[openbeos] Re: OFF-TOPIC: Helmar's final word
- From: Philippe Houdoin <philippe.houdoin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "'openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'" <openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:15:09 +0200
> Again, maybe I am overreacting, but... see below.
Maybe we're all overreacting here, but we all know why (each with their own
reasons).
> Closed source is not the problem. People have shown that is is
> possible to write printer drivers, device drivers, digital camera
> drivers, mail daemons, and even you show what is possible with
> Konqueror. The problem that BeOS had wasn't technical, and the
> sooner the OpenBeOS followers get this into their heads, the
> better.
Closed source, no, but closed API, yes.
Having to hunt after the right Be or ex-Be engineer email address to be able
to get at least the needed private header files (which, irony, *is* actually
kind of like open source) to write drivers is not very funny, when you
obviously must done too the same for hardware device you're looking to write
driver for.
I didn't help BeOS 3rd party drivers developers. Past, present, but future?
But see below.
> Anyway, I think the message is clear: BeOS doesn't suffer from a
> techie problem but a marketing problem, because for the majority
> it is quite useable. So rather than spending time at kernel level
> and trying to reinvent XXX_servers, they should spend time on
> supporting more motherboards, more hardware devices, more drivers,
> and also have a good look at applications too.
I'm partially agree with you on this part, but most BeOS inner parts are not
all modular or when there are, not documented at all.
No USB/i1394 controllers modules API available for example, so no OHCI USB
support, no new FireWire cards support or, better, FireWire devices support.
Still no media codecs API, too. Because it's in "change progress", ah ah.
Okay, some of these documentations managed to *leak*, like the IDE
controller modules one or print_server drivers one (which make me able to
write Canon Bubble Jet driver, thanks to *leaker*).
On adding more motherboards support, it's even worse because this is
directly in kernel source we may have to add this. And you know why we can't
today.
More hardware support and more applications, I agree, but we need at least
to get our hands on some missing BeOS documentations before been able to do
it.
And time.
And devotion.
I, as some others in this community, would like to do it, it may even be
fun.
> And besides, both Deskbar and Tracker are both open, and they
> need MASSIVE improvements before becoming remotely acceptable as
> an "alternative" desktop "environment". Why not help there?
What !?!
It's a joke, isn't it ?
OpenTracker/Deskbar seem to be as good as others desktops environment to me,
and even better if you ask.
Can you say *live* windows, speedy navigation menu, workspaces, easy to
write add-ons, favorites-aware file selectors panel?
Try to find all these features in other (successfull) OSes desktop
environments...
Oh please, BeOS desktop shell is NOT why BeOS don't succeed.
Commercially.
Anyway... I'm off.
Philippe, sorry for been off-topic..
Other related posts:
- » [openbeos] Re: OFF-TOPIC: Helmar's final word
