One thing I don't see mentioned anywhere including the plans is accessibility though. Not having basic accessibility support would be a serious issue, so I'm hoping it is either already there and just not mentioned or at least planned in some way.
Smaller, simpler, more hackable software is inherently more accessible.
Edit: Of all the comments to disagree with, I am blown away that this is today's. You guys desperately need to explain what you're disagreeing with here. Seriously, leave a reply.
If you look at how classic Win32 applications are constructed, I don't think you need anywhere near the support for screen reader software that you do with modern applications. All of the elements of a dialog box, for example, are constructed from a standard set of controls, and can be interrogated programmatically for their text.
I don't know anything about the internals of BeOS software, but I would bet that it's closer to Win32 in this regard than it is to more modern UI systems.
Ton of projects exists, ton of cars, ton of bicycles, ton of shoes, ton of pens, ton of keyboards, mices and screens... each of them are just another one and there is no real benefit to chose one rather than another (price excepted). They exist, because someone wanted to try someting or do something. Humans do things that way.
https://www.haiku-os.org/legacy-docs/bebook/ClassesAndMethod...
2. Cosmoe is under the MIT license, which may be of interest for those wanting pure MIT/BSD-licensed solutions, as well as for those who want to use a C++-native toolkit but are concerned that their use cases may subject them to having to pay for a commercial Qt license.
3. BeOS appeal.
This was the mantra of BeOs. Here’s a technology preview. Watch videos on a cube, now a sphere!
The OS was sold as a technology preview that was easy and accessible and the users only needed to wait for developers…
…that never showed up.
Similar occurrence with Microsoft phones and lack of developers. Pebble watch and lack of developers…
What these projects all lack are meaningful engagement instead of a few ‘oh wow’ moments.
> The Flora Prius was preinstalled with both Microsoft Windows 98 as well as BeOS. It did not, however, have a dual-boot option as Microsoft reminded Hitachi of the terms of the Windows OEM license.[4] In effect, two thirds of the hard drive was hidden from the end-user, and a series of complicated manipulations was necessary to activate the BeOS partition.[5]
The engagement was certainly starting, and I think there’s a chance—a small one, to be sure, but a chance—that if Be, Inc., hadn’t clearly decided that carving out a comfortable niche just wasn’t enough, BeOS might have succeeded. (Instead they decided to go all-in on “Internet Appliances,” which ended up dealing them the death blow rather than a big success. Ironically, I think that market effectively succeeded a decade later, but in the form of the iPad.)
the way windows are styled/handled. so i'd like to see a BeOS styled compositor/window manager.
the database like filesystem, and of course gui and commandline tools to use it. (can the filesystem features be emulated with extended attributes, or is a full port of the filesystem driver needed to get a filesystem with the same features? (i am not looking for compatibility, just the feature set))
But all BeFS has in the way of being "database like" is arbitrary named & typed btree indices, chosen by the owner. You can have a btree of filenames, a btree of "sent by" email addresses, maybe one of file types for example. If enabled (which is the default) you pay for this feature with a significant perf overhead on operations because those tree indices must be updated, but if it's disabled (common for disks with lots of small files) you lose the facilities enabled by having such an index.
Compared to full text indexing, which was also popular on some systems at about the same time, this doesn't produce very impressive results, yet you're paying for it everywhere. No surprise then that even the text indexing remains a niche feature, I know people who care about it a lot and others who've never been interested.
It's probably one of those niche features like wall switches for floor lamps (a socket is run off the lighting circuit and switched just like ceiling lights, but a floor lamp is plugged into that socket). A few people love it, most people aren't bothered, so, it's usually not done.
indices are a standard feature in databases, and yes, they can slow down some queries while speeding up others, so you should use them judiciously. maybe BFS has an issue there, but that does not negate the concept.
practically speaking, what i want is a gui filemanager that lets me set arbitrary keys and values on files, display them and filter for them. indexing them is not required.
btw: UK style power sockets all have individual switches to turn them off or on. maybe elsewhere people aren't bothered because they are not used to the idea.
Since you live in the UK you may also be aware that, unlike ordinary appliances, smaller low power (5 amp) connectors are authorised for lighting, so in that particular house because of its age the floor lamps literally can't plug into a conventional socket, the plugs are the wrong size, this has the further advantage that you can't accidentally plug an appliance such as a vacuum cleaner or television into a socket controlled from a light switch.
I'm not in the industry, but I think the idea is that, in the absence of built-in lighting, one should be able to add lamps to a room that can be turned on/off by a handy power switch next to the room's entrance.
Come to think of it, I haven’t used an OS that could match the accuracy, speed, or most importantly utility of BeOS’ active queries since 2001.
But in terms of wallclock time "less sluggish" just translates to it takes longer but you don't notice as much. Maybe the file copy takes 18 seconds but feels butter smooth, in contrast to this alternative where it took 14 seconds but wasn't nice - so for 4 extra seconds you get buttery smooth delay. Those seconds add up.
> BeOS R5 (which was given away free)
No, BeOS 5 Professional was paid proprietary software. However, there was a free demo version, BeOS 5 Personal.
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2000/06/beosr...
$69.95
> full text indexing, which was also popular on some systems at about the same time
[[citation needed]]
I think this is incorrect. The first mainstream OS with full-text indexing and searching was Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger" launched in 2005, 5 years of fast-paced development and tech change after BeOS 5.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_Tiger
The feature was called Spotlight.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spotlight_(Apple)
"Tiger" was $129.95 and needed a PowerPC G3, 256MB of RAM and 3GB of disk.
A G3 meant minimum of 233MHz.
BeOS 5 was half the price, and needed 32MB of RAM, 150MB of disk, and a PowerPC 603 or better -- meaning a starting speed of 75MHz.
https://asleson.org/public/mirrors/www.be.com/support/guides...
You are not comparing like with like here.
The main difference is that it was way less known, and early on it required considerable time to process things because of less powerful computers being norm.
It was intended for indexing IIS websites, although by W2K it could handle MS Office files. Was it directly visible from Explorer? The first Windows I personally remember with file search in the desktop – for instance, in the Start menu – was Vista, which came out in 2006 and which has a totally different indexing and search tool which replaced Indexing Service.
Vista introduced "next generation" implementation and used it by default, though you could still use the old one. IFilter remained the same for both. What really changed was how it was more visible and less performance impacting with newer computers - most people I knew disabled indexing because performance and there was no real culture of using built-in windows search.
pekwm with the right theme looks close enough and tabs windows together, which IMHO is the biggest feature: https://www.pekwm.se/themes/benu.html
(Of course, that's an X window manager, so AFAIK it can't be combined with this)
but yes, need something for wayland. but maybe cosmoe helps inspire someone to work on that.
If you decided to do this for, say, Windows, Microsoft is going to release a new Windows version with new stuff you can't do and too bad.
But BeOS itself is dead, and the Haiku project (to basically make BeOS again, once named "OpenBeOS") is about a quarter of a century old yet seems barely closer to releasing anything. A lethargic snail could sleep walk to the finish before Haiku ships version 2.
About the only thing I think you miss out on is GPU acceleration and maybe wifi? I haven't kept up with the current state.
But yes, graphics drivers are a problem.
None at all. Palm split into two companies in 2003, PalmOne and PalmSource. PalmOne handled the hardware and PalmSource handled the software. BeOS went with PalmSource.
PalmOne eventually bought the full rights to the Palm trademark from PalmSource in 2005 and switched back to being Palm. This is the company that made WebOS and got bought by HP.
PalmSource got bought by ACCESS (the company that made NetFront, one of the early mobile webbrowsers) and the rights to BeOS went to them in the sale.
I think that Access provides the web browser in the Kindle. That's probably the most widely-seen product by the most people.
It also tried to made a multitasking multimedia-capable PalmOS, PalmOS 6 "Cobalt."
https://www.palmsource.com/palmos/cobalt.html
My submission of it here got some discussion 9mth ago:
pjerem•7mo ago