As others looked into the past, ExtremeTech is looking forward to 2003, asking: What’s in store for desktop operating systems? Will Linux and Mac OS X go the way of OS/2, or is Windows doomed?
As others looked into the past, ExtremeTech is looking forward to 2003, asking: What’s in store for desktop operating systems? Will Linux and Mac OS X go the way of OS/2, or is Windows doomed?
OS X will continue to hold its share in the market.
Linux will continue to hold its share in the market.
Mordor$oft will continue to hold its share in the market.
What will really be interesting is what the numbers look like in 3-5 years.
If Apple’s upper management would show some real huevos and go for a slightly lower profit margin on computers and take some real steps to avoid losing the education market, they could be up to a 10% user share. OS X is cracktacular and as powerful as it is friendly.
I think Linux will be the real OS to watch. The fact that various German state govt’s have made a push for it, as well as various Indian state govt’s could make for some very exciting developments for a more user friendly front end. Hard core users will still be able to “roll their own”, but this could lead to the first easy to use and powerful Linux desktop.
As soon as this happens, and the software heavy hitters start writing more and more apps for Linux … well, I don’t think this will be a Mordor$oft killer, but I don’t think that a 10-15% userbase is out of the question.
>BeForever is dead?
My mistake, I wanted to say Beoscentral.
But, still, no updates on beforever since November.
(like anything happened on BeOS scene since November..).
Makes me wonder how many of these “BeOS has more users than ever before!” kinda guys even know what those sites where…
Rajan r:
> The last I went there, it was mostly alpha software. None as functional as those I can get from Linux and better still from Windows.
Yes, but there have some completes apps. (700 around)
> That I really have to see.
Hey! not forget: see BlueEyedOS too
Nikola Pizurica:
> Where did you get that info from?
> There is no info about that on YT web site.
Well, I know a little about Palm’s contract with YT..
and yes, is Dano.
> My mistake, I wanted to say Beoscentral.
> But, still, no updates on beforever since November.
> (like anything happened on BeOS scene since November..).
Yes, but was end of year. I also not appeared here for days.
I was busy with my girlfriend, high school, short travels, familiars, etc.
Thies:
> Totally agree on the point that there have never been as few BeOS users as now.
I too. How many? 1.000, maybe less…
Michael Vinícius de Oliveira
BlueEyedOS Webmaster
Maybe you right, everyone just forget about switching from MS to Linux. Because Windows has already won.
*sigh* sarcasm doesn’t work on you it seems.
oh i get my own medicine, I’m usually the sacastic one in the bunch..
cheers everyone.
Yes, but there have some completes apps. (700 around)
There is nearly 40 image viewers. Do I need them? Nope. Lately I have been using Office a lot (during the past two months no, because it was the holidays, but when school starts trust me, it would spike up). Does gobeProductive 2.0 have any of the features I really need? Nope.
lately too I have been using a lot of Photoshop. Is there anything on BeOS the level of Photoshop Elements? Okay, let’s make it easy on you, the level of The GIMP?
But the single most application I use is a browser. Is there any decent browser on BeOS? The most functional (i.e. ready) browser is BeZilla, certainly not an example of stability. Although I use Opera, I don’t mind something the level of functionallity of Internet Explorer… nothing of that sort.
Hey! not forget: see BlueEyedOS too
Yeah. Nothing really out, and even if B.E.OS is a success technically, it would stick as a hobby OS with its license.
Well, I know a little about Palm’s contract with YT..
and yes, is Dano.
I know little about Palm’s dealings with YT, but really you didn’t provide me with proof that Zeta is indeed R6/Dano.
I know little about Palm’s dealings with YT, but really you didn’t provide me with proof that Zeta is indeed R6/Dano.
As far as I’m concerned it doesn’t even matter. they aren’t as far as I can see shipping a product yet. and unless they release some stripped down version I can use to test if the OS will run flawlessly on my current hardware I won’t even consider buying a full version.
If they a year after the initial release are still around, applications are flourishing and the OS got accepted I’m quite certain I’ll give it a try. But definitely not now.
I don’t think Windows is doomed by any means. Anyone who thinks so is woefully short on business acumen. Why don’t you so-called MAC people and so-called Linux diehards just accept the fact that Windows is “king of the hill” and will be for a long time. Remember, not everyone out there wants to be an administrator, “tweak” the OS, or cares about the underlying operating system. The average computer user needs it to do simply perform the tasks needed to be productive.
I am primarily a Windows NT/2000 administrator but have also begun working with Redhat and have some experience with the MAC OS. I believe in the old adage “the right tool for the right job”. Some things Linux & MACs do very well and some things they don’t no matter what anyone believes.
Stop fighting the system and work with what is out there. No one wants to hear a bunch of cry babies and their daily rants!! I think Microsoft does a very good job at issuing patches, service releases, and knowledgebase info.
If you want a superior, more marketable OS then write one yourself and be able to market it very well.
With regards to BeOS and it’s future offspring, I’m taking a wait and see approach. Nothing has made using a computer as easy and painless as BeOS but with my current hardware, running it ain’t feasable.
I hope that Zeta and OpenBeOS continue the legacy and maybe oneday soon I will be able to use BeOS again and in a pro audio setup because Windows XP sucks in this regard. Still untill the OS’s come out and then get the apps written for them, I’m stuck with XP. There have been some great developments on the BeOS front with regards to audio but until that translates into something usable with Drivers/apps, they will just be points of interest.
Now for Quark, who cares? Adobe has obliterated Quark Express with Indesign 2.0 and it’s only going to get better. Not to mention that Quark are assholes when it comes to upgrades and the cost of entry for Quark Express is 2 times that of the bloody Design collection by Adobe which gives you 4 usefull and complimentary packages for Graphic Design and Pre Press. If you don’t like Adobe then try MAcromedia or Corel as they both have packages that can get the job done but unless Quark does something drastic with their software and pricing, they are headded the way of the dinosaur.
PS, I use PC’s in Pre Press design not Macs but the tools are pretty much the same on both platforms and as long as you use Open Type fonts or outline your fonts, there is really no issue between the two of them. I think PCs can do the job better at a lower price point but that is me.
Linux, well personally I say go Redhat for innovation on the desktop but if the benefits are then redistributed into the community, all the better. I have used Debian and I will say this of it, it is the easiest distribution I have used and the least problemattic. Personally I’m not a great Linux fan only because I don’t see Linux at the moment being used for what I want, audio creation. If this changes drastically in the future then I will embrace it whole heartedly but definately, not in it’s current state. Now a future version of BeOS/Zeta running Nuendo or Cubase SX with Multichannel audio support the likes being developed (lebuzz.com) then I would be in heaven.
p.s. forgot the addition of OpenGL and Il2 Sturmovick/FB for BeOS/Zeta, then I really would be in Heaven (-:
Happy New Year all and may it break our bonds to proprietry hardware/software.
Unless the linux crowd starts filling out those pay-pal forms for the small number of games that they are currently enjoying, there won’t be many more games for linux.
Pay your way and you’ll see lots of games.
Nobody is going to spend all that time on programming and artwork, and music , etc, etc if they can’t feed themselves with the result of thier work.
Well, while most people say InDesign 2.0 is great, better than Quark, blah blah blah, you can’t deny that not many are willing to switch to InDesign. They probably shift slowly. But yeah, I think that company is going in the way of WordPerfect and Lotus 1-2-3, while InDesign is bound to be the next Office.
Idiot,
Ah yes, rudeness, the last bastion of a person who’s argument has been lost.
the P4 Xeon and P4 are 2 DIFFERENT processors.
I never said they weren’t. Your orginal, incorrect post, said, “1) AMD supports SMP, P4 doesn’t you have to use P3s.” which is completely false. There are P4 class chips that do SMP. You do not have to go down to P3 chips to get SMP on Intel.
I could be wrong, maybe standard P4s do support dual processing, like the P3s did. Maybe P4s only support dual processing, not 8 way like the Xeons. I’m too lazy to do the research.
Nice back pedaling here on your part. You take a position, get rude and defensive when it’s proven wrong, change your argument to try and prop up your position, and then topple the whole thing over yourself by admiting that you are lazy and haven’t done any research on the subject.
Dual AMD MP processors generally out benchmark dual Xeons on any worthwhile benchmark. Why anyone would buy a dual Xeon setup is beyond me, unless they have shares in Intel.
Yet another piece of attempted misdirection on your part. You have (up until that back pedal paragraph) held out that AMD is better than Intel because P4s don’t do SMP (among other false claims that you posted). I pointed out to you that while there are P4 class chips that do SMP, you can’t put any old AMD chips together on an SMP board and get it to work. AMD chips suffer from the exact problem you’re trying to lay as a flaw on Intel chips.
Saying vague and false statements about un-named benchmark suites results doesn’t argue at all against the fact that AMD chips are not all SMP capable and that you conveniently forgot to mention that.
All of the statements about Intel chips in your original post (#20 in this discussion thread) are false.