Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 27th Mar 2006 09:42 UTC, submitted by DaaT
Zeta IsComputerOn (back from some downtime) has previewed the latest ZETA 1.2, still in beta testing, soon to be available to the general public. "Well, this is not the final 1.2 version, but so far my experience with this beta (and the previous ones) has been very pleasant. Stability issues have been (mostly) solved, speed has increased and the overall look has improved as well (the new buttons, tabs, the default decor has been improved too), making this a good experience throughout the beta testing." Many screenshots included, boys and girls. Expect a review of a 1.2 beta on OSNews too, soon.
Order by: Score:
Great:
by Sauron on Mon 27th Mar 2006 11:24 UTC
Sauron
Member since:
2005-08-02

I love to watch the advance of BeOs. It seems that perhaps finally Yellowtab have got their act together! I will be watching this closely.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Great:
by helf on Mon 27th Mar 2006 18:53 UTC in reply to "Great:"
helf Member since:
2005-07-06

Thats 'BeOS' ;)

Reply Score: 1

Good, but...
by biffuz on Mon 27th Mar 2006 11:30 UTC
biffuz
Member since:
2006-03-27

It's good they updated the look, but thy still have a lot to do. Maybe they can hire some professional UI designer (take a look to sites like WinCustomize or DeviantArt).
But we are in 2006, it is time to go with fully skinnable GUI.
And I hope they fixed the issues with the SoundBlaster Audigy...

Reply Score: 1

RE: Good, but...
by jeremywc on Mon 27th Mar 2006 12:15 UTC in reply to "Good, but..."
jeremywc Member since:
2005-08-02

Flashy graphics do not translate into a usable UI. If they did hire someone off of either of those sites, I'd advise everyone I came across to avoid it like the plague.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Good, but...
by Pierpaolo on Mon 27th Mar 2006 12:21 UTC in reply to "RE: Good, but..."
Pierpaolo Member since:
2005-07-11

Hahahaha!!
First of all, I have to tell that I agree with you. But we must be aware that some people coud be interested in this kind of feature. I dislike skins: most skins I saw can be defined confusing and distracting for me... but somebody can like them. I don't think it's a must-be-implemented feature but if they'll decide to include it I hope that it will be done in a clever way (the BeOS way) and that the impact on the performance will be minimal. I'd like to run Zeta on oldest computer too. In my very humble opinion, there are much important features to concentrate the development on: drivers and dev tools. BeIDE is nice, but it isn't perfect. I'd like to see improvements in dev tools too! Developers are important...

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Good, but...
by vitae on Mon 27th Mar 2006 19:36 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Good, but..."
vitae Member since:
2006-02-20

That's why the skins should be there, for those that want them. Those who are satisfied with the traditional BeOS look don't have to use them. People should have choice, no?

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Good, but...
by Pierpaolo on Mon 27th Mar 2006 22:20 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Good, but..."
Pierpaolo Member since:
2005-07-11

Yes! Sorry, it was exactly what I intended to tell. I'm not interested in skinning, but if they decide to implement it, I hope it will be done with *minimal* impact on the performance of the UI. And there are much important things to care on: Zeta should attract *both* new developers *and* users. I think more advanced dev tools are needed for attracting new developers. Better debugger-BeIDE integration is a feature I'd like to see... yT is doing very well, IMHO

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Good, but...
by Emerson on Mon 27th Mar 2006 12:38 UTC in reply to "RE: Good, but..."
Emerson Member since:
2005-09-19

Flashy graphics don't translate into an automatic usable UI, but they do translate into a GUI that has, well, flashy graphics. Which is what most end users want from an operating system. Even here, just look how many comments about vista have to actually do with the usability or underlying structure compared to the theming. Geeks can care about that all they want, but the vast majority of users want an OS that appeals to their artistic sensability.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Good, but...
by MikeGA on Mon 27th Mar 2006 13:21 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Good, but..."
MikeGA Member since:
2005-07-22

I think the problem here is how YellowTab seem to be approaching the interface "look." They seem to want to take the original BeOS interface and gradually improve parts of it. However, frankly, in order to get a modern look to the interface, this is not going to work.

What YellowTab really need to do is say "Look, for version 2, we are going to completely update the entire UI." They need to pick a scheme for the look of the windows, colours of menu etc. They want anti-aliased fonts. All these sorts of things.

Unfortunately of course, none of this is trivial. The alternative is just to stick with the BeOS original look, and avoid altering it too much at all.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Good, but...
by StephenBeDoper on Mon 27th Mar 2006 14:40 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Good, but..."
StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

but the vast majority of users want an OS that appeals to their artistic sensability.

Well great for them. I would suggest they stick with OSes concerned about satisfying those artistic sensibilities.

There are some of us, though, who actually prefer visually minimalist/understated UIs from an aesthetic standpoint. I'm glad Be had the restraint to keep their graphical tech demos confined to demo applications.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Good, but...
by Mea Culpa on Mon 27th Mar 2006 15:39 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Good, but..."
Mea Culpa Member since:
2006-02-18

again, it's a fine line to tread. Excessive minimalism can lead to dullness, but too flashy can lead to clutter.

A good UI designer is probably more pyschologist than anything else. Recognising what the user will be instinctively expecting is as much about UI as the aesthetics of appearance.

It's a tricky ball of wax, and the more I get involved with it at work, the more respect I have for "good design", and conversely diminishing tolerance for bad deisgn.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Good, but...
by Soulbender on Mon 27th Mar 2006 15:33 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Good, but..."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"Which is what most end users want from an operating system"

No they dont. Only computer geeks and nerds do. Your average user only cares that it isnt unsightly awfull and that it lets them do whatever they use the computer for (play music, look at photos, send email etc etc).

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Good, but...
by Mea Culpa on Mon 27th Mar 2006 13:59 UTC in reply to "RE: Good, but..."
Mea Culpa Member since:
2006-02-18

having done a bit of UI work recently (kind of thrust upon me, but with a "hunger" to want to get it done properly regardless), I can say that the UI is *thee* most important aspect of a product you can possibly be working on.

Flashy graphics can be used, but at every step of the design process, you must evaluate with the utmost criticism, what are you doing, justifying every choice. it's goes back to the old maxim of first impressions count, and it's axiomatic in UI.

However, while there's a section of the BeOS faithful who, to try and be polite about it, can be a bit luddite about UI, it's a mad tightrope act to balance flash with function. You can never be too critical about UI design, and it's good to see yT tackling the matter with the gravity it deserves.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Good, but...
by biffuz on Mon 27th Mar 2006 20:05 UTC in reply to "RE: Good, but..."
biffuz Member since:
2006-03-27

"Flashy graphics do not translate into a usable UI."

This was not the point.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Good, but...
by Soulbender on Mon 27th Mar 2006 15:24 UTC in reply to "Good, but..."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"Maybe they can hire some professional UI designer (take a look to sites like WinCustomize or DeviantArt)."

That's about the last place on earth you should hire a UI designer from. Graphic artists != UI designers.
I prefer an interface that is actually usable and doesnt look like a Gigeresque nightmare or Houston GroundControl.

"But we are in 2006, it is time to go with fully skinnable GUI."
Only geeks really cares about the interface being fully skinnable, ordinary people just want something that is clean and lets them get their tasks done.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Good, but...
by biffuz on Mon 27th Mar 2006 20:10 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Good, but..."
biffuz Member since:
2006-03-27

"That's about the last place on earth you should hire a UI designer from. Graphic artists != UI designers.
I prefer an interface that is actually usable and doesnt look like a Gigeresque nightmare or Houston GroundControl."

Just the first two names I thought.

"Only geeks really cares about the interface being fully skinnable, ordinary people just want something that is clean and lets them get their tasks done."

Really? Tell the phone companies to shut down that multi-million dollars ringtones market, then. People don't care about that, don't they?

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Good, but...
by helf on Mon 27th Mar 2006 20:34 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Good, but..."
helf Member since:
2005-07-06

you have that backwards. Geeks want a clean interface that lets them get their work done, normal users want a fully skinnable interface thats flashy ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Good, but...
by biffuz on Mon 27th Mar 2006 20:56 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Good, but..."
biffuz Member since:
2006-03-27

Geeks can use a clean skin, can't they? That's exactly what I do in Windows.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Good, but...
by Emerson on Mon 27th Mar 2006 22:27 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Good, but..."
Emerson Member since:
2005-09-19

you have that backwards. Geeks want a clean interface that lets them get their work done, normal users want a fully skinnable interface thats flashy ;)

Here's my view, with heavy sterotyping of people that in real life don't really fit into either catagory.

My experiences have been kind of a mixed bag. Most of the computer geeks I know want as little, and as fast, an interface as possible. They'll also be incredibly picky about inconsistancies in appearence.

Normal users want bright colours and animation. The vast majority though, very strongly don't want to do anything to get those effects. They're the crowds who wanted a purple computer, or switched to osx because they like blue buttons. As much as they might like a heavily painted widget set, even changing the theme through two button clicks is usually more than they're willing to go through. One of the biggest things I've noticed though, is tht they don't seem to care too much about graphical inconsistancy once they have the "cool pulsing theme". Inconsistancies from swing, gtk, and wx that make me cringe aren't even noticed by most average users.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Good, but...
by stew on Mon 27th Mar 2006 22:38 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Good, but..."
stew Member since:
2005-07-06

"Inconsistancies from swing, gtk, and wx that make me cringe aren't even noticed by most average users."

wx? wx doesn't do any themes by itself, it simply calls the native widgets of the underlying platform. Are you thinking of Qt?

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Good, but...
by Soulbender on Tue 28th Mar 2006 03:24 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Good, but..."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"Really? Tell the phone companies to shut down that multi-million dollars ringtones market, then. People don't care about that, don't they?"

Computers arent mobile phones. Your computer sits in your home, immobile, and is at the most seen by your family and a couple of friends. A phone is with you everywhere, seen and heard by a lot of people and is somewhat of a fashion statement in itself.
Thus people care much more about the looks and style of the latter than they do of the former.
As long as the default theme is reasonably pleasing to the eye users arent going to bother too much with changing it. They are more interested in how to easily get their photos on the computer and send them to their friends than changing the color of the buttons or the shape of the window borders.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Good, but...
by Jack Burton on Tue 28th Mar 2006 06:50 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Good, but..."
Jack Burton Member since:
2005-07-06

"As long as the default theme is reasonably pleasing to the eye users arent going to bother too much with changing it."

I second that.
There are roughly 90 "people-with-pc" where I work, and while most of them wants to have a nice picture as background (be it their son, their pet, or whatever), only some people change the color of the interface.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Good, but...
by biffuz on Tue 28th Mar 2006 09:15 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Good, but..."
biffuz Member since:
2006-03-27

"There are roughly 90 "people-with-pc" where I work, and while most of them wants to have a nice picture as background (be it their son, their pet, or whatever), only some people change the color of the interface."

Because they don't know how to change it, or they can't find a theme that suit their tastes, or the themes don't work well. You said they change the desktop picture: it's exactly the same point, they're changing the look of the computer.
I agree that a fancy interface is not an important feature from a technical point of view, but it is a big selling point, Apple taught us that: a lot of people admire the OSX look, what stops them from buying a Mac is the lack of applications they need (or the fact they have to change their habits).

Reply Score: 1

RE[8]: Good, but...
by Jack Burton on Tue 28th Mar 2006 09:33 UTC in reply to "RE[7]: Good, but..."
Jack Burton Member since:
2005-07-06

"Because they don't know how to change it, or they can't find a theme that suit their tastes, or the themes don't work well"

They know, they just don't care about this.

"You said they change the desktop picture: it's exactly the same point, they're changing the look of the computer."

No, it's a different matter. They want the picture of their sons on the pc, not a flashy look.

Reply Score: 1

RE[9]: Good, but...
by biffuz on Tue 28th Mar 2006 10:51 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: Good, but..."
biffuz Member since:
2006-03-27

"No, it's a different matter. They want the picture of their sons on the pc, not a flashy look."

Teach them how to change it, and they will if possible (and if they don't hate computers altogether). Almost everybody I teached to did. They now even look at the PC with a more friendly eye!

Reply Score: 1

Other new features?
by Pierpaolo on Mon 27th Mar 2006 12:13 UTC
Pierpaolo
Member since:
2005-07-11

I like how things are going for Zeta. Does anybody knows about the state of GCC "migration" for this new release of Zeta (once I read that this version will be shipped/compiled with gcc 4.x.x suite) and for the multiuser support? Just curious!

Reply Score: 1

Looking Good...
by ejk- on Mon 27th Mar 2006 13:29 UTC
ejk-
Member since:
2006-02-26

It looks good IMO, Zeta is coming along nicely.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Looking Good...
by Thom_Holwerda on Mon 27th Mar 2006 13:36 UTC in reply to "Looking Good..."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

It looks good IMO, Zeta is coming along nicely.

Yes, from what I can make up from my email convos with Bernd Korz, he is extremely excited about this upcoming release, much more so than 1.0/1.1.

I'll try to get my review done by tonight CET, folks, but I ain't guaranteeing anything.

Reply Score: 5

installation time
by thebackwash on Mon 27th Mar 2006 13:35 UTC
thebackwash
Member since:
2005-07-06

"Installation takes about 90 mns."

Did anyone else read this as "ninety millinanoseconds?"

That would be newsworthy.

Reply Score: 2

v What's the point of Zeta Anyway?
by mraf on Mon 27th Mar 2006 13:56 UTC
RE: What's the point of Zeta Anyway?
by miscz on Mon 27th Mar 2006 14:09 UTC in reply to "What's the point of Zeta Anyway?"
miscz Member since:
2005-07-17

1. Zeta is not open source, it's a commercial product. You are probably thinking about Haiku.
2. BeOS is not another project, it's OS with quite a bit of history.
3. YellowTAB wants to make money, not spend time on BSD or Linux.

Reply Score: 2

Pierpaolo Member since:
2005-07-11

4. BeOS/Zeta architecture is quite "newer" than Unix derivatives like Linux is
5. BeOS/Zeta are much cleaner and "structured" systems than Linux is (and, please *note* I'm an hard-core Linux user - Linux is great and is constantly evolving better and better)
6. don't feed trolls ;-)

Reply Score: 2

Sparrowhawk Member since:
2005-07-11

As miccz points out, you are thinking of Haiku.

So, although this is slightly OT, the reason people spend their time on Haiku is because it is their time to spend as they wish.

Can you imagine the stagnation that would occur if everybody inlolved in OS design went and spent their time on Linux/BSD? Variety feeds innovation. Everyone gains.

As for Zeta - they are spending their time on it because they feel that it is commercially viable. I'd say that that was a pretty good premise for a commercial entity such as yT.

Reply Score: 3

This is ... wow...
by Tuishimi on Mon 27th Mar 2006 14:20 UTC
Tuishimi
Member since:
2005-07-06

...If Zeta keeps adding drivers (and tweaking the GUI, it looks as tho' they've removed some of the little graphical "glitches" that were in the old beta version of BeOS R6).

I always had my doubts about YellowTab and Zeta but it looks as tho' they are really settling in nicely and working earnestly to provide a widely useable OS.

Reply Score: 1

The Window-Decor Easter Egg
by JacobMunoz on Mon 27th Mar 2006 16:04 UTC
JacobMunoz
Member since:
2006-03-17

I hope that yT will use a method similar to the 'easter egg' in the Deskbar...

Hold CTRL+SHIFT+ALT and click on the 'BeOS' logo on the Deskbar - and you will find a new option that says 'window decor', then you can select from Windows, Be, Mac, and Amiga.

It was a unintrusive way to give mild 'skinning' features, seemingly without any performance lag. I like that, and hope they just expand on the code/feature versus overlaying a bunch of cloddy extra API stuff. I know it doesn't give 'round edges' or transparency features, but as you could send a window to the back of the screen with just a right-click, you don't really need transparency. I agree with most of those here who say 'keep it simple' (and fast).

Reply Score: 1

RE: The Window-Decor Easter Egg
by Ithamar on Mon 27th Mar 2006 17:37 UTC in reply to "The Window-Decor Easter Egg"
Ithamar Member since:
2006-03-20

Click on the Deskbar, go to Preferences/Appearance, et voila, the Decor setting is what you're looking for ;)

Reply Score: 2

Productive
by biffuz on Mon 27th Mar 2006 20:18 UTC
biffuz
Member since:
2006-03-27

Curiously nobody commented on the localization of Gobe Productive. This means that the people at Gobe are back to work, or yT has the sources.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Productive
by mariux on Mon 27th Mar 2006 20:44 UTC in reply to "Productive"
mariux Member since:
2005-11-13

I thought about that too, my first though was: "They binary hacked Gobe Productive to localize it? No never", so it seems they have the sources yes.

Reply Score: 1

yes boys and girls...
by nivenh on Mon 27th Mar 2006 21:13 UTC
nivenh
Member since:
2005-07-06

they will find a way to insert "boys and girls" into the article header come hell or high water.

Reply Score: 4

RE: yes boys and girls...
by D-J-P on Tue 28th Mar 2006 07:55 UTC in reply to "yes boys and girls..."
D-J-P Member since:
2005-07-06

Everybody knows

Operating Systems + Girls = Does Not Compute (eugenia is an exception)

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: yes boys and girls...
by bryanv on Tue 28th Mar 2006 14:10 UTC in reply to "RE: yes boys and girls..."
bryanv Member since:
2005-08-26

Eugenia is a man, MAN!

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: yes boys and girls...
by dylansmrjones on Tue 28th Mar 2006 17:10 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: yes boys and girls..."
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

When did she become a man? :p

http://www.osnews.com/editor.php?editors_id=1

But she's still an exception to the rule about Technology and Women being incompatible ;)

Reply Score: 1

Skionning in BeOS/Zeta
by fishpond on Mon 27th Mar 2006 23:55 UTC
fishpond
Member since:
2006-03-27

As far as I can see, Zeta is skinnable already. The decors or themes basically are code libraries exporting a set of hook functions. So, this does not cost the performance of interpreting some kind of data file containing rules and associated graphic elements. In fact, it means that simple designs will render faster, while more eye candy will take its time.
The only thing missing really is a publicly available design specification for these decor libraries to allow parties other than Yt to provide themes to the community. Like C header files and an example.

Reply Score: 1

Multi User?
by vitae on Tue 28th Mar 2006 00:38 UTC
vitae
Member since:
2006-02-20

The only thing I don't quite understand is that awhile back they were showing screnshots of 1.5, but this next release is going to be 1.2. Does that mean no multi-user this time around?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Productive
by superstoned on Tue 28th Mar 2006 09:31 UTC
superstoned
Member since:
2005-07-07

i thought it was already clear Yt has the source of Zeta/BeOS?

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Productive
by biffuz on Tue 28th Mar 2006 09:39 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Productive"
biffuz Member since:
2006-03-27

"i thought it was already clear Yt has the source of Zeta/BeOS?"

Yes, but Gobe Productive is not a part of BeOS, it is (was) a third party application. Now it looks like they have the sources of that, too. Perhaps they have the sources of Productive 3! It was available only for Windows, but there were rumors that a BeOS version was in development as well.

Reply Score: 1

Skins
by fyysik on Tue 28th Mar 2006 16:02 UTC
fyysik
Member since:
2006-02-19

For normal users any change in look and feel of UI is nightmare which brings them to panic and depression.
I noticed it when worked as admin/IT-support person in quite big merchandise company.

Reply Score: 2

Free or pay update?
by warriorspot on Tue 28th Mar 2006 17:20 UTC
warriorspot
Member since:
2006-01-20

Will this update be free? I'm looking forward to it.

Reply Score: 1