 |
|
| I'm still the king! |
|
|
By Jess - Posted on August 23, 2002 - 16:36:01 (#2800)
Current version when comment was posted: 1.1.0 |
|
|
I AM THE UNDISPUTED HEAVY WEIGHT CHAMPION OF THE WORLD!!!... at typo's that is...
|
|
| I must dissagree again.... |
|
|
By Jess - Posted on August 23, 2002 - 16:32:33 (#2799)
Current version when comment was posted: 1.1.0 |
|
|
While I can see what you mean now your original post got jumped on because of a few things. If you look aroun alot of old BeOS write ups articles & illinformed press reports said BeOS WAS unix based. This alone leaves people p1zzed off cuz Be worked hand on making a fresh start & not building off such ancient code. Again also it would be better if we have our equivilant made for be as many of the bin tools ignore attributes making a few operations a tad harder & dangerous at times. Also the lack of multi threading & such would be a nice enhancment. The point is incorrect info about the OS can hurt it. It is not based off any *nix os but shares a common shell & some tools. people come here thinking this site is for a flavor of linux & drivers for windows. while I will sy I should not have flamed the point is things need to be consise as it's a good laugh when you see some dumb arse has dl'd our drivers from winxp & writes back saying it dont work please help but it's also bothersome to see how little our beloved OS is invisible to the world.
|
|
| Linux / POSIX apps under BeOS |
|
|
By Moriarty - Posted on August 23, 2002 - 15:30:09 (#2798)
Current version when comment was posted: 1.1.0 |
|
|
I guess it's time I had to explain my recent post again...
I did not say that BeOS was a Unix port, or a Unix clone. I said in my recent posting that some of the shell-type applications that are commonly used with the BeOS were made by compiling from the same source code as many of the tools found on a modern Linux / Unix system...
perl is a good example. php is another. And so is ls, cat, dd, et al. bash is a good example as well. So there may be some minor modifications / additions to support things such as Tracker attributes, and other BeOS specific features. GCC is a prime example of this.
I didn't mean to start a war over this. All I was saying is that we should not be ashamed that we have tools built from the same code base. I did not say that BeOS was built from the Linux Kernel source code.
Perhaps in the future all of you should not be so quick to jump down my throat about the orgins of various pieces of code when in fact your posting your flames to me indicates that you actually have no idea yourselves...
|
|
| mmu_man |
|
|
By s_d - Posted on August 17, 2002 - 18:57:25 (#2706)
Current version when comment was posted: 1.1.0 |
|
|
"it has mmap() now :) (ok I still have to publish this...). "
Heh, do it faster!:) - i need mmap functions set in order to publish DjVu tools (though, select() is also required - so for BONE only)
|
|
| mine, mine... |
|
|
By zblace@mi2.hr - Posted on August 17, 2002 - 18:00:33 (#2704)
Current version when comment was posted: 1.1.0 |
|
|
All this comments over my litle joke ;)
I will hav eto be more carefull.
|
|
| Moriarty you dno't knwo what yoru talking about |
|
|
By Jess - Posted on August 17, 2002 - 17:31:10 (#2703)
Current version when comment was posted: 1.1.0 |
|
|
Moriarty BeOS HAS NOTHING to do with Linux or UNIX. I use our shell all the time & LOVE BASH but again BASH is a shell & NOT LINUX or UNIX. You cannot BOOT into your shell as While BeOS uses Bash to pass messages along to start other sections of the system Be is NOT based on BASH nor is it a shell based OS. My point that that if we had the time & resources to make tools that do the same basic functions as in LinSUX they would be simply better taking explicit advange of our multithreaded environment & other power features of the Be OS.
|
|
| Btw |
|
|
By mmu_man - Posted on August 17, 2002 - 16:23:54 (#2702)
Current version when comment was posted: 1.1.0 |
|
|
when talking about "same codebase" I think he meant the GNU tools codebase, not the kernel one :)
|
|
| Re: BeOS is not a Unix - despite popular belief |
|
|
By mmu_man - Posted on August 17, 2002 - 16:19:24 (#2700)
Current version when comment was posted: 1.1.0 |
|
|
Wow, didn't know that, XINU rulz =)
Btw it's true BeOS isn't UNIX, but it still have more in common with Unices than windows never will.
It has a VFS, with the concept of /, it has a /dev, ... it has mmap() now :) (ok I still have to publish this...).
It has nearly all the power UNIX has, but isn't UNIX underneath.
That is a good thing IMO, that's what makes me love it.
|
|
| BeOS is not a Unix - despite popular belief |
|
|
By Eugenia - Posted on August 17, 2002 - 15:54:35 (#2698)
Current version when comment was posted: 1.1.0 |
|
|
>It's not sad that we have the same original code base
BeOS does not have the same codebase as Linux or Unix. In fact, the BeOS kernel was created having a copy of the XINU book next to the programmers ("XINU is not Unix"). The fact that is POSIX compliant, is just a welcome add-on. But BeOS itself, in its roots, has absolutely nothing to do with the Unix OS philosophy. Heck, even WindowsNT/2k/XP are posix compliant -even if they do not ship with the Gnu tools- and that doesn't make Windows a Unix.
|
|
| Uh, where do you think the terminal apps (et al) come from? |
|
|
By Moriarty - Posted on August 17, 2002 - 15:42:10 (#2697)
Current version when comment was posted: 1.1.0 |
|
|
Well, if you think it's sad that BeOS is forced to borrow from GNU/Linux, then you obviously don't boot into the shell very often...
bash, ls, cat, in fact, much of the contents of /boot/bin is POSIX-compatible, taken directly from the same GNU sources that the same Linux apps were...
It's not sad that we have the same original code base - we just have the ability to do things so much better than the average Linux user... The whole concept of being POSIX compliant is what made me use BeOS over Linux/*BSD and its `goodies' in the first place... BeOS boots much quicker than my current download of Debian besides... ;)
Brian - An original Linux user from before the time of the mystical red chapeau and these morons...
|
|
| I disagree with the cheese... |
|
|
By Jess - Posted on August 17, 2002 - 14:55:38 (#2695)
Current version when comment was posted: 1.1.0 |
|
|
I think we should use Feta... confused? oops typo... We should use the Zeta hoh hoh hoh (en francis). Yes BeOS is very much alive. I find it a tad sad that we turn to linux for tools though.
- Jess
|
|
| RIGHT ON LOON!!!! |
|
|
By sasquatch666 - Posted on August 17, 2002 - 04:12:41 (#2691)
Current version when comment was posted: 1.1.0 |
|
|
I agree with the loon,BeOS does indeed have a future,although it IS tough selling people on the idea of using a 'dead' OS.BUT it is the most lively "dead" OS around and as long as folks like Eugenia and the Loon keep working on it it will live on!Besides who knows what the folks at Palm are cooking up that they're not telling us about yet with the BeOS source and engineering team,it seems to me that Palm has been taken over from the inside out by Be Inc.I think this will all revolve around how the lawsuit that Be has against M$ pans out,we may be seeing a small notebook sized Multimedia BeBox built by Palm and running some form of updated BeOS for instance,who knows?
Even if that never happens the open BeOS community is making progress and it's only a matter of time!
|
|
| BeOS *IS* the future |
|
|
By looncraz - Posted on August 16, 2002 - 19:09:54 (#2684)
Current version when comment was posted: 1.1.0 |
|
|
Eugenia,
I beg to differ with you, I believe that BeOS has only begun to emerge. Of course, most likely the future users will not call what came of BeOS "BeOS." Instead, they may call it Zeta, or Cryupdoatnsh.. who knows?
Of course, as of now, it is pretty much stagnant (no new releases); although, portions have been replaced and many more portions are being replaced slowly. This will happen until we have a BeOS-clone which will be BeOS still in our hearts.
--The loon
|
|
| I believe BeOS has future |
|
|
By Lanjoe9 - Posted on August 16, 2002 - 18:41:04 (#2682)
Current version when comment was posted: 1.1.0 |
|
|
|
| Hello smart... |
|
|
By Eugenia - Posted on August 16, 2002 - 17:51:03 (#2681)
Current version when comment was posted: 1.1.0 |
|
|
It seems that you do not browse BeBits enough. I 've put up 4-5 new apps the last month. BeOS is installed on 3 of my partitions on 3 of my computers. I do not boot into it very regularly, but I make sure that whichever new PC part I buy, to be able to run BeOS. Last night I booted to BeOS with my laptop, and was on BeShare.
Also, I run OSNews, remember? It is my "job" to have BeOS and all other OSes installed and ready to boot on.
BeOS is a history for me, regarding the fact that it has no future. But it still runs on my PCs, so I boot into it every now and then to remember the "old good days".
|
|
| Does this mean EUGENIA is rebooting into BeOS again? |
|
|
By zblace@mi2.hr - Posted on August 16, 2002 - 15:12:14 (#2679)
Current version when comment was posted: 1.1.0 |
|
|
Does this mean EUGENIA is rebooting into BeOS again:)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
| |
Recent Downloads - # 612
Total Downloads - # 1,361
Total Views - # 756
User Ratings - N/A
|
|
|
|
 |
| |
Shell Utilities
|
|
|
|
 |
|
1. BePodder - 9.80
2. QEMU - 9.68
3. ScummVM - 9.57
4. Jukebox - 9.44
5. Haiku AGP busm... - 9.35
6. cpu_fix - 9.31
7. vim6 - 9.31
8. VNCServer - 9.30
9. Beezer - 9.26
10. HandBrake - 9.25
|
|
|
|
 |
|
1. Ati Radeon G... - 32,893
2. BeOS 5 Perso... - 32,462
3. Realtek RTL8... - 20,354
4. Ensoniq Audi... - 17,699
5. USB Joystick... - 16,559
6. BePDF - 15,354
7. ATI Rage 128... - 13,355
8. S3 Trio 64 v... - 10,306
9. VLC Media Pla... - 9,562
10. DOSBox - 9,476
|
|
|
|
 |
| You are not logged in.
Login
|
|
|
|
 |
|
