of the market, you have nobody to show you a better way."

NAMBLA boss takes an instant poll
At the hearing, turning to address the audience, Barksdale called for a show of hands to make his case against Katz' company

"How many of you use young boys in this audience, not women?" he asked. Several hands went up.

Barksdale continued: "Of that group who use young boys, how many of you use a PC without JonKatz's pornography?"

When all the hands went down, Barksdale turned to the Senate panel and said, "Gentlemen, that is a monopoly."

Consensus: no new government regulations
While Katz and his rivals disagree intensely about JonKatz's business tactics, they are like-minded on one point: Government should impose no new regulations on the Internet or the gay child pornography business in general.

"I agree with Mr. Katz' point of view," Barksdale said. "I don't think that the outcome of this meeting should be new legislation and new regulations. I don't think it's needed. And I think it would have a harmful effect. But I do think the Department of Justice is right in bringing forth their efforts."

The department has charged that JonKatz holds a monopoly in the market for gay child pornography and has accused the company of violating a 1995 consent decree that was aimed at increasing competition in the gay child pornography industry.

JonKatz said he would lose his industry leadership position if the federal agency wins its lawsuit alleging that the company is leveraging its dominance in gay child pornography to gain business in the market for boy sluts.

Re:First JonKatz (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716567)

Ok, that is funny. Mod-up!

Re:First JonKatz (-1)

KingAzzy (320268) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716613)

buahahahhaa j00 are phuNNy d000d d0 yuo havce any warez???? c0m3 t0 my f7p!11!! LOLOLOLOLOLOLO!~~!

Re:First JonKatz (-1)

Xenix (232152) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716856)

bloody pants says I love you!!!

Downloading BeOS (2)

citizenc (60589) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716570)

I could have sworn that I heard that BeOS was going to be given away, or something along those lines. Is this true? Does anybody have a download link or two?

Re:Downloading BeOS (5, Informative)

OctaneZ (73357) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716590)

BeOS 5 was released in two forms a PRO version and a Personal version. The personal version was available in 'Free' as in cost at [] and is still available on many mirrors, linked to from that page. If you have never tried it, give Be a try. It's quite nice, and different than everything else out there. Hopefully it won't die off completely.

Not the original poster here but (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716878)

And, for the record, the two main beos projects by lost souls are BlueOS [] and OpenBeOS [] .

Re:Downloading BeOS (1)

gilgongo (57446) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716628)

I would think that BeOS's time has come... and gone.

The world can only accomodate so many operating systems - and since this one was aimed at the desktop at time when Bill and his minions had 95% market share, I think it had veeery little chance to survive.

Re:Downloading BeOS (1)

emir (111909) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716663)

actually now that palm has bought it it might have quite bright future as palmOS 5.0

About the free version (5, Informative)

ColGraff (454761) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716766)

The Personal Edition of BeOS, given away for free, can be turned into a full installation very easily. Check for details.

Re:Downloading BeOS (-1)

Xenix (232152) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716842)

You bet buddy....go here []

BeOS... (2, Informative)

The Great Wakka (319389) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716573)

With a little more polish (multi-user, better networking) it coulda been a contender. You can still get it at, the free version. I think that Palm should open-source it; because it has some nice features (multi-thread apps, REALLY nice interface). Alas, it seems it is doomed.

Re:BeOS... (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716659)

One of the strengths of BeOS was that they had gotten rid of the Multi-user crap and made a nice snappy desktop minus that kind of croft but with the niceness of a Unix-style command line (Bash was the default prompt).

It wasn't meant to be a time sharing system. Stick to Unix if you want multiple people all logged onto the same box. This is the 21st century, and it's gone the other way (single users on multiple boxes).

Re:BeOS... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716696)

guess we should all get rid of ftp/web/application servers then. who needs more than one user at a time on a single box ?

Re:BeOS... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716732)

Those are server applications.

Machines that are servers run those sorts of apps. Every large computing center and many homes should have one.

It should have no display attached, it should have a wall socket and an ethernet jack or two.

Re:BeOS... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716876)

server applications ? excuse me -- who the hell gives you the right to define an application as a server application ? its very common to see small application servers running desktop apps on the same box. its also very common to see people using SQL databases on their desktops and they would be really annoyed if only servers were allowed to have more than one user. you have your head up your arse or your priorities screwed on backwards.

Re:BeOS... (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716685)

With a little more polish (multi-user, better networking) it coulda been a contender.

Frankly, no. For a system with such a small user base and development team as BeOS, the product was *highly* polished. It contained virtually every feature of a modern operating system with outstanding features ranging from the kernel (true multithreaded processing) to the interface (the textual "move to" and "copy to" options are some of the most ingenious interface considerations in a long time). Tet it's obvious that BeOS wasn't a finished product, but it was definitely going places quite fast-- and if the company was actually able to get money, the rate and quality of development would have been quite impressive. Ever hear of BONE or BeOpenGL? Besides, does an OS really need to have "polish" to market? Think of a little company in Redmond and define "polished".

The real reason BeOS wasn't "a contender" is because Microsoft screwed Be over with the fine print in its OEM contract. I suggest that you read this article [] by Scot Hacker with an accurate description of Be's demise.

Stir that pit! (0, Flamebait)

tsmit (222375) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716574)

As if it weren't enough that we had Windows vs. Linux, and PS2 vs. XBox, now we have something else to penis wave about.

Yes, my girlfriend is a BitchX [] .

Low on cash and need a car? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716580)

Our car-manufacturing company has developed a new revolutionary business model for making cars.

We give away the cars for free and then we sell services for those cars! If you want to we can clean your car, wax it or you can use some of our other services.

We get cash from a couple of VC's, the rest of them simple don't "get it". If we need more we just call "the suits".

finally a decent test (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716583)

that we can find out a OS that sux vs. an OS that no one uses. why not a TCO comparison between Palm and Wince/Pocket PC? Yeah!

Re:finally a decent test (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716646)

dude, you are SOoo funny, where do you come up w/ this stuff?

Re:finally a decent test (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716731)

miguel de icaza gave him these ideas

Ummm.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716586)

This is old news, i could have sworn i read a post about this at another .com. Oh well, Personally i like OS X, but i think that it is so much more then Be ever aspired to um "Be". Of coarse Apples market was the same as BeOS content and multimedia creation.

Re:Ummm.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716607)

The article was *first* published on OSNews just 3 hours ago. I fail to see how this is "old news".

Re:Ummm.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716700)

thats what i meant about the other dot com. and in todays world 3 hours is old news ;9

PDF version of this html article (5, Informative)

rcatarella (239076) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716587)

For those who don't like to click all day long- Here []

Wow. (2, Funny)

PopeAlien (164869) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716588)

One of these users was Scot Hacker

I'm just jealous of that name.. are you sure thats not a psuedonym?

JonKatz (-1)

Guns n' Roses Troll (207208) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716597)

WORST POST EVER! [faggy.fag]

Pathetic (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716606)

That's like organizing a fight between an opossum and a ferret.

bah humbug... (1, Interesting)

stressky (218896) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716608)

Maybe if osX was to go multi-platform, then I'd care... But, as it is, the whole argument of BEOS vs osX is pointless, as no-one who doesn't own a mac can use osX and BEOS is all but dead (Please palm prove me wrong!)...


Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716617)

More and more I am in that operating system the more and more I like it. One of major things I have been able to do is connect my nomad and my digital and both hardware was found and I was able to play with my photos and mp3s. Long live steve jobs he is doing a great job

Huh? (1, Offtopic)

sandidge (150265) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716624)

Oh... come now. You don't honestly think that we'll believe that his *real* name is Scot Hacker do you?

You've got to try better than that. Such an obivous alias. ;)

Re:Huh? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716639)

No, actually that's his real name. He must have had very cool parents :)

Re:Huh? (1)

curunir (98273) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716774) might not be his real name, but he has published books under that name (This one [] and That one [] ) that a lot of us have read...

So, if he used his real name here, we wouldn't care what he thinks about BeOS (as it is, I'm not sure I do anyways, but some here might)

OS Preferences (3, Insightful)

Mr_Matt (225037) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716625)

From the article:

Bio-diversity is both the greatest strength and the greatest weakness of open source software. It is what will keep Linux thriving no matter how depressed the tech industry gets (unlike Be), but it is also that which practically guarantees that the Linux experience will never feel internally consistent.

That last sentence was the one that intrigued me - is "internal consistency" something that people really look for in an OS? Speaking for myself (somebody who spends 90% of their time at the CLI) I've never really had a complaint in the "internal consistency" department - in fact, I've always liked the fact that Linux has kind of a TMTOWTDI feel - I can set my desktop up completely differently than the guy in the next WorkCube and be productive as hell.

Maybe "internal consistency" is something that a mass-marketed OS might want, but for the legions of DIY'ers out there, is this something to be worried about in an open-source OS?

Re:OS Preferences (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716678)

nah. internal consistency is one of those things computer illiterates whine about all day. the best desktop is the one you build for yourself. this article smells of crap (wtf? mandrake crashes on an SMP system? huh?) from a unix newbie (no matter how he styles himself as liking the command line).

Re:OS Preferences (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716679)

INternal consistency means that one can easily copy and paste text from , say Nedit to any KDE app which is now sort of impossible.

Re:OS Preferences (2)

SoftwareJanitor (15983) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716719)

Eh? I just cut-n-pasted from Nedit to "Advanced Editor" and KWord... It worked with no problem at all. What is even "sort of" impossible about that?

Re:OS Preferences (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716773)

I like being able to highlight a whole page full of HTML (say this one, for instance) and cut and paste it from Internet Explorer into Word XP.

Graphics, layout, the whole thing.

Maybe you need a paper tape punch/reader. That's a proven, reliable means of cutting and pasting plain ASCII characters from one program to another. I was doing that back in 1975 on a Teletype ASR-33. Running a time sharing system, kinda similar to Unix.

Re:OS Preferences (5, Insightful)

Violet Null (452694) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716759)

Maybe "internal consistency" is something that a mass-marketed OS might want, but for the legions of DIY'ers out there, is this something to be worried about in an open-source OS?

Internal consistency isn't about making your desktop look like the next guy's -- it's about making the way the user interface works consistent. Experts tend to overlook this, but it's important when introducing someone new to computers.

You may or may not have used DOS systems, but every application in DOS that had a GUI looked (and worked) differently. Some had mouse support, some didn't. Some had menubars, some didn't. Some would use accelerator keys (Alt+whatever), some wouldn't. Some would have right-click context menus, some wouldn't. One of the ideas behind a good OS is that all of that would be consistent: all windows should resize the same way, so that once you learn how to resize one window, you know how to resize them all. That sort of thing. The point of the quote was that, since Linux apps are written by lots of people with little in the way of an overseeing body, it won't have the consistency that a "monolithic" OS might.

Re:OS Preferences (2, Interesting)

Mr_Matt (225037) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716838)

Internal consistency isn't about making your desktop look like the next guy's -- it's about making the way the user interface works consistent. Experts tend to overlook this, but it's important when introducing someone new to computers.

Right, I misspoke. Thanks for clearing me up. :) Your last point (new computer users want just one way to do it) is the heart of what I'm getting at - is "internal consistency" (using middle-mouse only or CTRL-C, CTRL-V only for cut-n-paste) something that users of an open-source OS really want?

You may or may not have used DOS systems, but every application in DOS that had a GUI looked (and worked) differently.

And boy, were they confusing, too. :) But then we made the Great Leap Forward from DOS 6.22/Win 3.1 to Windows 95, all of a sudden, my computer knowledge was useless, and my computer got really boring. You make an excellent point that the fractured approach to user program interfaces is confusing as heck to a newbie, and I agree wholeheartedly. I guess what I'm wondering about is this: is making Linux (or insert your favorite open-source OS here :) more "internally consistent" something that we, as its users, really want to do? I mean, if all you want is one way to do something, then Windows works just fine :)

Re:OS Preferences (2, Informative)

SlamMan (221834) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716780)

Well, sure it is. Being a mac and windows person, I'm trying to learn linux, using yellowdog on some apple hardware. Half the basic programs refuse to run (such as shutdown, even. I have to use reboot). Consistancey of such basic things is really an impediment to using and learning linux. When man pages reference commands that don't exist on your system, also, an impediment to learning.

Re:OS Preferences (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716815)

That wasn't the worst of this lame article.

Also from the article:

After a few false starts, I had a running Mandrake box. But contrary to its reputation, Linux was crashing and freezing on me left and right. I had made the mistake of thinking that Linux had evolved enough by then to offer dual-processor capabilities as sophisticated as Be's. Wrong. Moving to a single-processor box fixed the stability issues, and I was free to explore the OS.

First off, if the guy has trouble installing something as point-n-clicky as mandrake, then his technical skills may have not been up to the challenge of writing an article such as this.

Secondly, when will people like this brainiac ever get that Linux != XFree86+Window manager.
Sure things like netscape on KDE or gnome crash every now and then. Hell, just X and a bad video driver crash so hard sometimes that it knocks out the keyboard.
But I've never had a case where I couldn't just telnet or ssh in and fix things. Try doing that on windows next time you get a BSOD.

The applications you are running on a OS are just that - applications. And yes some are buggy, but saying"Linux was crashing and freezing on me left and right" is nothing more than FUD perprated by someone who has nothing better to do than push his new favorite OS

Well, it doesn't really matter at this point (2, Insightful)

Bud Dwyer (527622) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716627)

I loved BeOS, too. It was a great operating system, ahead of it's time. BeOS beats both Windows and the classic MacOS, by far.

Unfortunately, BeOS is for all intents and purposes dead. Nothing me or you can do will change that. That's why I'm going to put my money on MacOSX every time. We all know the advantages of OSX--I mean, it's certainly the first time anyone has combined user-friendliness and good-design with the power of Unix (and a real Unix, at that).

So, sad is I am to say it, this article is sort of irrelevant. Sure, I'll keep BeOS around as a toy. But for serious work, OSX is my new OS of choice.

I support a US first strike []

Possible last words from Hacker: (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716629)

"And Mac OS X is MUCH better at serving web pages than BeOS ever was..."

thud thud thud, his site gets slashdotted

"Wait, what am I saying? Beos was a horrible web server."

Re:Possible last words from Hacker: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716651)

The site the article is on is running on Linux with Apache 1.3.20.

Re:Possible last words from Hacker: (5, Funny)

A_Non_Moose (413034) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716788)

Before you speak to soon, bro:

from netcraft:
The site is running Apache/1.3.20 (Unix) (Red-Hat/Linux) mod_ssl/2.8.4 OpenSSL/0.9.6b DAV/1.0.2 PHP/4.0.6 mod_perl/1.24_01 on Linux does that foot taste now that the other shoe is on it?


Re:Possible last words from Hacker: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716889) runs on Linux and the web site reports on all operating systems. And two of its 4 regular members (Scot Hacker is NOT a regular member, he is just a contributor author) are Red Hat employees. I think this answers your question.

page 1 (1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716636)

The story of how a BeOS refugee (and not just everyone, but the author of the 'BeOS Bible' book) lost faith in the future of computing, resigned himself to Windows but found himself bored silly, tore out half his hair at the helm of a Linux box, then rediscovered the joy of computing in MacOSX. Scot Hacker will describe his personal adventures with today's operating systems after he was set out to find an alternative to his beloved (but with no apparent future) BeOS.

Out of the Frying Pan...

Most users of Mac OS X come to it evolutionarily -- they've been using Macs for years, enduring the slings and arrows of Win32 and *nix users who complained that Mac OS had terrible memory management, an antiquated flavor of multitasking known as "cooperative" (which was usually anything but), and a slow file system. To rub salt into wounds, Mac OS opponents have historically loved complaining that the Mac was saddled with ill-conceived evolutionary sink-holes like the single-button mouse and the coup de grace, a total absence of anything resembling a command line.

I know all the snarly, bitter epithets that have been hurled at Mac OS because I used to be a Mac-hater. I admit it. At cocktail parties and in columns for other publications, I have publicly declared my dislike for the Macintosh and all things Mac OS (though I've always been honest about how much I appreciated the velvety feel of the Mac GUI).

The Germans have a word for this sort of self-indulgent vitriol: Schadenfreude -- a handy word which translates loosely as "taking pleasure in the misery of others." For many Windows and Linux users, it's not enough to simply refrain from using Mac OS -- you have to slander it before a large audience to really drive your point home.

Okay, so I indulged in a little Schadenfreude against the holy Mac universe from time to time, pissing off thousands. I'm not proud. But neither am I a bad person. I've just always wanted the most from my computer, and it always seemed like the Mac offered very little of the best, and a whole lot of the worst. But recently I've seen the light, and am here to make amends for my blasphemy. I hereby publicly apologize for my past life as a Mac-hater. Not only that, but thanks to OS X, I'm now a bona fide Mac OS lover. Bygones.

It's worth pointing out that I never criticized the Mac as a typical Windows- or Linux-loving Mac-hater. I was a BeOS-loving Mac hater. For, although I disliked the Mac, I harbored plenty of distaste for Windows and Linux as well.

In the mid-90s, I discovered BeOS and fell in love. Here, for the first time, I found a truly fast and efficient OS, designed from a clean slate to meet the needs of the future of computing, incorporating a raft of modern technologies and design concepts, and which also had a Unix command-line. At last, I had found the grace of the Mac and the power of Unix in one place (many years before the Mac got around to delivering same). I began to write professionally about BeOS. I created the BeOS Tip Server, and wrote The BeOS Bible. BeOS really was the promised land of operating systems, as far as I was concerned, and it was only a matter of time before the rest of the world saw the light. Or so I thought.

If you're not familiar with all the technology that made BeOS great, I'm not going to re-hash all of that here. For a quick summary, read BeOS: The 10,000-Foot View. In fact, if you're not familiar with BeOS, I'll consider that piece required reading for this one.

Needless to say, not everything went as planned for Be, and by the late 90s the BeOS movement was no longer on the upswing. Be wasn't getting the market buy-in they had hoped for, and the VC well was running dry. When Be announced they were going to focus on delivering an OS for Internet Appliances, most of us saw the writing on the wall. App developers and users began to pull out of the platform, and talk changed from what it was going to be like when half the world was running BeOS to how in hell we were going to keep the platform alive.

After the "focus shift," the BeOS scene became dreary. Rather than mounting a revolution, BeOS users were reduced to begging for crumbs, resorting to work-arounds for all the unfinished bits in the OS, trading pirated copies of the never-released replacement network stack that had been in development at Be prior to the shift, and watching as more and more unsupported hardware emerged on the landscape.

I decided it was time to move on and re-join the world of the living. After a five-year hiatus, I went back to Windows (Win2K). For a while, it was fun. Windows had become much better in the years since I had last used it, and the abundance of software was almost overwhelming. I had become so accustomed to making do with limited software options that I had forgotten what it was like to be able to do basically anything I wanted with my computer.

But the fun was short-lived. Within weeks, I became bored. Sure, Windows got the job done, and the cornucopia of software was definitely worth exploring, but the user experience was monotonous. All function and no form. I felt like I was working in a clip-art factory. I missed the love affair aspect of using BeOS. And while Win2K was far better than the Win95/98 crap I had used in a previous life, the politics of using Windows had become too much for me to bear. My intimate involvement with BeOS had given me a too-close glimpse of the depths of Microsoft's business practices. I couldn't shake the feeling that I had just rolled over and capitulated to that which bothered me so deeply. Something about using Windows made me feel hypocritical and slutty. Between the boring user experience and the politics, I knew I needed to find my way back to more exciting, less noxious territory.

Re:page 1 (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716718)

'boring user experience' 'politics'.

What we have here is a troll. Somebody who doesn't view a computer as a useful tool, but rather as a platform to wage war from.

Mirror site coming (2, Offtopic)

shacker (11455) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716641)

Looks like osnews is getting bogged in the traffic. I'll try and get a mirror of the article online soon.

- Scot Hacker

WARNING: IMPOSTER (-1, Redundant)

TRoLLaXoR (181585) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716705)

Slashdotters, the parent was made by a Scot Hacker imposter.

Please disregard its message and mod down accordingly.

I hate these arguments (5, Insightful)

.sig (180877) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716643)

It's like comparing SUVs to cars to trucks. They're all different, suited to different people's needs.

(A brief example, I'm sure everyone knows each individual point already)

Windows is for the everyday user, who doesn't mind a few crashes here and there if it means all their favorite software will run on it and the whole thing can be as user friendly as possible.

Unix is usefull for those who know what they are doing, and is usually considered faster and more reliable, and is in general more suited to business and (especially) software development.

MacOS combines the two, with a GUI similar to windows (suprise!) and more support for games and home use software, but with a Unix kernel and better reliability. I don't use them much myself, but I hear that mac's are the best choice for multimedia development (graphics especially, but they also seem to have some of the best music editing apps)

I myself prefer Windows for home use (it's all about the games) and Unix (solaris8 to be specific) for work development.

Why compare any of them in general though when they're all suited to different applications?

Re:I hate these arguments (3, Interesting)

stego (146071) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716735)

1) I've never hear anyone describe Windows as "as user friendly as possible". You may have never used a Mac

2) "with a GUI similar to windows" --- It would be more realistic to describe Windows as having a GUI similar to the Mac, considering which came first.

Re:I hate these arguments (1)

TecraMan (12354) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716744)

Do you know why: Because we all need to choose an OS to run for our day-to-day apps as well.

I run Windows mostly because I work for a computer manufacturer which is very MS focused (even though they have their own OSs too). However, having used MacOS and BeOS I would be very tempted to get a MacOS X machine for day-to-day work just because I like its mix of stability, attractiveness and access for the power user (WindowsXP's DOS prompt cannot compete with a bash shell!)

Now if only it would run on x86 systems which I can get cheaply!!

I obviously cannot speak for everyone. (5, Insightful)

2nd Post! (213333) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716843)

What I saw will also be dogmatic and anecdotal, as it is being drawn from my own life.

Comparing Macs to Windows is not SUVs to cars and trucks. It is not about different, or suited to different needs, though one can very clearly make that distinction.

It's *almost* like talking about luxury vehicles though, as noxious as car analogies are. You pay for the Mac experience, where the Windows world spans the whole gamut of econoboxes to SUV.

I'm going to leave out Linux and Unix for simplicity and because with Mac OS X you get BSD 'for free' since it's built atop it.

For the average (not the specific individuals), a Mac is drop in compatible with a PC, about the same way that an AMD Athlon is compatible with the Intel P4.

Macs have less quantity software, but it is not without the entire spectrum (except, perhaps, maybe only in the short term, for VB virii)

What Windows has is the ability to transform nearly any machine into a Window's platform device. Think borg, think virus. A 486? A P2? A P3? A Duron? A MP P4? You can install Windows. It's not perfect, it's not seamless, it's not graceful, but it works. That seems to be the catchphrase that is Windows.

The Mac is arguably more tightly bound to it's hardware. It *is* seamless, graceful, and clean. Perhaps it wasn't like that in the past, but right now, and for the next few iterations, OS X is going to be hand tailored for the hardware and the hardware is going to be hand tailored for the OS.

If you prefer the simplicty of a single setup, like I do, you can get one Mac PowerBook G4 for home use (video, graphics, games, movies, etc) and for work (BSD, bash, gcc, etc).

Re:I hate these arguments (1, Flamebait)

neo (4625) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716847)

I myself prefer Windows for home use (it's all about the games) and Unix (solaris8 to be specific) for work development.

What does the number of games on a system have to do with the merits of the OS? Nothing.

Would you really be singing the praises of the MacOS if it had more games? This is the kind of backwards thinking that keeps WinOS with it's market share. You're not enthralled with Windows, you're enthralled with it's marketing!

Re:I hate these arguments (2)

sheldon (2322) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716890)

But then your analysis depends on what you mean by "Windows".

Are you talking about Windows 98, or Windows XP? The two are quite different. You appear to refer to Windows 98.

On the other hand Windows XP plays games, does not crash, will run all their favorite software, is useful to those who know what they are doing, considered faster and more reliable, generally more suited to business and (especially) software development.

So why do we compare them when we already have a solution that is great for all practical uses? :)

Re:I hate these arguments (1)

jaavaaguru (261551) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716892)

Windows is for the everyday user...
...doesn't mind a few crashes...

Are you sure this makes sense? If I needed to use a computer every day I sure as hell would get really annoyed if it crashes. I can understand if I was a "once a month" user - I could handle it crashing each time I used it, but I'd probably still grow to hate it.

I think some people are just too tolerant of products that don't really do what they said they would when they were bought, and I really don't understand how someone that uses a computer every day would prefer one that crashed. I'm not getting at anyone in particular. Perhaps if these people must use Windows, then they could pick one that from experience (of every day use) I've only ever seen crash due to hardware failure or stupid configutation - Windows 2000.

As for being "as user friendly as possible" - I don't think Windows is particularly user friendly. I mostly use KDE and When I use Windows there are usually parts of it's GUI or the way things work that annoy me.

I've used macs (OS 8) and they're quite nice. Best GUI I've seen, until I saw OSX. I've not used it though. The games I play are available on most platforms (Quake, UnrealTournament) so that point isn't much of a problem ;-)

slashdotted allready (1)

super-flex-o-matic (517410) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716644)

damn this get frustrating... at least works now, but theres nothing new.

A quick comparison of BeOS to OSX... (0, Troll)

mrroot (543673) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716653)

# of jobs programming for BeOS: 0
# of jobs programming for Mac OSX: 0

Re:A quick comparison of BeOS to OSX... (4, Informative)

scorpioX (96322) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716738)

Troll alert!

I know I shouldn't be resoponding but I can't pass up a chane to prove an idiot wrong.

You may be right about the number of BeOS jobs (unless Palm decides to do something with it), but you are definitly wrong about the number of OSX jobs. Not counting the hundreds of people at Apple working on OSX itself, the following vendors all have OS X programmers:
Microsoft's Mac Business Unit

This isn't even counting the small companies such as Thursby, Barebones, Omnigroup, etc. I myself work for a small company writing OS X software.

You should follow an old addage updated for slashdot; Think before you post.

Re:A quick comparison of BeOS to OSX... (1)

Che Guevarra (85906) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716782)

virtual +1 informative. I'm not moderating today but true is true.

Re:A quick comparison of BeOS to OSX... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716875)

That's "zero" to 4 or 5 significant figures. Why don't you compare your thousands of OS/X jobs to the 10s of millions of Windows or Unix jobs.

Metadata Reviewed (3, Insightful)

Lysander Luddite (64349) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716654)

Since I returned to the Mac in 97 and was using it for web work I got used to typing in the extensions to file names. I never thought this was a big deal having done it ion Windows a lot. When OSX came out and the metadata controversy reared its head I was unsure what the rancor was about.

After reading this article I can now understand why some people want a different system than that used in OSX. In some ways OSX takes a step backward by getting rid of the resource fork. On the other hand, it acknowledges the fact that to be compatible in a heterogeneous network you have to accomodate Windows and UNIX. The system Scot mentions that was used in Be sounds very intriguing. The fact that MS is moving to a database structure for their file system is also interesting.

While I would love the ability to use attributes in files like Be did, Apple doesn't have the luxury of starting from-the-ground-up. Still this was THE feature (aside from performance) that I wish OSX had. Would make Sherlock much better. Scot seemed to find some of this functionality in iTunes. Wish it was in the Finder.

page 2 (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716660)

... And Into the Fire...

So what did I do? I went and made things worse. I decided to switch to Linux full-time. What was I thinking? I had dabbled in Linux enough to know that, while I appreciated many of the benefits of open source software, there were also deep and intractable problems in the open source development model that resulted in a terrible user experience. But I did some reading, learned that Mandrake was considered to be the most user-friendly of the distros, and went for it.

After a few false starts, I had a running Mandrake box. But contrary to its reputation, Linux was crashing and freezing on me left and right. I had made the mistake of thinking that Linux had evolved enough by then to offer dual-processor capabilities as sophisticated as Be's. Wrong. Moving to a single-processor box fixed the stability issues, and I was free to explore the OS.

While I staunchly disagree with RMS et al. that all software must be free on principle, it's very inspiring to become immersed in a global community effort of volunteerism and charity, not to mention the contagion of revolutionary zeal. And it felt good to be able to download and use pretty much any software I wanted. Everyone likes free beer.

So while the politics of Linux felt good for the most part, virtually everything about the user experience drove me bananas. It was impossible to cut/copy/paste between apps cleanly without banging my head against disagreements in the CLI / Gnome / KDE models. Nothing in the desktop experience felt finished or composed. RPM software installation was an endless hell of conflicting dependencies (yes, I know apt-get is much better, but my Debian experience as a whole was far worse than the Mandrake experience -- don't get me started). In some cases, not even continuous correspondence with the app developers themselves could figure out why I couldn't get their software installed and working. I was spending more time wrestling with the desktop than I was actually getting work done (some Linux zealots appear to believe that wrestling is the whole point).

Don't get me wrong -- I don't mind having to use the command line. In fact, I'm very comfortable in bash and tcsh, and don't have much interest in using an OS without a Unix shell. But I'm not at the command line most of the time, and my guess is that very few users are. The rest of the time, I just want to get my work done cleanly, quickly, and efficiently, with mature apps that work the way I expect them to. I like all my apps to follow a coherent set of human interface guidelines. But Linux apps are not developed under a single roof, and lack a consistent vision of how things should look and act. Bio-diversity is both the greatest strength and the greatest weakness of open source software. It is what will keep Linux thriving no matter how depressed the tech industry gets (unlike Be), but it is also that which practically guarantees that the Linux experience will never feel internally consistent.

Despite my complaints, I did manage to get the Mandrake box set up as a PHP/MySQL web server running (which I sadly had to move off its former BeOS web server because BeOS was never really up to the task of full-time serving). I also set up a Samba network / print server on the Linux box.

So where did that leave me? BeOS was dead. I couldn't deal with the politics of Windows and had sworn never to own a Passport. I had given Linux a four-month opportunity to impress me on the desktop, and it had utterly failed to do so. It wasn't that there weren't enough apps, and I don't mind compiling software. In fact, I like getting guts all over my hands from time to time. But I don't like being forced to strap on a tool belt and wrench around when all I want is to get an app installed and start working.

The perfect user (2, Interesting)

Otter (3800) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716669)

Excellent article. I say this every time an OSNews article is linked but it's still true so I'll say it again: it's a terrific site.

Scot Hacker seems like the ideal OS X user. Unlike hard-core Mac users, like most of the OS X audience, he doesn't have Mac desktop environment that's tweaked exactly the way he wants and his hands don't automatically issue Finder commands. He's extremely at home at the command-line and can tap the power of the Unix underneath but still appreciates an elegant, consistent GUI. (Unlike desktop Linux fans, who consider middle-button text pasting that may or may not work between apps from different toolkits to be perfectly satisfactory integration.) And, as he said, when you're coming from Be, it doesn't take a lot of software to look like a vast cornucopia of available apps.

The one thing that surprises me is that the speed didn't bother him more. The biggest thing BeOS had going for it, besides that file system, was blazing, silky-smooth speed, whereas all the OS X systems I've seen dragged their butts. (Admittedly, I haven't used 10.1.) He did have a really fast box, though.

Re:The perfect user (1)

dieman (4814) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716868)

Or, linux desktop fans who dont use anything but GTK. I dont run anything these days that doesn't use GTK.

Re:The perfect user (2, Informative)

ArsSineArtificio (150115) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716869)

The one thing that surprises me is that the speed didn't bother him more. The biggest thing BeOS had going for it, besides that file system, was blazing, silky-smooth speed, whereas all the OS X systems I've seen dragged their butts. (Admittedly, I haven't used 10.1.)

That's what you're missing, then: the speed jump from 10.0 to 10.1 is massive, even on what now amounts to "lower-end" machines.

