[openbeos] Re: Re[2]: OpenBeOS in competition with BeOS
- From: "Richard S. Lewine" <rslewine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 13:08:29 +0000
I'm reading all these emails that are agonizing over how to begin, and what to
call
openbeos.
For the most part, the people on this list are technical people first, not
business people.
It's natural that they want an oppotunity to create a "better BeOS". Coding,
building,
testing are their passions, and I again say "Hooray" for without techies, there
is nothing. I
even commited to doing testing, (whatever that means for an OS) myself.
There are a few of us on the list who are more entrepreneurial and business
oriented.
Agian I say Hooray, for without someone selling and marketing, there's no one
to use the
"better BeOS." Just using word of mouth in the technical community at large
won't
generate critical mass for perpetuatjion of the product.
While I don't really know Helmar, he appears to be an unusual blend of both.
Therefore,
his exposure has been to both environments and his counsel is grounded in both
experiences. To argue the merits of open or closed BeOS, is to argue whether to
eat or
drink; both are required.
If just this group of developers focused on creating *BeOS applications*, the
likes of
Productive and Personal Assistant, BeOS as is would enjoy an unimaginable
growth spurt
in users. . .because they wouldn't need to boot to windows for their
acccounting
functions, human resource functions, fax drivers, WYSIWYG web building, and
myriad
other specialized apps, etc. The magnitude of the combined programming
knowledge of
this assembled group probably is not equalled in very many places. If it is
focused on
both the technical and commercial issues of breathing life back into BeOS, even
as it is,
the results would be breathtaking.
I for one, as a business user, am ready to have my breath taken away!
Rich
"Helmar Rudolph" <helmar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>Yuri Titov wrote:
>
>> I hate to say this, but it doesnt really matter to me what
>> Palm says. I lost trust in Be a year after it put out R5. The
>> only good news I will hear is either we get source for BeOS,
>> or Palm tells us we can forget about beos.
>> I dont want to be debendant on a company again.
>
>I don't hate to say this, but the sooner you (guys) face that you
>aren't going anywhere without a proper marketing and support
>structure, the better. Conversely, I am under no illusion that
>without decent developer support, our initiative is going nowhere.
>
>You may come up with something cool, but I know of a company that
>came up with something cool before - the company was called Be,
>Inc.. And Be, Inc. in all its coolness went nowhere. Why? Because
>in all their coding frenzy they took their eye off the market and
>subsequently got killed.
>
>Now I don't know what really motivates you, doing something
>open-source, something cool, something to support BeOS, or......
>only you can answer this question, but I can tell you that the
>more united we appear to Palm, the better for everyone involved.
>
>So, I really don't know how we are dependent in any way on Palm.
>If Palm says "No" to the licensing of BeOS, then you will still
>do what you are doing. But without the proper marketing and
>support you are going the same way as with access to the source
>code: nowhere. But while we will certainly find the programmers,
>you may not find it easy to find the right marketers or
>supporters. Remember: there is so much more to a successful OS
>than a cool kernel and some XXX_servers.
>
>In short, it is my current priority to unite all the forces,
>because should Palm say Yes -something I am mildly positive
>about- we gotta be moving fast. And then there is no time for
>farting around or arguing about silly things, because the market
>is not waiting for us anymore.
>
>United we stand, divided we fall.
>
>Just my 0.02,
>
>Helmar
>
Other related posts:
