The OpenBeOS folks released their first ever test version for their BeOS clone operating system. This first release is not self-hosted, it is just a collection of individual components that replace their equivelant under the original BeOS 5. The components released so far are OpenTracker, OpenDeskbar, MDR(Mail Daemon Replacement) and some of the preference panels: Keyboard, Menu, Mouse, Screen, Virtual Memory, WorkSpaces. The OBOS developers are looking for beta testing and feedback.
This is such great news. I realize that this is only a well named ‘micro release’, but it’s a great start. These guys are doing an awesome job so far and all we can do is hope that they keep up the great work and we’ll have a new BeOS soon!!
someone should seriously re-design thier site, it’s not indicative of BeOS’s quality.
I really like BeOS. I really hope that OpenBeOS sees much more success and acceptance than regular BeOS seemed to see.
Note to the OpenBeOS team: <sarcasm> Please, for the love of all that’s good could you change the default color of the titlebar? The yellow titlebar’s burn holes of sorrow into my soul. </sarcasm>
Some of us cherish the yello and blue look you now. However I’d appreciate a built in color selecting option instead of using tools like window shade.
Regarding the eternal “bured eyes trough yellow color” is something we’ll probably take take with Glass Elevator (codename for the second official release, or R2).
Our primary goal right now is to release a R1 that is a perfect replication of the original BeOS R5. So, well, that mean back of the yellow for now ๐
I personnaly like the original yellow look, but I don’t want to loose a single potential user just because ommited to add a color selector.. You can count on me to promote that (easy to implement) feature at all cost ๐
By the way, everything included in this first “patch release” is FAR to be representative of our current progress. I’m totally amazed by the quality of developers up there. The kernel is going extremely well, and the BFS file system is progressing in an incredible fast rate. Plus a very good progress have been made around the app_server and the UI widgets, the support kit, etc.
Seriously, the very first release will be FAR sooner than I first expected when I joined the band.
What you see with this first “patch release” is only the iceberg’ top ๐
having even just that patch release at this time is a big surprise
Keep going =)
What a nice joke here!!! ‘Micro release’ ? “iceberg’s top”,
surely not! I follow day after day the development of it. Where is your kernel, guys? Do you think to rename a program of 200 lines of code to ‘app_server’ is enough? Ok you will end them soon, but on which GFX drivers? Vesa?
About BFS, thanks to the Linux source code, you can access to a BFS partition, but you ommited to see/say that you are using current classes of BeOS to do it. You played MP3 too, right, but what was the part of the OBOS rewrite in the chain: mp3 -> soundcard ? <10%.
Stop vaporware and continue to code, the way is long.
You are doing a good job, stop to glorify it too much.
be asked nvidia for specs and nvidia declined.
nvidia claimed be needed some serious market share growth of like 20% b4 they would help.
meanwhile mac os x has like 1% and nvidia is supporting mac os x
Ok, first you don’t know that much about the project, because our BFS driver is written *FROM SCRATCH* and have *NOTHING* to do with the Linux one (which is anyway under GPL, so we can’t use).
And for the “release soon”, are you enough moron to think I mean next week ??? You at least know enough about OS dev that I mean “soon” like maybe in a year ? And yes, I do think we’ll be pretty much of a release in a year. Not necessary with 100% of every R5 services, but at least with an OS we can continue to natively work in.The Native API (well, the libbe.so) progress very well, with many widgets and services supported.
Yes we have *A TON* of work still to do, the heck we have to redo the work off dozens of full time engineer over many years. But the project REALLY advance in a very fast speed, which I didn’t expected few weeks ago.
Oh and we forgot. Our kernel features is there :
http://newos.sourceforge.net/features.html
and personnaly I’m very glad the OBOS team choosed this one. Very clean code and design, and made by ex-Be Engineer, so the whole is pretty much inspired by the original BeOS kernel.
I think there’s a unified driver for nVidia made by Be Inc. It probably don’t support all advanced features of newer cards, but at least you can “use” BeOS with that one…
apple bought next step.
apple originally wanted to base all new apps on objective-C, openstep API.
developers complained.
apple introduces carbon, based on C/C++ api so developer investment is protected.
developers happy. many apps are ported to mac os x based on carbon- i.e office.
given the huge investment in win32 api, and given the ample documentation for win32 api, why not build your api
around the industry standard – not as in WINE to run
win applications (which m$ can arbitrarily change at any time) but to make porting inexpensive?
This is a very interesting idea indeed. But the only single reason why I enjoyed booting in BeOS, was to have good time programming with the BeOS API that is SO much more elegant and fun to develop with.
Ok so, keeping intact BeOS API is maybe not the best “business” avenue, but as I’m not paid for working on OBOS, I still prefere doing what I just think it’s fun for me.
Please remember, putting pressure on OBOS to compete against the current OS market is not that realistic IMHO. Yes I believe that at some point, maybe in a far futur, OBOS can be a really commercial viable OS. That would be really cool. But right now the unique goal is to continue the BeOS lineage, because we liked it so much.
why not do both?
apple mac os x – if you want fun, program in cocoa. if you want to maintain your investment, program in carbon.
i think that for an os to compete against windows, it must
have windows win32 api, in the same way carbon has mac os 8 api. toolkits, etc.
it need not run win applications in emulation (as the project of wine is supposed to do) only make porting/updating inexpensive.
i would surprised if lindows can actually run windows apps,
Sure that if we were 1000 developers instead of 100 we could check this possibility ๐ But right now we are SO loaded of just barrely clone the straight BeOS that any extra features of design changes will be worked (if any) in a far far futur …
I think the whole idea of source compatibility is better (having a Win32 API wrapper) than any kind of emulations (WINE, etc). But WinAPI is SO DAMN big …
steve,
100 developers??!! i’m impressed.
why not just build on atheos.cx, rather than start from scratch?
if a beos clone is to be the next linux, why not consolidate on one open source os like atheos?
time is of the essence. if mac os x succeeds, there will be no room for another linux/be os.
What if the OBOS folks finish the project only to find out that Palm will release a new and different version of BeOS desktop? (This would fragment the platform a la Unix)
When ever I think about this, I always remember how Sakoman left Be during the BeOS/PPC era only to return and build the Intel version later on.
Sakoman is now the Chief Product Officer at Palm. Perhaps he can throw us a BONE!
ciao
yc
Rather than attempting this *** WinAPI compatibility, maybe better idea to create OBOS components as foundation, which allows implementing JVM nearly one-to-one ?
Like that all servers emulate classical BeOS functions, but also have ability to work as underlyung part as fastest and “most native” JVM in the world? ))
And this is real, not proprietary, industry standard.
“100 developers??!! i’m impressed.”
Yes, me the first ! In fact the project got a huge boost by getting some coverage at OSNews and Slashdot.
“why not just build on atheos.cx, rather than start from scratch?”
In fact, I can’t answer that because I wasn’t in the project when all the discussion about it happened. IMHO, NewOS was choosed because of his internal design very close to the original BeOS (and developed by Travis, an ex-Be engineer who worked in the original code). And AFAIK the AtheOS made by Kurt is not totally open-sourced, but maybe that changed in the last couple of weeks …
“What if the OBOS folks finish the project only to find out that Palm will release a new and different version of BeOS desktop? ”
There was A LOT of efforts (i.e. BeUnited) to pressure Palm either to support futur version of BeOS, or just release the code. And what turned out is that Palm is *clearly* and *definitely* not interrested about going in the desktop war. They are so much in hot water just in handheld world that staying alive in the pocket is WAY enough, believe me ๐ In fact, Palm bought Be Inc for only two reasons:
1) Put the hand on some (very few) technologies in BeIA/BeOS
2) Inherite of the whole engineer mass workers already trained in the IA and handheld technologies (BeIA).
The second reason is probably the most important one. So at the end they don’t care at all about BeOS Desktop itself.
BUT, there’s a potential futur issue. Right now Palm doesn’t
care that a bunch of geek are making a BeOS clone, because their business is not related. But in the futur if (and only *if*) OBOS become a broader OS, and start to conquer some market share, then maybe Palm may be interested to cash on this new thing, by removing dust from old property ownership.
Worst, if OBOS become a known OS and like Linux start to spread on some handheld device, urg, you can be sure Palm may suddenly become very angry …
Other problem, is if Palm is bought by a bigger player (say AOL) and the new BeOS owner decide to continue BeOS with major support to fight against Windows (wow, can you imagine BeOS backed by a so powerfull machine that is AOL ???).
At the end, currently, there’s a bunch of people in the OBOS team trying to make talk with Palm (through Sokoman) to check what are our legal possibilities…
We’ll see …
they are undocumented, they are buggy and they aren’t comfortable.
Better something like a native layer for java or something like a wrapper class for other ELF platform (like *BSD or GNU) and the BeOS API
(PS I’d like a full C wrappers since I cannot stand C++ but probably it’s only me)
“they are undocumented, they are buggy and they aren’t comfortable.”
The initial idea behind using a Win32 API wrapper is not to be documented, non-buggy or comfortable. It was only in the goal of easier the port of Windows softs. But anyway it will surely never happen… ๐
Tho as a Win32 developer I disagree on the fact the API is undocumented and buggy. That’s a bunch of myths. Ok it’s not the most comfortable, but personnaly I’ve seen worst…
“PS I’d like a full C wrappers since I cannot stand C++ but probably it’s only me”
Between you and me, it’s probably just you ๐ I personnaly waited LONG time before even trying the C++ (I was a die-hard straight C developer). But since that first try, I love so much the language that I have even some difficulties to come back to the non-OO level of C…
AtheOS
GPL & Kurt has stated more than once that AtheOS is NOT a BeOS clone, why should we force it on to him?
Win32 API’s
Why? We have GREAT API’s as it is.
You want win32, use Win32, or help port wineLIB.
“Kurt has stated more than once that AtheOS is NOT a BeOS clone, why should we force it on to him? ”
Exact. That’s most likely why OBOS team leaders choosed NewOS kernel over AtheOS. From the start NewOS share a lot more feature & design choices with BeOS.
About the Win32 API … please people read carefully the posts. We NEVER talked using Win32 API. BeOS API is the coolest API. We ONLY thrown the idea of having an extra Win32 API wrapper (that personnaly I’d found better than any wine flavor). And IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. This discution was only an idea like that, that may ease the port of windows apps. THAT’S ALL ! IT’S JUST SOME ***VAPOR*** TALKS ! ๐
I like C I like OOP in most cases. I simply HATE C++ approach.
I’ll try ObjC to see if is so handy.
I’ll see
“I’ll try ObjC to see if is so handy. ”
I’m VERY intrigued by ObjectiveC. Is a free Windows version available ? I would like to try this different avenue …
> I think the whole idea of source compatibility is better
> (having a Win32 API wrapper) than any kind of emulations
> (WINE, etc). But WinAPI is SO DAMN big
Steve WINE Is Not an Emulator, it is an API wrapper.
Try GnuCompilerCollection under Win32 either with MingW32 or Cygwin. I’m sure that most of GNUStep works there too, also the GUI-part as XFree86-4.x runs natively under Cygwin.
Just try it.
The BeOS world is really starting to get exciting again. After waiting and waiting and waiting for Be to give us even the tinyest update, it became hard to stay optimistic. With the rate of development in the OBOS group, I am very optimistic again. Lately, I’ve been coding my BeOS app at work (don’t tell anyone!!). I am more eager than ever to contribute to the community. I just wonder how long it will be before Big Bill raises his eyebrows seeing this and then giving his ‘open source is evil’ speech. Keep up the good work OBOS team !!!
Steve, one of the greatest things BeOs has is its journaled file system, as an insider could you please comment on the new BFS and compare it a bit with the powerful capabilities of the SQL based file system annouced by Microsoft?
Interestingly too, no release has come out yet from the BlueOs project, it was supposed to be the shortest path to a BeOs “clone”, any news?
Kudos to OBOS, I visit that site every single day of the week and read all the newsletters. Go OBOS!
the GNUstep site has load of documentation and there is a lightweight (relatively) GNUstep only distribution that you may try.
I’m intringued as to where the idea that AtheOS is not 100% Open Source came from? All of the AtheOS codebase is currently under the GPL. Thats the full GPL, and not the LGPL. Which technically means that AtheOS is more Open Source than most!*
*In the RMS sense at least
I’ve just created two partitions. One for Windows and one for BeOS. I’ve installed BeOS R5 PE. My NIC card works… yea! My video hardware works… yea! Mozilla 0.9.8 works… yea! Now, to transfer (install) BeOS R5 PE onto the separate partition and see if we can’t maybe get the performance boosted a bit by taking it out of Windows.
Jared
“OBOS: The transition has begun!”
Get the BootableBeCD utility by Neiras, make BePe Cd bootable and install it in its own BFS partition:
http://www.bebits.com/app/1930“>BootableBeCD , Intel Version – requires R5 (661 KB), that one at BeBits is a bloody DEAD link, better download BootableBeCD from <a href=”http://bezip.de/app/772/BootableBeCD.zip“>BeZip.de
Germans are superior after all
“Steve WINE Is Not an Emulator, it is an API wrapper.”
I disagree. I’m not a big connoiseur of Wine, but all I know you can run compiled programes (i.e. Office) directly from the binary. Which make Wine more an emulator than an API wrapper.
A full API wrapper is when you can recompile the original code to generate a binary specialized to the target system.
“I’m intringued as to where the idea that AtheOS is not 100% Open Source came from? All of the AtheOS codebase is currently under the GPL. Thats the full GPL, and not the LGPL. ”
My personnal perception of AtheOS being partially close-sourced come from an interview with Kurt saying so, I guess last year. But as I said, it’s possible Kurt changed the whole thing, which I’m not fully up-to-date ๐
For the GPL license of AtheOS, I can’t speek for the rest of the OBOS team, but personnaly it’s an other good reason not to use AtheOS as the kernel. I don’t like the viral effect of this one, so I’m very pleased we use MIT (very close to BSD license) which give real freedom over the code we produce.
It is an api wrapper that let also run PE executables,but the hardest work is on the library wrapping not the PE executing.
Steve wrote:
—- begin quote —-
“Steve WINE Is Not an Emulator, it is an API wrapper.”
I disagree. I’m not a big connoiseur of Wine, but all I know you can run compiled programes (i.e. Office) directly from the binary. Which make Wine more an emulator than an API wrapper.
A full API wrapper is when you can recompile the original code to generate a binary specialized to the target system.
—- end quote —-
You disagree? It’s not a matter of opinion. WINE is an API wrapper. It is how Corel ported WordPerfect Office to Linux. I also believe Borland used it for parts of Kylix.
In addition to being a compatible API that you can use to recompile Windows programs for Linux, there is a binary tool that can be used to run native Windows executables on Linux. It is in that case that “undocumented” Windows calls are a problem. There are no mysteries in a program that you have the source code for. But there may well be calls that MS Word uses that are not disclosed to non-MS developers (that’s a big point in the antitrust cases), which WINE could not then handle.
So, in conclusion, WINE is a great tool for helping companies like Borland or Corel, who have complete access to their own source code, to port their programs to a platform that WINE runs on (Linux, Solaris, OpenBEOS (maybe someday?)). It’s not so good for getting MS’ killer apps (the ones that tie people to the Windows platform) on platforms that MS doesn’t want them to run on.
Rob Campbell
[email protected]
“In addition to being a compatible API that you can use to recompile Windows programs for Linux, there is a binary tool that can be used to run native Windows executables on Linux.”
Wow thanks for the informations. I knew about the second part, but not the first. I admit with that in light Wine become more attractive …
A question: I often heard about “Wine ‘will’ support this feature…”. Is Wine right now a fully usable interface, or it’s still in permanent development ?
thanks !
Steve
and the opensource API like GTK SDL QT o GNUstep are progressing quite nicely and let you code following your taste (GTK and SDL are C written and have many wrappers to other language, QT is C++ written and probably is quite useful for C++ lovers, GNUstep is objC)
If atheos is not a be clone then what the hell is it for?
should ex-be users go to obos, atheos, amiga-linux, qnx rtos, or mac os x?
“If atheos is not a be clone then what the hell is it for? should ex-be users go to obos, atheos, amiga-linux, qnx rtos, or mac os x?”
I’m not sure if I understand your question.
AtheOS = a home made OS made by a guy who just for the sake of learning how to program an OS. Period. Nothing to do with BeOS in any way.
OBOS = Full BeOS Clone, currently in development, build around the NewOS kernel, which share a lot of similarities with the BeOS kernel.
Steve, less comments on OSNews and more coding on OBOS please.
“Steve, less comments on OSNews and more coding on OBOS please. ”
Lol .. I know … that would be lot more useful ๐ I’m just currently in a rage of OSNews, and need to check the site every 30 minutes. It happen sometimes. I insure you, in no more than 1 or 2 weeks, my rage will vanish and I’ll become silent ๐
But until then … poor OSNews readers that have to support my bad english grammar … lol
Iยดm a big fan of BeOS, I was sad to see Be`s end. I realy get hopings again the see OBOS as a suggsesfull OS in the future.
If I could I would support OBOS with coding.
Thanks to all coding for OBOS. Great work.
Jรผrgen
Steve wrote:
—- begin quote —-
A question: I often heard about “Wine ‘will’ support this feature…”. Is Wine right now a fully usable interface, or it’s still in permanent development ?
—- end quote —-
The WINE thread is mostly off-topic, so sorry for bringing it back. But you did ask and you are involved with OBOS, so I guess it’s not too bad to respond.
I think that WINE is a fully useable interface for porting an existing program or writing a new program (though I think the latter makes no sense at all; better to code a cross-platform program with cross-platform tools like wxWindows from the start). You may encounter a function call that isn’t yet supported, but then you simply implement it. Corel made great contributions to WINE in this way.
With regard to the binary interface, the answer depends on the application you are trying to run and whether or not you have Windows installed on your machine (WINE can make use of it; I’m not too clear on the details of this). A database of programs tested with WINE and tips on configuring them is maintained at appdb.codeweavers.com. More information is available at http://www.winehq.org.
IMHO, it would be a waste of effort to concentrate on implementing WINE for OBOS (or as a standalone OS in lieu of OBOS) at this time. There is not a hoarde of open source developers just waiting to develop apps in WINE; if there were, they’d be doing it already. And a commercial software company won’t bother porting their Windows apps to OBOS using WINE. If they were interested in porting, they’d port to Linux today.
The OBOS project clearly has its priorities straight: cloning BEOS. Next or in parallel, native ports of apps like OpenOffice (which is designed to be cross platform) and tool kits like GTK+ and wxWindows should be worked on. In fact, there is already an incomplete port of the opensource, cross-platform AbiWord word processor (www.abisource.com). I’m sure they would appreciate that port being ressurrected.
By the way, I don’t know why I didn’t think of this when we had the exchange on whether or not WINE is an emulator. WINE is an acronym that stands for “WINE Is Not and Emulator”!
Rob Campbell
[email protected]
I am impressesd! I am very impressed, damnit!!
But just1 thing: you state that BeOS 5.0.3 is necessary. That woul mean BeOS PE is not supported by your patch? (BePE can not be upgraded to 5.0.3, only BeOS 5. PRO)
“Steve, less comments on OSNews and more coding on OBOS please. ”
Yeah! Get back to work
There is an official patch to 5.03 for PE too
steve wrote:
OBOS = Full BeOS Clone, currently in development, build around the NewOS kernel, which share a lot of similarities with the BeOS kernel.
If OBOS becomes a major success on par with linux, would
palm or be inc challenge obos in court? or, more to the point, if palm or be inc did challenge obos, would obos prevail in court?
Since they’re writing it from scratch, I think the only problem could be the names Be and BeOS.. but I’m not a lawyer
” If OBOS becomes a major success on par with linux, would
palm or be inc challenge obos in court? or, more to the point, if palm or be inc did challenge obos, would obos prevail in court? ”
Good question. First that’s why we probably officially use “OBOS” as the official name, to get rid of the ‘BeOS’ in OpenBeOS.
But as the OBOS is a 100% open source code, and that the product is owned by nobody, who can be sue for doing that ? I’m really curious the know what Palm can really do. Sure right now they don’t care. But if OBOS become more popular, what can Palm may legally do against an open source project ?
Someone with better knowledge in legal system can give me more informations ?
Thanks …
I am an Intellectual Property lawyer at Spain. As you have already pointed out the only serious legal issues that may arise are those of the BeOS trademark because of its possible association with OpenBeos.
In the other hand, I know the OBOS team are being very cautious with the coding.
Copyright covers Originality, it’s not a Patent system as many tend to think (Patent covers inventions, software is explicitly excluded on all modern copyright laws), no first to file at copyright (under the Berna Convention there is no filing obligation) nor first to create, it is about creating originally (not by vile copying, we spaniards say “servil”), whenever that is done.
A great joke that fully explains the “vile” character:
Harper’s new monthly magazine, November, 1873. http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?frames=1&coll… :
“Tony [The Earl of Shaftesbury, making a speech at Exeter Hall] was asking the children a variety of questions of a Scriptural nature, to which he had received very satisfactory answers. Just as he was concluding, he addressed a girl somewhat older than the rest, and among other things inquired, `Who made your vile body?` `Please my lord`, responded the unsophisticated girl. `Betsy Jones made my body, but I made the skirt myself!`”
See? She made the skirt herself, no vile deed, full copyright, just as OBOS, Betsy’s descendants now work at Palm Inc. The Lord copyright is another tale.
The key is creating, if you create something similar to do the same thing there is no infringement, copyright does not cover functionality, it covers expression. Of course the expression is not an strict concept, for you may not elude copyright by mere accidental alterations, that would be fraudulent.
If I were to look for possible infringements of the BeOs copyright I would try to argue one of these two:
– OBOS is some kind of BeOs “derivative work” without authorization.
– OBOS has done illegal and unauthorized BeOs reverse engineering.
Mine would be the proof burden.
Derivative Works
I am following the OBOS development, and by what I see it is being a clean cloning, starting by the NewOS kernel, the app-server, the media kit, the file system, translation kit, everything is being coded from scratch or reused from open software. That kind of coding is no mere accidental alteration, it is the complete creation of a hole new system designed to function on a similar manner to BeOS.
It is A NEW ORIGINAL CREATION. It is not a derivative work, for OBOS have not taken to “derivate” the code they don’t have. The most common cases of derivative works are translations, in order to translate you need the original text.
Reverse Engineering
Reverse Engineering is the “star” of the USA DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act), and as you already know the rest of the world follows. The USA jurisprudence about it used to allow many cases of fair use, specially under Interoperability cases:
Atari vs Nintendo, Fed. Cir. 1990
Sega vs Accolade, 9th Cir. 1992
Bateman vs Mnemonics, llth Cir. 1996
Needless to say after the DMCA, the legal guideline is DON’T EVEN TOUCH IT, the fair use is now as narrow as an EULA. The mere possession of SoftIce is Evil.
So what? So I don’t think Palm would get into a reverse engineering battle versus an open source OS, in a similar way (not an identical manner) MS doesn’t go after WINE, it would be very nasty, very unpractical, not easily probated, and even the `interoperability fair use` may after all prevail in Court.
I believe Apple would litigate, if they are nuts enough to order the removing of Apple-like theme screenshots, what would they not do? THEMES!!! How third class of you Steve! (his expression). Fortunately Apple themes are `really` only banned for only a 1-2% of desktop users. And then talk about porting OSX to x86 as the great thing! (not for computing freedom), to worse.
Hehehe! can’t help mentioning the Redmonds, have you read the legal papers at Lindows.com? Go read them, exactly what I was saying but better, much better!!! Those rejected PTO applications are BEAUUUUUUUUTIFUL!!! And I love the Microsoft Computer Dictionary definition of “Windows”, EXHIBIT A is gold. `Good Morning MS I’ll be your Server today!` (LindowsZilla).
Concerning the trademark point, in the worst of cases OBOS would make a great trademark, like OBOS NOT BEOS, this is not recursive but equally understood. No damages would result before a legally protocoled notification (a formal one) asking to stop using the OpenBeOS trademark. And as said, OBOS would have no problem in my opinion. Open and Beautiful.
Excellent work at OpenBeos.
GO OBOS!!! GO!!!
Thanks for the infos Marques ! I shown your message to the OBOS team. It may be useful ๐
People.. be careful!! WINE is an emulator, but WineLib is an API wrapper. WINE uses WineLib when executing Win32 PE exe’s, but you can link to WineLib on any supported platform and just call Win32 API calls ‘natively’.
This whole confusion was one of the things that clouded Kylix when it first appeared. It used Wine*LIB* not *WINE*, and people thought it was running under emulation. Kylix is a 100% native elf exe, but used WineLib to reproduce certain things that would be time consuming to have to redevelop for Borland. It was a cost cutting measure (time/development-wise) that shot them in the foot!!
Sorry to drop in here with a no-brainer question, but as a BeOS outsider I’m sure I’m not the only one not to know this.
Per OBOS’ site they are building a BeOS source-compatible OS based on a NewOS Kernel originally built by an ex-Be engineer.
This release is a set of apps and applets to use in the original BeOS 5.03 release in lieu of the proprietary Be applications ( correct me if this is wrong ) replacing some control panels, the tracker ( Be version of explorer, OS shell?? )
Is ther development therfore aimed at replacing the proprietary OS one part at a time until a complete OS environment with fully documented API’s is produced, then slot in a recoded NewOS kernel able to use those API’s?
Alternatively, is the compilation of these apps to BeOS r5 standards just a stop-gap until a self-hosted development process running on the new kernel can be sustained?
Forgive my ignorance, what I have read here and elsewhere is slightly contradictory/confusing
TadB wrote:
—- begin quote —-
People.. be careful!! WINE is an emulator, but WineLib is an API wrapper. WINE uses WineLib when executing Win32 PE exe’s, but you can link to WineLib on any supported platform and just call Win32 API calls ‘natively’.
—- end quote —-
Not quite right. WINE == WINE Is Not an Emulator. Another one of the recursive acronyms that open source projects are famous for. Wine consists of both a development toolkit (Winelib) and a program loader. I don’t think even the program loader is technically an emulator.
Just nitpicking.
Rob Campbell
[email protected]
“Is ther development therfore aimed at replacing the proprietary OS one part at a time until a complete OS environment with fully documented API’s is produced”
Exactly. We are currently reproducing each single piece of BeOS that we replace by our open-sourced, own version. The user API’s will be exactly the same as the original, so developers can bring back the good ol’ BeBook and use it with OBOS like if it was the original OS.
This way is *SO* easier than starting from scratch a brand new OS that you need to design from ground up, make mistakes, etc. By developing OBOS in BeOS, the process is very fast and very safe (each single OBOS module can be fully tested in the heart of a stable system).
Plus, we are aiming for 100% binary compatibility. Which mean at the end, hopefully, nobody will see a difference between BeOS R5 and OBOS (except for all copyrighted visuals elements like icons, BeOS name, etc) and will be able to continue using their old applications.
Thanks for that clarification.. good luck.
Or Windows Emulator, both are correct, or atlest that was the case last time I went to winehq It has been many years sence I last dived into Wine.
If my failing memoryis correct (does not happen all that ofton thanks to Vodka) it’s as Wine is both WinLib (not an emulator) and Wine-the-PE-to-elf-toy (an emulator).
Mlk
There was a project to bring WINE to BeOS. This was called BeWine. It can be found at http://bewine.beunited.org. I’m the current owner of the project since the rest of the folks gave up while Be Inc. was floundering. Limitations in BeOS made the porting of WINE to BeOS difficult and updates to the OS were promised that would solve some issues (therefore, why create time consuming workaround code??). That never happened.
Currently, I plan to get a new development team assembled for BeWine once OBOS becomes a usable OS. The plan is to turn BeWine (or WINE, whatever) into an OBOS server (wine_server). This will be the equivalent to the WINE executable runner. All this is probably best planned for the OBOS R2 time.
However, RIGHT NOW, we need and can use someone to port WineLib (something that current BeOS limitations do NOT affect). So if someone would like to port WineLib to BeOS (current BeOS, no OBOS required), please get in contact with me. Porting WineLib will make application porting FAR FAR easier from Windows to BeOS.
Any questions… please write me at [email protected].
-Jace
BeUnited
BeWine Manager
OBOS CDT
Hey idiots, Steve has nothing to do with BE or BEOS, he isn’t an insider, has any ONE of you read ANY of his comments? Ask yourself, which is more plausible Be hired this barely literate moron or this is a barely literate moron who wants to feel big by pretending he’s an insider? I love the BeOS too but you dipshits who are listening to him need a reality check.