Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by H-kon, Oct 8, 1999.

Not open for further replies.
1. ### H-konRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
312
If anyone of you are curious about BeOS and have a fast connection, maybe you don't have a fast one but are still curious about it. You can download it from here:

ftp://ftp.esoterica.pt/pub/beos/

It's almost 200 MB though, but it lasts a good 20 minutes which will tell you a lot about BeOS and what it can do. This is version 4.0, not 4.5 which is the current one which has a lot of new stuff in it ( and i mean A LOT

Have fun

3. ### H-konRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
312
Looks like people barely get a 1K sec download from that server.. Hmm. well. i am lookig for a better one

Messages:
312

7. ### DaveWRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
243
Well, I watched that Be demo video, and I must say I'm very impressed.

In fact, I'm heading home for a short vacation over this long weekend (Thanksgiving here in Canada), and I'll probably try to pick up a copy of the BeOS to bring back with me. I'm especially pleased that ALL my hardware (including my TV card) will work with the OS. I've been convinced.

8. ### DaveWRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
243
I only wish the BeOS would work with my old PowerMac 8100

9. ### H-konRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
312

What's with the Mac? I believe that every Mac before the G3's do work, even if you have a G3 upgrade card in them.. What's wrong, maybe i can help you out, or i'll ask someone

EDIT: Saw Be didn't support your model

Better wait for IBM's CHRP platform then...

One tip. When you pick up BeOS, be sure to get the "BeOS bible" by Scott Hacker. It's THE most valuable companion you'll get for BeOS in a long time

[This message has been edited by H-kon (edited October 08, 1999).]

10. ### RogueRegistered Member

Messages:
22
We just got an iDot computer here at work with the BeOS. And I have to say it is really fast. But it doesn't even support QT4, or a lot of other apps. I'm curious about the future of this OS, but I'm afraid this machine here is just collecting dust at the moment. But then again I wouldn't ever leave my Mac!!!

11. ### H-konRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
312
Well Rogue. that isn't Be's fault really. It's Apple's fault since they refuse to license the codec to Be since they became a threat to MacOS. They also refused to give Be the specs for the motherboards for the G3's and G4's so that people could have a choice on the Mac's. So support for Mac's are discontinued after 5.0 is released next summer..

Apple hates competition. they locked Sorenson ( maker of the Q4 codec) to not let anyone else but apple have the pleasure of using it. And they wont port Quicktime to either BeOS or Linux for that matter.

The future of this OS is very good. A new version is coming out next month ( for free if you have 4.5) A bunch of apps, games, office stuff are coming also, and instead of Quicktime, RealPlayer came on board instead which will release G2 in Novemeber at Comdex.

If you need some more info, i'll gladly tell you. But it goes to show that even the Mac community wanted Be instead of NeXt.. tells you a little about the arch right there.. along with the Amiga people joining too

12. ### H-konRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
312
What kind of apps are you looking for?

13. ### DaveWRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
243
Well, I was totally unsuccessful at trying to locate the BeOS at any local computer shop (though one major retailer said they were investigating the possibility of carrying it - but they couldn't find a distributor).

So I ordered a copy from egghead.com for a really smokin' price ($45 for the OS AND the BeOS Bible book -- most places charge$60 for just the OS). I also picked up a cool trackpad for \$2

I'm eagerly awaiting its arrival

14. ### RogueRegistered Member

Messages:
22
Keep in mind that I'm a die hard apple user, so I don't mean any offense to anyone. But come on, the real player sucks. Big time. You can't even see or hear half the stuff through that thing. I hope Apple eases up a little on the BeOS. If the Be is as great for media as it's boasting, QT is an essential. Especially for video. So if Apple, Adobe, and Media100 jump on the Be bandwagon, hey, cool.

15. ### H-konRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
312
I would love running BeOS on a Macintosh, but until Apple eases up on anything ( Yes. I want the clones back as i have mentioned) BeOS wont run in it.

BeOS's media capabillity is just awesome. If you have the chance of picking up a copy to use on a low end system ( PC, or an old Pre-3 Mac, then go for it

DaveW - I am glad you ordered it. If there is anything i can do to make your experience even better, then let me know..

Oh. I am now an editor at www.thebesite.com. Drop me a mail or two if there is something that i can help you with..

------------------
"It's always easier to ask questions than to give the answers. The Questions are almost always innocent, but the answer's are most often not".

Haakon T Haug ( aka H-kon)

16. ### DaveWRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
243
Well...my 2nd attempt to acquire the BeOS has failed. Apparently egghead.com cannot ship it outside the 50 states, due to some distributor agreement. It was awfully nice of them to tell me about this a week after I put my order in.

Messages:
312

18. ### VandenRegistered Member

Messages:
14
I'd really love it if BeOS became the mainstream for home/business use. I have a theory about what it will take to do this: They need to support more games. Don't laugh; I'm serious. Most home users have no use for audio and image editing beyond the capabilities of MSPaint. Home computer systems are mostly used for, you guessed it, games. Especially if you have kids in the house, and, let's face it, old people don't tend to use computers much. So I guess what I'm saying is that Be needs to work a bit more on entertainment for their OS before it gains a large user base. Any opinions?

19. ### BorisSenior MemberRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,052
Also, and correct me if I'm wrong -- BeOS should really shine on multiprocessor systems due to its extensive multithreading. I wonder how well it would work on a (relatively) cheap system that uses, say, 8 Celeron 400's? Maybe they should look into joining with a hardware manufacturer and trying to offer just such an unheard-of platform.

------------------
I am; therefore I think.

20. ### VandenRegistered Member

Messages:
14
Well, an 8 way celeron system would be great, but I don't think it's possible. As far as I know Pentium II/III and celerons are only capable of running in dual mode. I think you have to move up to Xeons to do more than 2 processors with x86 chips. Anyone know for sure?

But ya, the immense amount of multi-threading should make a system like that fly.

21. ### BorisSenior MemberRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,052
I'm not 100% sure, but I think the dual-processor limitation is more a function of chipset than of the CPU(s). For example, I've personally seen Intel supercomputers containing 256 Pentium Pro CPUs (and there are systems containing 4096, and possibly more) in one box; I'm pretty sure Pentium Pro was not designed with that kind of usage in mind.

If somebody designs a cheap kind of chipset that can support at least 4 processors (be they Celeron, PII/III, Willamette, Merced, PowerPC, Athlon, or Sledgehammer), and scale to more (perhaps up to 16), such systems could become very popular, especially under BeOS. The reason I talked of Celeron 400s, is that they are dirt-cheap for their performance; even when you put 8 of them together, you get an aggregate cost equivalent to just one PIII/600.

The reason such systems are not common right now, is primarily because multi-CPU boxes are mostly designed for high-performance computing. Which means they have very fast/wide busses and I/O controllers, support for lots of very fast memory, etc. As far as I know, nobody has yet attempted to build an <u>affordable</u> multichip system. AMD seems like the more likely company to build one, though -- thanks to their point-to-point design of the chipset. Shouldn't be too hard to include several parallel EV6 busses on a single motherboard, and connect them in a crossbar-like fashion.

------------------
I am; therefore I think.

22. ### 666Registered Senior Member

Messages:
378
Boris,

I belive they sell a Slotket(sp?) for the Celeron, that allows it run in dual mode. I belive the website that I saw the review for it was at www.sysopt.com

[This message has been edited by 666 (edited November 02, 1999).]

23. ### DaveWRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
243
Boris,
SMP is not entirely dependant on the chipset. Certain processors are incapable of multiprocessing by design. Eg. the PowerPC G3. The Celeron is also not really SMP capable, though hardware hacks have been developed (eg. the slotket hack that 666 mentioned) to enable a dual-processor mode.

In fact, it was Be that really pioneered efforts for consumer-level implementation of SMP. Be started as a hardware/software company. They had a prototype BeBox computer (i'm not sure if it ever reached production) which was dual-processor. Be very quickly gave that up and focused entirely on software development.

On another front, Apple is very likely to release MP Macs based on the G4 (which is SMP-ready) early next year (perhaps even a MP iMac??). The new Mac OSX software is based on a UNIX core, and as such is able to take full advantage of SMP. And of course the Mac has far more apps & games than the BeOS.

I don't think that Intel is serious about MP in the consumer space, which is a serious error in judgement. I agree, if any moves are made in the Windows SMP space, they will be made by AMD.