I first of BeOS in "Boot"(Nov.'97). I'm curious as to where one would
find it? Is it on CD?
Perhaps I'll install it along OS/2 and Linux.
Regards,
Bob
lunaslide wrote:
>
> At 06:55 AM 12/26/98 -0500, you wrote:
> >
> >I was just wondering........
> >
> >How does Linux stack up against BeOS?
> >
> >I mean't in the terms of let's say a server or a http server.
> >
> >Is is possible to adminsiter BeOS as a good server of any kind?!
>
> Now? No. In the future? Definitely.
>
> There are a couple of different issues:
>
> Applications:
> It is very easy to port UNIX apps over to Be, so eventually, people wanting to use
>it as a server for whatever will be able to. Also, the programming interface is
>*really* nice, so before long, some GUI implementations of http, ftp, NFS, samba and
>other servers should be avilable, making system admin a snap. But for now, the apps
>aren't there yet.
>
> Security:
> Currently, Be is only a single user OS. The engineers tell us that the foundation
>for a multiuser enviornment is already in the OS, but they have chosen to hold off on
>it for awhile, probably due to debugging and programming issues.
> Also, there is no empasis on network security that I know of. If there truly isn't
>any security in it like UNIX, this automatically means that it is unsuitable for a
>server to the outside world.
>
> Drivers:
> Very limited at this point. Each release brings more. R4 is the first version I
>can run on my dual processor machine because SCSI support is finally here.
>
> Networking:
> It's networking is immature, but sure to improve. At the moment, I would guess that
>linux has the faster networking by a mile.
>
> Performance:
> It screams. It totally puts linux to shame in terms of raw speed. There are
>several reasons for this:
>
> a) a 64 bit journaling filesystem which behaves like a database when searched or
>queried
>
> b) an application and windowing structure that are tuned for performance and take
>over most of the functionality of an application, leaving it to do it's intended
>purpose
>
> c) a kernel that was written on multiprocessor systems and takes advantage of more
>recent advances in multithreading theory and application.
>
> d) an application support layer that allows even non multithreaded applications to
>be threaded by the kernel.
>
> There are many other reasons. The short answer is that its a new OS, unconcerned
>with legacy issues and therefore built on the newest OS technologies for the most
>recent archetectures.
>
> The downside of that is that it's not mature yet and needs apps. I believe the apps
>will come because its such a fine OS that people will want to write for it just
>because (sound familiar?). It is not open source, but it is extremely well
>documented for programmers.
>
> I don't believe it will supplant linux for many reasons. Linux is not just about
>performance and speed. It's about Free Software. Linux is a far more mature OS with
>thousands of apps to make it suitable for many types of jobs.
>
> I still suggest you try Be, though. Look at the supported hardware carefully first.
>
> -
> To get out of this list, please send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
> Check out the SuSE-FAQ at http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/ and the
> archiv at http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html
-
To get out of this list, please send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Check out the SuSE-FAQ at http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/ and the
archiv at http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html
