[openbeos] Re: OpenBeOS Applications
- From: "unlyrn" <unlyrn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 16:32:59 +1300
> N+
> ==
>
> Other than being fast, this was always always crap (IMO - I know there
> are people who loved it). I would suggest settling on BeZilla as our
> default browser (like we have much choice anyway). Perhaps we can make
> a OpenBeOS distribution of it, packaging it up nicely and give it a
> BeOS theme? I really don't think that now is the time to be making
> another web-rendering engine.
>
> If people object to the whole BeZilla, why don't we use the Mozilla
> rendering engine and create a simple browser like Gaelon does?
When I first clicked on the 'Welcome to BeOS' html, Net+ bounced into
action, and there was the page... no disk thrashing, no need to load
mail/news, just a nice simple browser doing exactly what I asked - very
BeOS.
I agree, BeZilla is definitely the furthest-down-the-track as far as
browsers go, but theres no way it should be the default browser in its
current form.
Take the rendering engine, give it a simple BeOS GUI, and a bit of
integration (think queries - favourites, cached pages etc) and I think we'd
have something.
> PoorMan
> =====
>
> This was actually OK... but is it really worth writing a web server
> when Apache 1.3x and Apache 2.x have been ported.
>
> I would suggest getting the Apache 2.x port up to date, and creating a
> GUI to httpd.conf instead of PoorMan. (Heh - ApacheMan) - much like
> MacOS X does, we could even bundle PHP with it.
I'd really like to see RobinHood as default BeOS server - a few more GUI
based config tools and you've got the perfect balance between
accessability/power; again, its a very 'BeOS' app. Moreover, if someone
loads up OBOS for the first time and sees Apache etc, will they think "Oh,
so this has the same apps as everything else, hooray", or "Oh, so this has
the same apps, what's the point?"
Anyone who wants to run Apache can do so - moreover, the people who want to
run Apache shouldn't have any problems doing this for themselves. But people
who want to run OBOS should probably be given a little more for their
efforts than a bunch of popular ports from other platforms..
> BeIDE
> ====
>
> I don't know what to do about this - discussions welcome!
I don't see Metroworks jumping back into the fray for this - and its
certainly a huge porting project if it were to be 'recreated' (besides
which, the legal team at MW may be a little less leniant than Palm...).
However, long term (this is probably GE stuff here) I'd like to see an
accessable visual language ala VisualC++ available, supported, and actively
developed, preferably slotting in to the existing IDE. I know there have
been a few such efforts on BeBits, and yes, we need the foundation first,
but Be has always been a very attractive platform for developers in terms of
clean (even beautiful APIs), I just think we should take it a bit further
and make it the most enjoyable system to develop for, bar none.
> BeMail
> ====
>
> I don't know what to do about this either, I *really* like BeMail, but
> if we are going to bundle BeZilla, do we need to rewrite BeMail? I
> have a feeling that the answer will be yes here :)
Again - noone should have to load up BeZilla in order to check their mail.
More importantly, BeMail offers things like integration with the query
engine that would be impossible or just plain clunky with other mail clients
Thanks,
David Shipman
(hmm, long post, I need some coffee)
Other related posts:
