[openbeos] Re: Hi from the PetrOS camp.

  • From: David Sowsy <dsowsy@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 17:44:36 -0500 (EST)

> To answer your other question as to what we'd gain, well we'd gain possibly a
> larger user base than we might get if we stuck to Win32 only, plus it would
> demonstrate that our OS is more powerful than being just a Win32 workalike.
> The design philosophy is of being able to support more than one user API.
OK, so your logic is that if OpenBeOS becomes popular amongst zealots that
you can come along for the ride. 
> If the idea works well, your project might gain a little momentum and perhaps
> credibility from a commercial point of view by having a commercial developer
> willing to work with you.
> So I guess the answer is "thanks, but no thanks", no?

I'd not be convinced that your OS is a 'good fit' for OpenBeOS in anything
but the network area. Are you planning on 'donating' your coveted
network driver model to the project, or what? There are many approaches we
'could've taken', and gone through a Java based path, built an add-on to
another GUI based realtime OS (QNX), gone on Linux (like that other group
is doing). Etc etc. 

I make design decisions all the time, and there's a point where we
take the "it would be nice if we could do X" and throw them out the
window, and say "This is what we are doing, lead, follow, or get out of
the way."

We are still in the self-emerging phase of development
here and not  pursuing "partnering" or corporate motifs yet. So unless
you're going to dig in and start architecting and writing code right now,
I'm not sure how useful you can be.

. *  *      *   .   \|/  *      *     ,   . *   '  *  .
.   .   *  ,     * --*--    .     `    * ,   .  *  ,  .
David Sowsy    .    /|\  BeOS Rebel and Coder   .  *  .
http://dsowsy.nanorevolution.com   .   *   .   *   .  .

Other related posts: