[openbeos] Re: Linux v. OBOS

  • From: "Adi Oanca" <e2joseph@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:07:08 +0200


Hi Simon! :-)

> Hi you random-off-topic-posting dudes,

    Ohh come on :-) what is good and what is bad for our OS is ALWAYS god to
hear. Even if those are concepts only! :-)
    If someone thinks subjects are off-list, don't answer! But as long as
someone replies to an email posted on this mail-list you can consider it
being ON-topic!
    Just look how few emails were in the last 20 days! If we are to be
creating the OS of the future :-) be better start discussing! :-)

[Kevin here]
> > 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.

    Kevin... IMHO "raw" functionality is for servers mate!

> > 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.

    Noo nooo nooo :-) I think functionality and eye-candy is a PERFECT
whole, and I think it's towards that we should go!!!
    Serious developers WILL be attracted by our CLEAN API, and ****MORE****
serious developers would come from the companies that would embrace OBOS as
their target platform.

> > 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 ?

    Yes it is! BUT, at some extent! See... OBOS won't be good at running
viable servers WinXP isn't good at that either! By contrast, Linux 2.6 and
MS Windows Server 2003 are DO at that, and they do it VERY good!
    So, to make it clear: serverOS != workstationOS !=[not THAT much]
desktopOS. Each with its ups and downs!

> 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.

    Ohhh but I was talking about that! And it was my impression that you
were talking EXACTLY about that too! You were asking to modernize the code
interface because you wanted an eye-candy GUI, isn't it?

> 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.

    :-) It uses resources because of a little BAD :-) design too.

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

    I do agree, making money means more full-time developers and a more
complete OS. I think by R2's time we'll have a marketing team!.

> > 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.

    :-( Why don't you people recognize that MS is doing a good job since
Win2000 came out? Have you EVEN tried Windows 2003 Server???????? It's a lot
better than Linux 2.4!
    Stop criticizing MS by saying their products are CRAP!!! If so, why do
you think 80% of software companies develop products for their
platform??????? Do you think they are stupid too?????? Adobe will market
products for Windows ONLY, their products are crap too???, are they stupid
    It's their philosophy to be blamed: they believe the whole world is
theirs; And in fact that is... MARKETING !!!

> I wonder how many people use linux for similar reasons? "It's not any
> good, but it means i dont have to use windows".

    Right! Ehhh... I won't continue anymore...

> Hopefully most BeOS users use Be because they actually prefer the OS to
> the competition.

    O how I wish that! :-)

> Make money. Let
> > me
> > repeat that - Make money.

    We'll try!

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

    Sorry! I do not understand! multi-user network? OR multi-user OS?
    multi-user network? you mean the same way Linux users login into their
CLI accounts?

    OBOS will be a multi-user OS(we have no choice) but that will happen
later. We even don't have a design for that yet, AFAIK! Maybe R2. But I
think R3 will definitely have that feature.

> > 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"?

ME! :-)

    We DO NOT want to make system administrators happy! IN FACT, we DO NOT
want system administrators!!! WE want OBOS to be able to manage himself with
A LITTLE(indispensable) help form the user!!! That's what "functionality" is
all about!!!


Other related posts: