[openbeos] Re: Linux v. OBOS

  • From: <kevin.lawton@xxxxxx>
  • To: <openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 15:27:41 -0000

If you assert that discussing the relative merits of other op systems is 
somehow 'off-topic' within the context of discussing what might be important or 
superfluous within OpenBeOS, please could you at least define what the 'topic' 
actually is ? 
   
-----Original Message-----
From: simontaylor1@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:simontaylor1@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 12 November 2003 15:11
To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [openbeos] Re: Linux v. OBOS

Hi you random-off-topic-posting dudes,

> 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.   

The reason this is off-topic is that the direction OBOS is going in (at 
least for R1) is clearly defined, and has been agreed on. If you want 
to discuss things for beyond R1, glass elevator is the place.
ps: GE isn't very well publicised on the OBOS site. Is there a reason 
for this?

Nobody's talking about adding "eye-candy and cartoons" - if you're 
talking about my thread on the visual design, that wasn't about adding 
eye candy, that was about modernising the core interface.

The BeOS interface does actually use quite a lot of resources in terms 
of CPU - that is one of the reasons it is so much more reponsive than 
anything else out there.

On to Troy,
 
> 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.

It never was linux vs OBOS in an overall "OS War" sense - that thread 
was about a comparison in performance between BeOS and linux for SMP 
applications.
 
> I absolutely love BeOS. Even showing its age it is still a powerful 
> and
> simply elegant operating system.

Yes.
 
> 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.

They are called the network kit team.

Find out about them here:
http://open-beos.sourceforge.net/tms/team.php?id=7
(ps the page is a bit out of date)

As Micahel has mentioned in a newsletter about "focus", there are 
tradeoofs in the destop vs server debate, and OBOS should very 
definately focus on the desktop side.
---quote-----
Sometimes the design ideals vary from user type to user type. Servers 
require different trade offs - performance under heavy load is more 
important than being lightweight, stability is far more important than 
performance, and throughput is more important than low latency. Linux 
has many of these same issues - it was originally designed for more 
server-like situations. When the needs of multimedia users became a 
more vocal part of the Linux community, patches and changes had to be 
introduced to reduce the latency of the system. The smart money says 
that there are still trade offs occuring somewhere. Writing better code 
can improve performance, but you can't change the laws of physics.
-------------

While it's reasonable to want to be able to run a simple home server on 
OBOS, it is unreasonable to expect that all the servers in the world 
hosting the web should switch to OBOS - when the main focus is on a 
Desktop OS.

> 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.

Whatever. I use windows when it has a tool to do the job better than 
BeOS. Otherwise I'll use Be.

I wonder how many people use linux for similar reasons? "It's not any 
good, but it means i dont have to use windows".
Hopefully most BeOS users use Be because they actually prefer the OS to 
the competition.
 
> 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.

Sorry, what? 
So single-user == hobby OS, multi-user == marketable OS? I don't get 
that argument at all.
It's true that having desktop OSes be fully multi-user is fashionable 
now, but windows 98/ME wasn't really, and I think microsoft's figures 
would show you 98/ME was more than a hobby OS. For what I use my 
computer for, single-user is much prefered.
 
> 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.

Again, who's talking about "eye-candy"?

I love the idea of WalterCon, I'd be really interested in how many 
people go. I'm in the UK, so it's a little impractical for me to get 
there (although I did look up airfares just to see!).

And finally to your demand for people to suddenly start working on 
multi-user networking. You obviously have NO IDEA of the OBOS roadmap. 
R1 is going to be an OS that is binary-compatible with R5. That means 
no multi-user. Period. You want to discuss multi-user, then go to 
glasselevator. What R1 will do is reimplement R5 in a better way. That 
means that networking will be in the kernel, and OBOS R1 will therefore 
be better at server type roles than R5. Note: not better than linux, 
but better than R5. You really can't ask for more than that, given the 
constraints that R1 is being created under.

If you want to see what's really happening, look at the CVS changes 
mailing list. You'll see work on the bootloader, filesystem addons, 
preference apps, core kernel functions, media add-on api, app server, 
networking, and loads more. In short, they are "focusing on the things 
that matter" - creating a working R1.

> Warm regards,
> Troy

Cheers,
Simon.

ps: I hate replying to off-topic posts, telling people how they're off-
topic, and then inciting reponses.
If you want to respond, please, please, please mail me privately. 
Thanks.


-----------------------------------------
Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/




Other related posts: