Vasper released today BeOS Max Edition v3.0. The compressed file weighs about 280 MB and includes third party software in addition to the tweaked core of BeOS 5.0.3 PE. BeOS Max is patched and supports AthlonXPs/Pentium 4s and installs on its own partition. Burning the ISO is not as simple though, as it has to be burned as BFS ISO format. More info on how to properly burn it here and here.
BeOS Max Edition v3.0 Released
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
getting this now
tweaked core of BeOS 5.0.3 PE
Not trying to Be smart but how do you tweak something that is not source code but in binary format.
Also how do you apply patches such as the AthlonXP/P4?
Again I am not trying to be smart, just curious.
They reversed engineered a few parts (not Vasper, but others, Vasper just includes their work), found where BeOS dies in certain new unsupported hardware, and then they include patches that patch its kernel.
Hey Eugenia, do you know what they do to debug BeOS? With Linux is already very hard, but at least you have the sources, kernel support (compiled in) and some libraries.
Do you know if they start Be from inside some VM (like VMware).
Thanks in advance
No, I don’t know how they do it. I know that most of these and other patches are coming from Russian hackers though, who admitedly do some good job on it. 😉
This is good news. BeOSMax edition doing some progress.
Now the big question is, do you wanna pay 99$ for Zeta, when you can download Max for free???
Maybe Zeta is based on BeOSMax with some added software like MlDonkey?
Anonymous, I would suggest make some more research.
BeOS Max is based on BeOS 5.
YellowTAB’s Zeta is based on BeOS 6.
Zeta has many improvements and replaced and better servers (e.g. a different network stack, a much improved app_server and interface kit, many more drivers etc etc.)
This document explains what is what:
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=3809
The last version was riddled with bugs. I hope they did a better job this time.
Of course, I am thankful that some good soul is investing work in BeOS MAX, it’s fantastic, it is, but please make it solid – test it!
Back to the time of 486 I heard about some add-in boards used for remote debuging (they had a serial connection you plugged on another computer).
Maybe what they use there. Anyway, veeery haaaard job and nice indeed. I’m going to try it. 😉
I will certainly buy at least 2 copies of Zeta Deluxe the moment they come out.
In any case, the Max project will stop the moment Zeta comes out. To stay up to date you have to have Zeta 🙂
Unless you would like to wait for WalterOS (the OpenBeOS continuation of Max).
[quote]Back to the time of 486 I heard about some add-in boards used for remote debuging (they had a serial connection you plugged on another computer).[/quote]
Actually BeOS has that ability build in. You can just plug into the serial port and get the debugging info.
BeOS Max Edition is illegal (the BeOS PE license is very explicit). Is it usual for OSNews to link pirate sites? Can we also advertise cracks for WinXP to work around the copy protection?
There’s a typo in the MaxV3.cue file.
On the line where it refers to the iso image, it reads
FILE “BeOS5PEMaxEditionV3b3.iso” BINARY
It should say:
FILE “BeOS5PEMaxEdiionV3.iso” BINARY
It’s easy to change this in an editor…and so you don’t have to wait for the re-release and download it all again
I use BeOS Max v.3 Beta 2 since it was released and I haven’t see any bugs there.
The OS works great without any problems.
And it’s not illegal – it’s based on discontinued project – BeOS PE without any copy protection cracks.
The modifications are only for support of new processors with BeOS PE.
It doesn’t contain any illegal software with the distribution – it’s BeOS PE + freeware, opensource,… software.
John BLink: Not trying to Be smart but how do you tweak something that is not source code but in binary format.
Why should it be much different?
People can edit C code… They can edit Assembly code with variables and functions… They can edit Assembly code that refers to memory addresses rather than function names or variables… (You’re almost there already) They can also edit raw “binary code” too.
Essentially… “Binary code” isn’t much different than source code. It just takes a little more work to play with.
Also, you can convert “binary code” into source code as well with special tools. This source code typically lacks things people are used to such as variable names and function names. But it’s possible. If my memory serves me well… These tools are typically called disassemblers and decompilers(?).
Is this not old news? http://www.bebits.com/app/3148
> And it’s not illegal – it’s based on discontinued
> project – BeOS PE without any copy protection cracks.
No, it is illegal. The installation of PE on it’s own partition, rather than a virtual one, is not allowed by the licensing agreement iirc. Also redistributing the executables (and that is, the base exe, with no alterations), is not permitted. The fact that Palm and what is left of Be isn’t filing a law suit against the guy making the distro is the only reason it’s still in existence.
BeOS is still owned by a company. Just because that company chooses to abandon it, doesn’t mean it is right to redistribute it.
>The installation of PE on it’s own partition, rather than a virtual
>one, is not allowed by the licensing
>agreement iirc.
It was pretty stupid of Be to include Installer (which let’s you install PE on any partition) if that really is the case…
Thanks for the replies Eugenia and Deletomn.
Also I guess I don’t know BeOS that well but what installer is JokuVaan talking about.
Also does BeOSMax have support for USB mouses. If no, then their is another reason to get Zeta.
I hope they have fun beating that dead and decaying horse some more. Would be interested to see how many completed downloads they have for it. If it’s more than 1000 I’d be surprised.
I remember something about BeOS PE that limited the size of the installed partition to like 500MB… and that was basically the only limitation of PE that made any difference… but that didnt stop anyone from using a partitioning tool to resize the partition *after* installing… and, to my knowledge, nothing in the PE license specifically bars you from doing something like that…. Other than that, the other patches are mostly functionality patches to add support to newer hardware…
so yeah… it’s hardly considered *warez*….
http://bezip.de/app/1328/
Any one who thinks it is illegal, DON’T download it. BeOS PE is abandonware so I don’t take income from anyone, nor do I break any laws. In fact I just save you the trouble of making BeOS work for you.
Max doesn’t include any software that requires licensing without the permission of the Author, and includes NO leaked source code, or binaries, or Palm property.
I was just woundering what the minimum system requirements are for BeOS?
Pentium I 75Mhz
Thanks, I have an old laptop that I’ve been looking to do something with 🙂
vasper, beos pe isnt abandonware at all.
yes it is: http://www.beincorporated.com
Unless you would like to wait for WalterOS (the OpenBeOS continuation of Max).
You’ve got to be kidding! That’s the name they ended up choosing for OpenBeOS?
I sure hope note… To paraphrase the Simpsons Comic Book Guy; “Worst name ever!”
What will their followup release be called? “HubertOS, Son of WalterOS”?
Either way, I’ll have to check out this new release once my new system’s back up & running (getting some issues from the manufacturer fixed). None of the current BeOS releases would run on my new PC (3GhzP4/800 chip w/a gig of Ram), so hopefully this will correct that.
WalterOS… I hope that’s a working name or a mistake.
WalterOS is NOT the name for OpenBeOS.
It is the name I have chosen for the replacement of Max when OpenBeOS (orwhateverthenameOS) comes out 🙂
W(indows) alter(native) OS.
Get it?
🙂
Is there a way to upgrade from the old BeosMax?
I really would not like to overwrite my current Max.
An upgrade package from 2.1 will come out soon.
BeOS Max Edition is illegal (the BeOS PE license is very explicit). Is it usual for OSNews to link pirate sites?
No, but it is fairly normal for ignorant people to spread FUD and act all indignant rather than find out the facts before doing so.
These same people usually post such information Anonymously rather than use their regular nicknames and show their ignorance. Go figure…
it doesn’t work on my p4!
i get kernel debug messages. the only part i can remember is (intel_something_text)
isn’t that the same error as the earlier version? damnit. once again, i can’t try BeOS. heh.
Should write down what was displayed and email the devs … another patch could be in order
I think i will be getting this when I get home.
BeOSMax -is- illegal software, illegally distributed in breach of the BeOSPE license of use. However since Vasper is not making any money out of it, that short of IP fraud is of economically-unfeasible prosecution. Nothing to fear as long as Palm turns a blind eye.
Apple Computer Inc. is a bit more bugsy with its IP, they are the kings of Cease&Desists letters. This may be regarded as an illustrative parallel case with BeOSPersonal edition (it is different, except for a non-authorized modification and distribution beyond the scope of fair personal use):
-Instructions for converting Mac OS X 10.1 update Software to a full install version of Mac OS X-
http://slashdot.org/articles/01/11/29/1522209.shtml
Even amateur theming is prosecuted by Apple, people who are writing themes and theme editing tools for Mac OSX are getting cease and desist letters from Apple’s lawyers. That’s what happened to the Aqua themes at Themes.org, no money made, no need to.
http://slashdot.org/articles/00/02/17/131240.shtml
Don’t get me wrong, I like and appreciate the effort put into making the BeOSMax (and for the same matter the BeOSDeveloper edition), and I hope you keep on “updating” that way the BeOS (till we have an OpenBeOS or Zeta replacement). But legal is not, so far it is a consented de facto situation.
Wow …lots of people still developing for Beos. I would like to try it but it won’t work on a PPC system.
I’m looking forward to see Zeta as well as Openbeos which is my only alternative to OS X. I guess I have to get an i386 box.
S.
http://www.sideliners.ca
But he is selling cd’s of BEOS Max on the site – that has to be illegal. And at about $6 USD apiece, that’s profitable – it only costs about $0.50 for a blank CDR and couldn’t be more than a couple bucks to ship – so who gets the rest? Because Palm isn’t actively developing BEOS, people have told themselves it’s OK to pilfer it. Anyways, BEOS Max is like Frankenstein’s monster, all patched and stitched together from various buggy pieces.
> it only costs about $0.50 for a blank CDR and couldn’t be more than a couple bucks
Remember that the guy is greek. It is NOT as cheap there.
However you break it down, he’s taking money for a BEOS CD – that can’t be legal. I loved BEOS, but since the Palm accquisition I detest all the BEOS “graverobbers” that have come out of the woodwork.
he’s not breaking the liscense, well for one the licence is rather void at this point. But still you can without any magic make PE on a partion of over 500 meg, he’s simple patching it and continuing something that would be dead otherwise. Palm would be dumb to sue him, since his actions are actully making the IP worth something by keaping a userbase.
PE was ment to be distrubuted. When PE was released Be’s web site told users to download it and give it to their freinds. He’s basicly doing that, putting the patches in it though, and getting cost back for mailing and buring it to disk.
—– quote —–
No, it is illegal. The installation of PE on it’s own partition, rather than a virtual one, is not allowed by the licensing agreement iirc. Also redistributing the executables (and that is, the base exe, with no alterations), is not permitted.
—– end quote —–
Copyright protects a person or company’s work from being copied without their explicit consent (excepting fair-use).
End User License Agreements (a *CIVIL* contract) that you (implicitly) agree to when using the software, in this case is supposed to prevent a user from doing the things you mention (i.e.: installing on a non-virtual partition).
But violating a contract doesn’t mean you broke the law, it means you are open to a lawsuit. It doesn’t mean that someone will come and arrest you, but it does mean you can be sued.
So is it illegal as a user if you own a legal copy of R5 Pro and you just want the improved drivers and updated stuff so you can install it on current hardware.
Anyways, BEOS Max is like Frankenstein’s monster, all patched and stitched together from various buggy pieces.
Your bias is showing. What an amazing coincidence that you happen to also dislike something you are claiming is illegal.
Yes, it is illegal.
Quote
But violating a contract doesn’t mean you broke the law, it means you are open to a lawsuit. It doesn’t mean that someone will come and arrest you, but it does mean you can be sued.
End Quote
Partially incorrect. There is Private Law and Public Law, violating a contract -IS- breaking the law, the difference being that the offended private party will choose in due time to proceed or not against the offender, it is dispositive. Breaking the law does not equal to being legally prosecuted, being prosecuted is a consecuence that might follow.
In Public Law (with few explicit exceptions) once its breach is verified the prosecution must officially take place -ipso facto- (automatically). I guess you are confounding Public and Private Law, and thus erroneously identifying breach and prosecution.
Anyway, I wouldn’t call Vasper “a robber”, that’s a grave accusation, he is not making any profit out of BeOSMax. Vasper does not need to distribute a hacked BeOSPE, the guy is just trying to share it not losing money!
Vasper, keep on hacking, illegal good stuff. Hey, illegal is not always evil, look at how well Bill Gates is doing.
I guess I am biased here, against Palm, ‘hate their guts ;>]
Anyone know if this new version will run on VMWare? I’ve been dying to try it out for quite a while, but I’ve no spare HD on which to run it. And I sure as hell can’t do a backup-reparition job on my work PC, the only PC to which I have access.
If anyone knows of any tricks, let me know. The last version would not run on VMware, which was a big bummer.
That partially answers acobar’s question: no, they do not debug using VMware, becuasei t doesn’t run on vmware. I imagine they use gdb, and do a remote connect sort of thing via telnet, another machine running gdb, or perhaps something like ddd.
Why don’t you just install it on a virtual partition, and patch it yourself if your hardware is too new? It should work with ext2, possibly also resierfs partitions.
Is there a statue of limitations reguarding “Abandonware?”
You can’t eat peanuts in church, either.
Last time I checked, I could only use a buggy Mozilla (Bezilla?) build.
omg, what is that man doing on beos max’s website? my eyes = hacked?
Why don’t you just install it on a virtual partition, and patch it yourself if your hardware is too new? It should work with ext2, possibly also resierfs partitions.
By virtual partition, I’m guessing you mean in a folder called BEOS, like the Personal Edition usually does (rather than referring to a virtual disk/virtual partition in VMWare).
I’m not running Linux, but Win2k. I do think R5 PE support installing onto a NTFS partition, though. It’s something I could try, but not for enough time to really play with it- this computer needs to remain on and in Windows for various reasons. Hence my wanting to use VMWare.
Patch it myself? By installing a driver, or writing something new? I’ve done a lot of coding in my life, but a) not much in C++ or asm; b) absolutely no driver development or c) no BeOS development. I’m asking about VMware because I’d love it if it just worked in VMware- the simulated hardware is pretty simple and standard.
I just hit the site after seeing the story on slashdot (reminded me that I meant to do it when I got home), and while following the thread down, there were several people bagging on the BeosMax webmasters poor skills. I clicked over to the site and…
Ugh.
My guess is that a Slashdot BeOS fan/enemy hacked the page. But that’s just a guess.
The site is however, VERY disgusting at the moment. I hope the webmaster sees this and updates their server soon. Ick!
Yup, they hacked it about 20 minutes ago (at around 19:50 PM UTC). It was fine before that.
My understanding from reading the liscense agreement (not recently though) is that PE can be distributed by anyone, as long as the original files are unaltered and it’s given away freely. By selling copies without a distribution agreement, Max is certainly open to damage recovery.
There would be nothing wrong with adding patches, Freeware, or OpenSource apps, and having a free download.
If they can show that the original BeOS files are unaltered and the fee they charge only covers the cost of production and distribution, I doubt there would be any liability at all.
By the way, the term Abandonware doesn’t apply here by the definition I’ve read. Obviously there’s no legal or ‘official’ definition of Abandonware, but here’s the common usage:
* The true owners of the software cannot be located, or ownership can’t be determined
* There’s generally a time qualification – the product has not been marketed for X years
* The product is not being marketed commercially, and the product cannot be found for sale anywhere
The first two do ~not~ apply to BeOS, and I’m not sure about the third.
Damn, the Max website is the nastiest thing I’ve even seen… Even if it can’t be fixed right away, I would pull the server plug from the wall!
I am forced into buying a new motherboard, and since the freaking industry refuses to let me upgrade in small steps, I have to buy a new motherboard. I am concerned about this mention of someone being unable to start BeOS on a P4. More info about this problem PLEASE! 🙂
We can’t give you a clear list, there is no such full list.
You just need to get a _new_ design mobo and a _new_ cpu. Older models were failing much more.
I guess this one blows the E page out of the water…
first, Anonymous (IP: —.soton.ac.uk) said:
BeOS Max Edition is illegal (the BeOS PE license is very explicit). Is it usual for OSNews to link pirate sites? Can we also advertise cracks for WinXP to work around the copy protection?
From what I’ve read, BeOS Max Edition- and the other PE derivatives- are not illegal. All of the work done to turn PE into Max edition (or Developer’s, etc) is legal, and within the EULA of BeOS R5 PE. If I am wrong about this, I’d be interested in seeing the details. It also likely depends on how PE is being modified.
It isn’t pirate software. OSNews links to it because it’s really the only accessible front of BeOS development that is usable today. It is nothing like linking to WinXP cracks, even remotely.
If OSNews was linking to a warez site where you could download the BeOS R5 Pro edition, that would be illegal, and there’s no way in hell Eugenia or the other OSNewsers would do such a thing.
and then xeros said:
And it’s not illegal – it’s based on discontinued project – BeOS PE without any copy protection cracks.
Being based on a discontinued product has nothing to do with legality. MS no longer supports Win98- and NeXT/Apple no longer sells or supports NeXTSTEP 3.3- but it’s still illegal to sell or give away pirated copies of either.
hey man will you just shutup! Sorry Eugenia, but that guys getting on my nerves.
I think it’s great that the PE version of BeOS is still being modified. I’ll be getting Zeta as soon as they release it. I was buying the PC version of BeOS back when it was v3. I loved Be and wish they hadn’t have sold out!
Quote
From what I’ve read, BeOS Max Edition- and the other PE derivatives- are not illegal. All of the work done to turn PE into Max edition (or Developer’s, etc) is legal, and within the EULA of BeOS R5 PE. If I am wrong about this, I’d be interested in seeing the details. It also likely depends on how PE is being modified.
End Quote
***ANY*** non-authorized modification of BeOS 5 Personal Edition is in breach of the BeOS 5 Personal Edition – LICENSE AGREEMENT. BeOSMax edition and BeOSDeveloper edition, are both non-authorized modifications, furthermore bundled with other software, furthermore distributed in CD-ROM copies, thus they are at least in triple breach of the license agreement, thus they are illegal.
The most obvious modification is that BeOS 5 Personal Edition was not designed to be installed in its own BFS partition, it is restricted to a 512 MB file on either your Microsoft Windows or your Linux partition. It was not created and distributed by Be, Inc. as a free ride, but as a trial version before switching to BeOS Pro. Therefore Be provided two limited BeOS 5 Personal Editions, one to be installed within Microsoft Windows and another one to be installed within Linux.
The latter is not clear to you after reading the license agreement? Well don’t worry, there is also a step-by-step introduction. Let’s hear from Be Inc.:
Quote
Limitations of BeOS 5 Personal Edition
– Disk Space (Part 1)
…inflates to 512 megabytes, no more, no less…
– Restarting Windows after Running BeOS
As mentioned above, the BeOS 5 Personal Edition that you
downloaded turns itself into a Windows application
…
To install BeOS 5 Personal Edition you need:
– A Pentium-based computer with at least 32 megabytes of RAM (P90
or higher is recommended).
– At least 512 megabytes of free disk space on a non-compressed
FAT, FAT32, or NTFS drive.
– Windows 95/98, 2000, or NT4.
– A blank floppy.
End Quote
According to the License Agreement, only one backup copy of the program per user is allowed. Making other copies of BeOS 5 Personal Edition without consent of the copyright holder is illegal. Burning BeOS 5 Personal Edition in CD-ROMs and distributing them without written authorization is illegal. Bundling BeOS 5 Personal Edition with other software and distributing that bundle without consent of the copyright holder is illegal.
And so what?, fortunately so far nothing, because so far Palm does not want to know. Good for us, we can periodically have a tweaked/updated BeOS iso. I own a copy of the latest BeOS5Pro, but after so long, nowadays I rather use an updated BeOSDeveloper Edition (a hacked BeOS-PE).
It’s kind of funny, too much trouble to have a clear conscience, ’cause many people childishly delusion themselves into thinking that hacking and illegaly distributing the Personal edition is alright, problem (they think) would be doing that with the Pro version. In reality, the IP fraud would only be more clear.
It is as simple as “so far nobody cares”, so we grab it. I certainly do. But Be sane, some people could care.
“You got to sin to get saved”
——————————-
-BeOS 5 Personal Edition Read Me-
http://gd.tuwien.ac.at/opsys/BeOS/ReadMe.txt
-BeOS 5 Personal Edition License Agreement-
http://gd.tuwien.ac.at/platform/BeOS/LICENSE
This guy is so stupid. Stop using BeOS useful information space to waste our time.
Since Be was silly enough to include the wonderfull reinstaller somewhere else tool, the cats out of the bag isn’t it. Even if they were still around they could hardly stop PE users from making the partition native, so stop whining about it.
As for patches those are fine, but the repackaging of the whole as a friendly modified package maybe iffy. Anyway the whole thing is moot when Zeta comes out, Max will goaway! That gives the lawyers a few months to chase after nothing ($ wise) and lawyers only chase after $.
Hello, my “friendship” with BeOS begun in 1999. There was 4.0/4.5/4.52/5.0.x/Dano… versions.
Yesterday I tried install on 3 computers:
1) Compaq EVO 310v (MS-6541,i845GL,P4-2.4GHz,intel100pro/intgrated): all works fine instead network. I tried use patches for eepro100 drivers- unsuccefuly
First time start was with Deskbar error..
2) Home PC (DFI AD-77,KT400,Athlon 2200+,GF4Ti4200,AC97,Lucent/Winmodem,rtl8139c):- I can’t install at all
( I get kernel panic… and Please insert BeOS CD msg 
Early there was Athlon 1800+ – Dveloper Edition 1.1 installation was succeful.
3) Home PC (Intel 845WN,i845,Celeron 1.8GHz,Radeon 7200,rtl8139c)- installation- succeful.. when change screen resolution with Radeon Screen to 800x600x16@85Hz- screen shutdowns after 10-15 sec. working
Why I can’t install this version on my Athlon XP 2200+ ???
Are you refering to BeOS Max or BeOS 5?
1) Network card not supported.
2) Bug of BeOS Max, it includes not well tested drivers that crash your PC
3) The Radeon driver is buggy, I suggest emailing the author of the driver.
Yesterday I tried to install BeOS MAX v.3.0 from beosmax.org.
I hope that YT’s Zeta will be better and we will see all that we expected from BeOS.
Early, in 2000-2002, when I have older computers (AMD K6-2, Voodoo3/3000)- all BeOS versions works perfect.
It’s pitty that today BeOS are outdated.
***ANY*** non-authorized modification of BeOS 5 Personal Edition is in breach of the BeOS 5 Personal Edition – LICENSE AGREEMENT
Authorized being the operative work. Be has closed and sold all IP to Palm. BeOS Personal Edition is Freeware so cannot be included in the IP.
Therefore there is NOONE that can give authorization.
Therefore it is Abandonware,
Therefore LEGAL. PERIOD.
shisshhh..
and if you don’t believe me… don’t download it.
NOTE: I don’t sell CDs with BeOS Max. There is ISO4LINUX that charges for burning the CD and mailing it to you if you are far away. I don’t get a penny and never will.
maybe you can help me to start working my Intel PRO 100VE onboard network. Please.
I believe it was on the Be web site where I first read about how to install PE on its own partition, should you not be able to use the in-Linux method (or Windows for you other weirdos). I could very well be wrong, my memory is terrible, and getting worse (as are my headaches, which are seemingly related).
Anyway, I go back to my limited internet access life, well, only for a week or so more… thankfully!
–The loon (yellowTAB, SuperDano, PhOS)
Let’s hear from Be Inc.:
Limitations of BeOS 5 Personal Edition
– Disk Space (Part 1)
…inflates to 512 megabytes, no more, no less…
– Restarting Windows after Running BeOS
As mentioned above, the BeOS 5 Personal Edition that you
downloaded turns itself into a Windows application
…
To install BeOS 5 Personal Edition you need:
– A Pentium-based computer with at least 32 megabytes of RAM (P90
or higher is recommended).
– At least 512 megabytes of free disk space on a non-compressed
FAT, FAT32, or NTFS drive.
– Windows 95/98, 2000, or NT4.
– A blank floppy.
End Quote
You are interpreting this incorrectly. These are technical limitations of BeOS PE, not legal ones. There are tips on the BeTips server on how to install PE on virtual partitions larger than 512MB, or how to install on a true BFS partition.
http://betips.net/chunga.php?id=510
http://betips.net/chunga.php?id=495
I even have a copy of an old Be Newsletter email in which a BeOS engineer explained how to do these things.
Or what about those people that wanted to upgrade to v5.0 from BeOS v4.5? They were allowed to upgrade to PE if they wanted to.
It is perfectly legal to instal BeOS PE on its own partition or a virtual partition larger than 512MB. I even had BeOS 5 Pro on a 800MB virtual partition at on time.
Walter:
This is the name proposition from Bruno G. Albuquerque for OpenBeOS, I don’t think you ask him the authorisation to use it.
BeOS PE is not abandonware.
The PE licence explicitely forbids making money from it, so selling CDs from the website is questionable (did they indent it as “making money”, or just selling it as the medium price ?).
VMWare:
I long ago put up this page telling how to do it:
http://clapcrest.free.fr/revol/beos/vmware_BeOS_patching_HOWTO.txt
Quote
It is perfectly legal to instal BeOS PE on its own partition or a virtual partition larger than 512MB. I even had BeOS 5 Pro on a 800MB virtual partition at on time.
End Quote
It is perfectly ILLEGAL to install BeOS PE on its own BFS partition circumventing the resctrictions applied by Be Inc. If not, prove it, show me a written Agreement that contradicts the original License Agreement, not hearsay. Lest we forget the other illegalities; that modification is not the only one.
Quote
You are interpreting this incorrectly. These are technical limitations of BeOS PE, not legal ones. There are tips on the BeTips server on how to install PE on virtual partitions larger than 512MB, or how to install on a true BFS partition.
End Quote
If you had any legal experience you would know that one of the first places to look for an authentic interpretation of a lincese agreement on software, is the technical limitations and/or specifications of the product. They are more legally binding than you seem to fathom. For some odd reason, I suspect you know this well, however you stubbornly insist on things you know are not binding, like Betips.net and some floating email.
Vasper is obviously a full dedicated coder, his definitions of “Freeware” and “Abandonware” are hilarious. No harm intended, Vasper, I sincerely appreciate the effort you have put into bundling an updated BeOS for the sole advantage of BeOS users. I am not acussing you of “robbing” as other person in this thread did. Kudos to you for gratuitously helping other BeOS users, with zero profit, just for the sake of it. I have already encouraged you to keep on doing it.
Truth of the matter remains that these BeOS 5 Personal Edition non-authorized modification (BeOSMAX and BeOS Developer Ed), CD-ROM copies and bundled-software distribution, are illegal. No big deal, so far, but illegal they are. It’s important to adknowledge it and move on, otherwise people may start calling “Abandonware” and “Freeware” what it is obviously not, as Vasper just did. I’m sure we don’t want that warez-talk on the BeOS replicas to come.
I keep an eye on BeOSMax, I actually use (illegally) among other installed OSes, the BeOSDeveloper Edition from Beosonline.de, just spotted the Athlon XP Patch.
Sorry, yesterday I play with Athlon-based computer BIOS and BeOS MAX 3.0 installation was success
Q: is it possible to create intelpro100/ve drivers for beos from FreeBSD or Linux sources? Intel package has it.