Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 5th May 2004 06:34 UTC
I am one of those remaining BeOS addicts. I love the BeOS' responsiveness, its short boot-up/shutdown times and its, well, overall feel. But no one can deny the fact: BeOS 5.0.x PE is getting old. Very old, with a kernel build-time of around May 2000.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Someone made a post saying that BeOS having all these forks is just like Linux, where all these distros are incompatible with each other. It's true that BeOS probably should unify, but Linux distros are not really "incompatible" with one another. You can run Gnome 2.6 on Mandrake or Debian or Redhat or SuSE or whatever. All the distro maker does is choose a package management system, a default set of free applications, and some sort of installer/configuration tool. From there, users are free to compile & run code, or download packages of types their distro supports. Arguably the three most popular package formats are gentoo's ebuild, debian deb and the "de facto" rpm standard, but source is the lowest common denominator and some distros support more than one (debian can install rpms with minimal pain, for example).
The reason this happens in the Linux world is because there's so much free stuff out there from disparate sources that it makes sense for someone to put it all together. This isn't like MS Windows, where everything is coded in-house at Microsoft and so they can package it up real nice (or Mac OS, where everything is coded at Apple, etc.)
The result of their being "idiots," as you foolishly said, is that users can have a system with powerful applications (like IDEs, productivity suites, browsers, email, web/ftp servers, databases, etc.) about 30 minutes after popping in the distro install CD.
So stop pretending this is a bad thing.