[openbeos] Re: Atheos Forked
- From: "Daniel Reinhold" <danielr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 05:13:15 CST
I understand your points and it's an interesting idea. However, I think
that we (OpenBeOS) already have a challenge -- a tremendous one at that
-- of recreating R5. This alone is sufficient to keep us focused for
quite some time. I don't think we badly need to take on any other
challenges at the moment.
As I see it, the BeOS is more than just a piece of technical work, but
more like.. a spirit, a way of looking at things and doing things.
We've set ourselves the task of recreating and even extending that. We
are really competing with the ghost of Be, not with any other current
BeOS derivative projects.
I don't think that you ever see that kind of spirit in the Linux world
which is more technically oriented and steeped in the adolescent nerd
mentality. You don't see it in the Windows world, which is commerical
and soul-less. You do see it in the Mac world (altho then you are, to a
degree, stuck in the world-according-to-Steve). I think that this may
be our ultimate incentive to succeed -- we don't want to be forced to
move into those "other" worlds.
Having said all that, it is true that if, over time, many current BeOS
users migrate over to a Linux/BeOS hybrid, we may feel the need to
prove that our implementation has marked advantages in latencies,
responsiveness, etc. But that's still a ways off -- we can cross that
bridge when we get there. Right now, we don't really need to defend our
choice of kernel...again (we've done that many times already).
To me, this annoucement about an Atheos-tweaked, BeOS compatible OS
sounds like a proof-of-concept. A proud engineer's baby. Is it really
meant to be a fully usable, supported, living OS, with a thriving user
and developer community? OpenBeOS certainly is intended to be real, not
just a fun project for geeks (tho it can be fun).
I certainly think the announcement is interesting. I'd be curious to
take a look what Bill Hayden has done myself. But I don't think it
makes a jot of difference to this project at this point. Our challenge
is, first and foremost, build the thing and get it working. Then, make
sure it not only works, but works beautifully. Who's up for that?
>Sounds to me like a challenge... and one with potentially positive
>ramifications.
>
>This AtheOS/BeOS/LinuxKernel hybrid will bridge a gap between Linux
>developers/users and BeOS developers/users. It can't hurt any efforts
>to keep BeOS alive, as it is source level compatible, and therefore,
it
>seems to me that it would tend to bring even more apps to the various
>BeOS-derivatives, such as OpenBeOS, BlueOS, and this AtheOS/Linux one
-
>get more developers creating apps and learning the Be API basics.
>
>So the challenge is - prove that OpenBeOS, with the NewOS-based
kernel,
>performs much better than the Linux-kernel-based platforms. The
masses
>will eventually migrate over to the better OpenBeOS platform via the
>bridge created by Bill Hayden.
>
>You all up for that? ;)
>
>Deej
>
>
- Follow-Ups:
- [openbeos] Re: Atheos Forked
- From: Cedric Degea
- [openbeos] Re: Atheos Forked
- From: Timothy Covell
Other related posts:
- » [openbeos] Re: Atheos Forked
- » [openbeos] Re: Atheos Forked
- » [openbeos] Re: Atheos Forked
- » [openbeos] Re: Atheos Forked
- » [openbeos] Re: Atheos Forked
- » [openbeos] Re: Atheos Forked
- » [openbeos] Re: Atheos Forked
- » [openbeos] Re: Atheos Forked
- [openbeos] Re: Atheos Forked
- From: Cedric Degea
- [openbeos] Re: Atheos Forked
- From: Timothy Covell