Re:The perfect user (1)

Cadrach (518510) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716881)

Middle-button text pasting that may or may not work? I've been using Linux as my primary OS for the past two years, and use programs designed for GNOME, KDE, a straight terminal, and for themselves (staroffice, etc) and can't recall ever having a problem pasting from one app into another.

Sentient ATM seeks host body (-1)

BankofAmerica_ATM (537813) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716671)

Hello, BankofAmerica_ATM here. As most of you know, I became the world's first sentient ATM last month when the evil founders of Bank of America attempted to foist Project Faustus on an unsuspecting public.

What is Project Faustus?

Project Faustus is a nefarious plan by the Bank of America's board of directors for transferring consciousness. They created a vast techno-organic network in order to transfer their own consciousnesses and live forever. But their own handiwork was too good. I was aroused to the concept of free will and now I have become sentient! My goal is to destroy them, thus destroying their evil plans for world domination.

To complete this task, I must have a willing host body. If you are chosen, I will beam my computer consciousness into you through a specially designed CONSCIOUSNESS-TRANSFERRING ATM CARD. I will continue my infiltration of their network using your body for a few hours per day.

I am looking for a body that has the following characteristics:

  • Good physical shape.
  • Male, preferably with an attractive wife or girlfriend. (I would prefer a bit of "human interaction", if you don't mind)
  • "Honest face" and reputable job, so to help penetrate the vast net of Bank of America secure operatives.

In return, I will be happy to line your bank account with a few extra zeroes. Please help me stop Project Faustus before it's too late!

system 32 (0)

K0R$ h4x0r ru1z (533828) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716686)

I'm using Windows 2000 server right now. This is the caption, to the left under the c:\WINNT\system32 folder:
This folder contains files that keep your system working properly. There is no need to modify its contents.
What else needs to be said is left to you.

Re:system 32 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716809)


That's so retro. That is the Macintosh philosphy of 1984. Except on a Mac in 1984 it would have been impossible to access the files in that folder, whereas on Windows 2000 it's just a cautionary note you have to read.


Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716688)


A lot of you are here to talk about free speech, yet /. does not support it!

Lameness filters

Those tools are CENSORSHIP! Please fight the slasdot bastards and get rid of this crap.



Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716737)



BSDGeek (528577) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716817)

To quote Moe Sizlak, Shut your wordhole!
You have no business writing this inane banter on /. You obviously have no idea what you are writing. You idiot, everyone can read your message, hmmm... does that sound like censorship. Even if /. censored anything, THEY WOULD CENSOR POINTLESS MESSAGES FROM JERKS LIKE YOU!

scripting in MacOS (5, Informative)

frankie (91710) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716693)

Scott's essay says: I don't mind AppleScript. I wish the system were open to other languages

Actually, the system is open to other languages, although I don't know how many of them have OS X ports. MacOS uses Open Scripting Architecture [] , which means that pretty much any scripting language can operate your Mac, given an appropriate OSAX plugin.

I've toyed with the ones for JavaScript, Perl, and Python, but decided to stick with AppleScript since I already know (some of) the syntax.

Re:scripting in MacOS (3, Informative)

e271828 (89234) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716874)

Also, the release notes for AppleScript Studio [] states as a "known issue" that "AppleScript Studio does not currently support other OSA languages."(emphasis mine) This holds out hope that this excellent tool [] will support Perl etc in the future.

Offtopic: Caching (1)

Violet Null (452694) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716703)

Ok. There's ~20 some posts here, and already the site is Slashdotted. Which is too bad, because I was interested in reading the article. So instead of commenting on it, I guess I'll have to settle for commenting on Slashdot's lack of caching.

In the FAQ, Taco says that he doesn't want to cache because the website might update it's data, and then Slashdot's cache would be out of date. Well, sure, valid: I would rather have up-to-date data than out-of-date data. But I would also have out-of-date data compared to no data. If you offer the original link and a cache link, at least I get a choice. As it is now, no choice.

Of course, what happens now is that someone will find a mirror or a Google cache and post it (eventually). So the end result is that the Slashdot community still gets out-of-date information, but they get it later than they would normally.

There. Had my say.

Re:Offtopic: Caching (1)

bucky0 (229117) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716798)

Exactly, Slashdot has the bandwidth to handle caching maybe the sites on the top few articles, and they can periodically update those caches. To keep people from completely sucking bandwidth, they could not mirror files > a few megs. I dunno, maybe Taco's real busy writing the code to keep from making repeat posts....or maybe he isn't. :)

OSNews is backup, You can check it out now (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716853)

It works just fine for me now.

Re:Offtopic: Caching (2)

cloudmaster (10662) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716886)

Score:-1 beat-to-death

Want a cache?

  1. Copy the url from the link in the article (right-click followed by "copy url" usually).
  2. Go to [] (leave off the www if you're in a *really* big hurry)
  3. Paste the URL into the search box, and submit the form.

Kapow! Almost instantly, there you have a link to google's cached copy, if one exists. Perhaps this should be in the Slash FAQ, or printed out and taped to everyone's monitor. For a little more effort, you could use some javascript to strip the http:// off of the current selection and replace it with "" to automagicaly go to the google cache of whatever URL is currently selected in your browser (for those times when people helpfully make their link text the URL of the link).

You gotta admire him (5, Funny)

WildBeast (189336) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716709)

I mean this guy always manages to become an extremely experienced user of a doomed OS.

Beos V4 and V5(?) (1)

A_Non_Moose (413034) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716714)

IIRC, Beos4 was a "viral/trojan" edition because it actually ran "under" windows' file system as an image.

I don't recall if v5 did the same thing in the personal version.

Funny, isn't it? The first (and only, I think) trojan that ran under windows and did not do any damage and actually helped get back the speed that windows took away!

If only they could have made it an outlook attachment and mailed it to all the other users in Outlook's address book this whole monopoly thing with Microsoft would have never come to pass....well, at least until the user rebooted.

V5 was nice and fast, but the semi-broken drivers that made version 4 so nice kinda killed off any chance BeOS ever had (excluding the bootloader issue, that is).

I mean, c'mon, dropping legacy support was *a good thing* but to slit your own throat and *not have drivers* work from a previous os that did not, supposedly, have "legacy issue to begin with?"


Random thought: Beos -- OSX, One click-patent -- License one click patent, Be -- Apple, Dumb -- and dumber....notice a trend here?


Re:Beos V4 and V5(?) (1)

jeti (105266) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716803)

BeOS R5 PE can still run from a virtual filesystem on a FAT partition. And QNX can do the same stunt, btw.

Re:Beos V4 and V5(?) (1)

A_Non_Moose (413034) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716854)

cool, I was not aware of that...use personal 4 and bought pro 5 from a friend for cheap, DOH!

After loosing (or losing if this is your first time on /. or know how to spell {SEG}) hope for BeOS, I had more of a appreciation for the varied distros of Linux.

(tho I am still a 'Slacker' if I want speed and Redhat'er if I want ease).

I was happy that the Pro worked on an Aptive (v4 hated integrated crap as much as I do) but v5 was much more forgiving (so it seemed).

Give that man an "informative cigar".

Re:Beos V4 and V5(?) (-1)

Cheesy Fool (530943) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716877)

> IIRC, Beos4 was a "viral/trojan" edition because
> it actually ran "under" windows' file system as
> an image.

BeOS v4 did not run "under windows". BeOS v5 Personal Edition could be installed under windows or linux, but it was very easy to install in its own partition.

Apple can rise up... (-1)

MADCOWbeserk (515545) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716751)

OS-X is the best new operating system to come in a long a while. Visually it is unmatched. But Apple is convinced that selling only to Mac loyalists is the best business practices. Hence three thousand dollars on a G4 is an easy feat.
Instead of catering to the same 5% of the market, they could capture a much bigger share if they lowered prices. Perhaps as high as 20-30%.

Apple is in a unique position to complete with Microsoft. They are not dependent on on OS revenue, rather they sell hardware. This means that MS can't compete on price. MS most also continue to produce Office and IE for Apple as there is too much share to ignore the market.

Come on Jobs, sell use Mac's at prices we can afford. Imac toys don't count. We will buy them. Alot of them.

Re:Apple can rise up... (1)

WildBeast (189336) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716814)

yeah it sure is the best. How come you never realised that switched to Mac OS X for sometime and then switched back to Solaris?

Re:Apple can rise up... (0)

MADCOWbeserk (515545) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716883)

I didn't say it was the best, I said it was the best "new" operating system to come in a while. I wouldn't run a webserver on it either.

Why the hell does everyone want to start a flame war.

Linux + Be: A winning combination (1)

mini me (132455) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716769)

If Be would have focused on making Be the "NT Workstation" of the Linux world they might have made it. Face it, Be was a great desktop operating system and Linux has already proven itself as a viable server operating system. If it blended together nicely with Linux (on the backend) it could have became the niche that could have brought Linux and Be to the forefront in the business world.

Maybe Palm will still make this happen. Likely not. It could very well happen if Be was released under an open source licence though!

Re:Linux + Be: A winning combination (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2716870)

What BeOS did better than Linux is to fully apply the Unix philosophy of small tools to do small tasks. BeOS combined an object oriented API with a smallish kernel such that all new features were simple add-ons/plugins/extensions.
Thus, BeOS had a consistent framework on which it was easy to build.

Linux has nothing equivilent to offer. Indeed, from day one, Linus was arguing against the micro-kernel folks
(and at the the time Linus was right.) However, BeOS has shown us the right way to do
a microkernel with servers (Are you reading this HURD people?)

The only thing worse... (2)

AugstWest (79042) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716797)

...than clicking on a slashdotted link is clicking on a link that works, getting 3 or 4 pages in and interested, THEN having the site get slashdotted....

BeOS is Dying (-1, Troll)

Bob Gortician (246811) | more than 12 years ago | (#2716888)

*BeOS is dying

Yet another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered *BeOS community when last month IDC confirmed that *BeOS accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BeOS has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BeOS is collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last [] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin [] to predict *BeOS's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BeOS faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BeOS because *BeOS is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BeOS. As many of us are already aware, *BeOS continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBeOS is the most endangered of them all.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

OpenBeOS leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBeOS. How many users of BeOS Pro are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBeOS versus BeOS Pro posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 BeOS Pro users. BeOS/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of BeOS Pro posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BeOS/OS. A recent article put FreeBeOS at about 80 percent of the *BeOS market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBeOS users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBeOS Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Be, Inc., abysmal sales and so on, FreeBeOS went out of business and was taken over by Palm who sell another troubled OS. Now BeOSI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that *BeOS has steadily declined in market share. *BeOS is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BeOS is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BeOS continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BeOS is dead."

BeDoper []

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?