OSNews

What immediately came to my attention was the poor choice of additional software; I missed a lot of my (read carefully: my) default BeOS applications: BePDF, CL-Amp, Seeker, BeMSN and, most notably, Beam. Of course installing applications in BeOS is as easy as 1-2-3, but that is not the point; these applications should be installed by default. Every modern OS needs PDF-support (however, Windows and PDF...?).

I find Seeker quite important as well (Windows Explorer-clone). Tracker is nice, but for advanced file-management, I simply prefer a file-tree. Beam is important as well, since I just cannot seem to get used to BeOS' standard way of organizing email (via the file system). It makes no sense to me, but that's probably just a matter of getting used to.

For browsing the internet NetPositive and MozillaFireFox (v 0.8) are included. NetPositive is over. The default BeOS browser is too old, too slow, and too simple. FireFox is, as we all know, a very capable browser. The only problem is that the build included in PhOS is too buggy; installing a more recent build will fix the problem. There is Flash-support, but not integrated into the browser; only a stand-alone Flash-player is installed. No IM clients are installed by default. I immediately installed BeMSN (can't live without it).

Since BeOS was called the "multimedia" OS, it is of course interesting to see how well PhOS performs on this area. Playing DVD's is a breeze; VLC (v 0.7) does the job quite well, but you'll have to do with only stereo; I could not get 5.1 support. Too bad.

SoundPlay is included in order to play music files. SoundPlay is quite a capable application by itself, but the version included in PhOS (4.8.1) crashes when trying to load a music file. Also setting a different skin will crash the program (yes, some people actually care about that). A more recent version is unavailable. Too bad, again. And that is also why I whined about CL-Amp not being included; CL-Amp is a simple music player, but, as far as I know, it always works.

I already knew attempting to retrieve images from my Canon PowerShot S50 digital camera would be useless; I still gave the included "Camera" a chance though. It failed, Canon cameras were not on the "supported" list. It would be futile to test other BeOS image retrievers; I already gave them a chance when I was still running BeOS Max v3. Too bad, once more.

The greatest problem on BeOS is of course the lack of a decent office-suite; Gobe Productive is a decent piece of software, but, after checking out there website, I came to the conclusion that they do not offer Gobe Productive v2 anymore (it is included in Zeta, though). So, we are kind of forced to use AbiWord. No, there is no alternative. You will have to.... Well, you will first have to install it; AbiWord is not included in PhOS. Weird. The available version is an old one though... Version 1.0, while the most recent stable release is 2.0.6. Anyone interested in maintaining AbiWord for BeOS? Or even better, anyone interested in porting OpenOffice to BeOS? Please...? Spreadsheet functionality is available as well for BeOS (Sum-It), but, Sum-It also isn't included in PhOS...

When it comes to stability and responsiveness, no one can beat BeOS/PhOS. The UI is so responsive, that it takes some getting used to when you come from a Windows or Linux world.

System Settings

Maintaining a BeOS system was easy. PhOS is no different; literally. A few changes here and there though; the most important one of course being BoneYard. Since PhOS uses BONE instead of net_server, the configuration tool is different as well. BoneYard is also easy to use, though.

Another addition to the "Preferences" menu is the "Control Panel". Here, you can add/remove users, and switch between Development-kits (PhosphurOS/BeOS R5). The CP is far from finished though; it says: "It would appear I am STILL not doing ANYTHING cool here :-/". More to come, I am sure of it.

Conclusion

PhOS is a very good "distribution" of BeOS. Even though I have been pretty negative about the whole system throughout the review, I would still say that I am more satisfied with PhOS than I was with BeOS Max (not to say that Max is a bad product though).

It takes some work to get a decent system up and running, you need to download a lot of applications, but it is worth it. The overall feel of PhOS is just more "up-to-date" than Max' feel.

But that is me talking; a BeOS fan. How about the average user? Well, to be honest, the average user cannot do much with PhOS (or any other "free" BeOS distribution, for that matter). With the lack of a decent Office Suite, BeOS is no viable option. I must say that I have not yet tried Zeta.

So, for whom is PhOS a good choice? Well, for anyone running an "older" version of BeOS, who does not want to buy Zeta (yet) and who is not offended by the legality issues.

To clarify, I decided to give grades on the different aspects of the OS:

- Install: 9/10 (without the glitches a 10/10 would have been possible)
- Hardware Support: 5/10 (my hardware already presented problems, let alone more exotic stuff)
- Ease Of Use: 8/10 (this is purely the use of the OS)
- Speed: 10/10 (no clarification required)
- Overall Polish: 9/10 (the UI is very consistent, and I just love tabs)
- Functionality: 3/10 (PhOS is useless. Only people like me enjoy it, in a production environment, it is useless)

About the Author:
Thom Holwerda is a regular visitor on OSNews.com and has contributed more than once. His first computer experience dates back to 1991 (a 286 entered the household). Over the years he has played around with several computers, but it wasn't until 2001 that he really started to experiment OS-wise with computers. His favorite operating systems are Windows Server 2003, Mandrake Linux, BeOS. He also has an affinity for the QNX Neutrino RTOS. Thom also contributes to the SkyOS project, being responsible for the Dutch translation.