[openbeos] Re: News, Views and Overdues

  • From: "Peter Stegemann" <peter.stegemann@xxxxxx>
  • To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 21:33:46 0000

"Daniel Reinhold" <danielr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

>Hmmm, Peter... you seem a little pessimistic about the prospects for 
>the OpenBeOS project (understatment!)

I'm widely known in the BeOS-scene for beeing pessimistic. But that
was never true, I always was and I'm still am _realistic_. And I have
some experience.

Please have a look at www.aros.org and read every single page
before you read on.

>Well, you've got a right to your opinion. Anyone can say this project 
>is crazy, it'll never happen, don't waste your time, etc. I can't say 
>that I haven't had some of those feelings as well. But, despite all the 
>negatives, it truly is a worthwhile project. It's the only way IMO that 
>the BeOS can possibly survive in the long run.

I have never said OpenBeOS should stop because rewriting BeOS
is hopeless. You're pointing a lot in that direction in your reply, but
that's absolutely not my statement.

>You say "Rewriting the OS will take a LONG time". Well, LONG is 
>relative --- it certainly won't happen overnight. But it's not as tho 
>we are writing a 10-volume book series where we start on page 1 of 
>chapter 1 of volume 1 and begin typing away until the whole series is 
>finished. It's a parallel development project where bit and pieces are 
>written and integrated as we go. 

We don't need no philosophic excourse. We need a realistic
estimation about how long it will take this way.

>You say "That's what BeOS currently is: 3 years behing schedule." 
>What??? Where'd that number come from? Three years ago, BeOS was at 
>R3.x (the initial Intel port) and probably 90% of the current users had 
>never even heard of it at that point. I think most people would say 
>it's more like 1 year behind. Regardless of where it's at is besides 
>the point. It's not a horse race. It's about people being able to 
>continue to use this lovely alternative OS they've come to love.

It IS a horse race. If you just want to continue the OS, do so. It
didn't stop working for me, so it should still work for you. This is
one of the MOST important questions: WHY do we want to
rewrite BeOS?

>You say " I would vote for improving on the R5 base, putting rewriting 
>of old modules on second priority. This will give you binary 
>compatibility for a long time and improvements which are needed to keep 
>and increase the userbase." How do you improve the R5 base w/o access 
>to the kernel and the OS kits that implement the functionality? That 

One of the most important features BeOS has over other architects
is the possibility of expanding it without having to recompile. 

Just build a list of stuff that can be done setting on the current R5
and stuff that needs modifications to R5.

>leaves you with writing device drivers and add-ons. Those are nice and 
>useful and needed, but they only take you so far. Eventually and 
>inevitably, users leave as their hardware is no longer supported -- 
>perhaps before that because they see no real changes or updates and 
>lose faith that they will ever happen.

This is EXACTLY what will happen. It's what happens since a year.

>If we drag our feet for a couple of years and nothing really happens, 
>then you'll really see the death of an OS. At that point, many people 
>would be thinking, "damn, if we had started the OpenBeOS thing and 
>really worked on it, we'd be two years into it by now and really have 
>something to show". So let's not become future regretters... let's roll 
>up the sleeves and start working now!
>
>My personal feeling is that if we don't do this thing, the BeOS as we 
>know it, will pretty much wither up and die. We will all be forced to 
>use Windows, MacOS, Linux, or something else. The people who've joined 
>this list and want to see the project succeed are those who don't want 
>that to happen. Maybe Palm will develop the BeOS themselves (yeah, 
>right). Maybe Palm will license the code to another company or group. 
>Maybe Palm will be bought by Sony and we can direct all of our begging 
>in their direction. Maybe all sorts of wonderful things will happen. 
>Maybe, maybe, maybe, maybe, maybe, maybe.........................
>
>Let's eliminate the maybe's. Let's take this thing into OUR HANDS. 
>Let's do this project, not because it is easy (brother it aint), but 
>because it is worthwhile.

I don't like the way you're argumenting. Your putting me on the side
of people who area against OpenBeOS to make my arguments
invalid by definition. I'm NOT argumenting against OpenBeOS.

Please reread my last mail and try to invalidate my arguments with
facts.

1) A rewrite will take YEARS.
  a) The current userbase will have vanished
  b) The technological lagg of BeOS will have increased
2) There is no complete documentation of the public API and
  there is even less documentation on hidden APIs.
  a) A binary compatible rewrite is extremely complex.

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. haiku
  3. Archive
  4. 08-2001