[openbeos] Re: Linux v. OBOS

  • From: <kevin.lawton@xxxxxx>
  • To: <openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 14:18:23 -0000

Hi, 
Yes - I'd second that ! 
It is the raw functionality that counts at the end of the day: the more useable 
a system is - the more it will be used. 
Leave the toys - the eye-candy and the cartoons - to Micro$oft to sell to games 
players. A clear, simple, functional user interface - which doesn't consume 
most of the system resources just by being there - is, IMHO, far more likely to 
attract the serious users and developers. After all, an op system is there to 
give us a platform to run our applications on - network server, graphics 
workstation, internet terminal, word processor, or whatever - isn't it ? 
Just my thoughts, I know - and I'd say that discussing issues such as this IS 
on-topic. 
Regards, 
Kevin.   
   
-----Original Message-----
From: troy banther [mailto:troybanther@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 12 November 2003 13:37
To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [openbeos] Linux v. OBOS

Hello everyone,

Okay. This is my two-cents.

It's not so much Linux v. OBOS. It's what can be used to market it.

I absolutely love BeOS. Even showing its age it is still a powerful and
simply elegant operating system.

It has one very sore point - networking at a server level. No snide or
smart ass cutsie responses. I am very serious. Find a coder that is
willing to tackle this for OBOS.

I use Linux now. Not because I particularly love it. It allows me to do
the things I want to do without reverting to Micro$haft WinCrap.

It allows me to set up a proper multi-user network. Hint. I can go
beyond the simple "hobbyist" and actually market it. Make money. Let me
repeat that - Make money.

Forget the friggen' BeOS eye-candy. Forget where you hold OBOS
conferences. Focus on those things that matter to system administrators
like myself. Multi-user networking. Be Inc was heading in the that
direction with the looks of BeOS CLI.

Warm regards,
Troy

On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 02:10, Charlie Clark wrote:
> On 2003-11-12 at 02:28:56 [+0100], you wrote:
> > bulk.fefe.de
> > Good link but it's just for the unix os. Linux 2.6 looking good.
> > 
> > The Be docs said it supported  around 4 processors.
> > 
> > Anyways if APPLE had bought Be then there would be no argument because 
> > the Virginia Tech computer would be running the Be operating system.
> > 
> > Any of you want to bet on that ?
> 
> This is nice and fun but way off-topic. Please take it to a "my OS is 
> better than yours forum" and when you know how to build incredibly large 
> systems come back and do it ;-)
> 
> Charlie
> 



Other related posts: