A handfull of well known –to the BeOS community– developers have come together to create a new OS, which starts where BeOS left off. Bear in mind that this OS, named Sequel, is not a BeOS clone, but a brand new OS which adds new things in the mix while retains the best features found on BeOS and other OSes. The OS is closed source and it is in early stages: it currently boots off a floppy and has a shell. Editor’s note: I am part of the small team, since its first days, a few months ago. I designed part of the UI for this OS, but I am looking forward to get a working GUI system before I dive in and do some “real” work on the UI and usability. Stay tuned for more news about Sequel in the future. UPDATE: Please note that this is NOT “my” project. I merely help out the guys on the UI, and nothing more. UPDATE 2: March 2003: I have resigned of my role on Sequel.
Group is Working on a BeOS ‘Sequel’
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
First off, at last we’re gonna have some fun!! Good Luck Eugenia, I hope this takes off, what about ideas that we might have how shall we send it to you guys?
Please note that this is not “my” project. I merely help with the UI, I am not truly part of the core team.
Hehe, i wrote about his “rumour-news” 3 months ago:
http://www.qube.ru/index.html?i=361
Luckily, nobody reads russian:)
But it helped me in understanding, why Eugenia is jealous sometimes about other post-BeOS projects
Luis, I think you don’t argue against open-source with this, but against the GPL license model. If you consider e.g. OpenBeOS’ MIT license, you could have closed source drivers et al without any problems. Plus, all your efforts wouldn’t be for naught because the closed-source OS went belly up.
You’re right, I don’t argue with OpenSource projects, but license models.
If the idea behind this new OS is be commercial or later change to some sort of opensource, good for them.
How about releasing your ported apps (and drivers?) once OpenBeOS is usable? It will be R5-compatible after all…
We have discussed that with our team, and we will.
Any new project must be encouraged, not flamed. That is what I thought of course.
OBOS is a project that I follow very close.
Interested in Sequel too, time will tell.
Luis Lavena
MMediaSys
I seriously SERIOUSLY wonder about all these people that scream “RELEASE THE SOURCE”, and when the developers say “NO” they reply with screams and rants and raving about how people simply MUST follow their model for application development and spend lines upon lines of text bandwidth trying to justify themselves. IF you will only use an open source OS, then FINE, 100% FINE, Use Linux, or a BSD flavour thats open source but leave other people ALONE and stop preaching your ideology on others, It’s getting OLD and alot of us are getting VERY VERY sick of it!. Please, respect the work and time of others and if you disagree with such and such, then thats FINE, your entitled to do so, but stop whining about it, We’ve heard it all too often already.
The replies to those that argue in favour of open source are amazing. They show either a complete misunderstanding of what open source is (generally taking GPL as the only possible open source license in existance) or saying “look elsewhere”.
All I can say about this issue is: (i) I am not in need for another OS. I don’t request a BeOS clone or “sequel”. But (ii) if a project is announced here, it is my right to comment on decisions that have been made and my duty to correct the most serious misunderstandings posted here. Announcements lead to comments that’s the way sites like OSNews work. Don’t complain it you don’t like what others say and don’t announce if you don’t want to get comments at all. I for myself am not demanding the source code but if it is not under an open source license I may as well state my reason to refuse any help. As I said in a previous post — we already have a successful commercial OS out there. To loose my heart to an alternative it has to be open.
Regards.
As a windows user, I expect for a long time something else than windows. I believed in a “BeOS revival”, understand a desktop UI with a consistant set of widgets. (I installed BeOS PE on my windows platform. Less than ten minutes after, I used and enjoyed it).
I qualify myself as a power end user. A end user because I’m using an OS as a black box, but a power user because I’m able to program the Fourier transform of a discrete function and to desplay its graphical representation on a screen.
In other words, I do not care about the kernel, the file system, the icon format of an OS. I need a consistent os and a programming language with a GUI library.
It is a pity to see all these different “BeOS projects”. A new BeOS branch will only bring confusion and delays a new usable desktop OS.
Meanwhile I keep developping applications, not for the windows community but for the community of windows users.
PS Do not suggest me to try Linux, I never understood if I had to choose between GNOME or KDE.
Why don’t many of you give these people a break? Not matter how many times they say it is not a BeOS clone or replacement, some of you cannot seem to grasp that. So, they announce this project they’re working on and they get flamed and tared and feathered. Give them a break! They’re probably sorry they even announced it now.
K9-27 wrote:
what about ideas that we might have how shall we send it to you guys?
Just post your ideas in the forum on our website!
http://www.xentronix.com/module.php?mod=forums
You can also send feedback from this site or mail directly [email protected]
Joyce Notenboom
Being that Sequel is not a BeOS clone, I wonder why whoever posted the news chose to use the BeOS icon on the front page of osnews.com?
I believe that does contribute to the confusion.
Koki
Apart from OpenBeOS, which has specifically announced that it wants to create an almost exact copy of BeOS R5, every other project out there builds on the BeOS ideas but does not clone it. Same with Sequel.
So basically, we never had “lots of BeOS clones”, we always had “lots of BeOS sequels”. And now there’s another one.
As far as I’m concerned, YellowTAB’s Zeta is the only real sequel. Yes, their site is unprofessional. Yes, they should shut up more often. Yes, we dont know if it’s 100% legal or not. But it still is the only one that follows the BeOS tradition most closely.
> But it helped me in understanding, why Eugenia is jealous sometimes about other post-BeOS projects
I am NOT jealous of ANY project. I don’t give a flying monkey what the others do, I don’t even care much about Sequel. I just contribute my UI suggestions, and I go my way each time. I said that I will help them when I am needed, and that’s what I do and nothing more. The last time I contributed anything to Sequel was THREE months ago.
So, STOP making STUPID assumptions about “jealousy” or “camps”, cause you don’t have a clue what you are talking about. >:(
…It’s ironic to me that everyone’s screaming “OPEN SOURCE IT! There IS no other way! Gwar, Resistance is Futile, you WILL be Open Sourced!” …And here we thought MICROSOFT was the Borg.
I’m not going to claim to understand the ins and outs of Open Source — I admit I do equate it largely with the GPL, although I’m aware there are other licenses out there. But stating that “all your work will be for naught if it’s not open source” is a load of tripe.
In effect, it seems like it’ll be “closed source” so the programmers can worry about actually, God forbid, concentrate on PROGRAMMING, rather than worrying about coordinating other peoples’ work. This is a Hobby OS, rather than some grand chance at slamming Windows off the Desktop, after all.
Then there’s the “shared source” that will allow folks in the future to make drivers and apps. I believe this is what will give Sequel the biggest chance at being something more than a Hobby OS if it’s ever desired. Open Source is wonderful, fine. But hackers aren’t really known for making pretty software that’s super user-friendly either.
I would love to see what Eugenia came up with for a possible UI, but I understand the reasonings behind not wanting to share that info yet. I mean hell, as ‘wonderful’ as the Dock is in OS X, there’s a work-a-like for Windows 2K and XP alreay, zDock. Nothing to do with a UI is really ‘sacred’ anymore, as I confess I even had an Aqua-like theme for Windows XP for a while there.
I thought the idea of the Open Source community was to be supportive, and share with each other. It was supposed to be some nice, open community with a lot of good will and sharing. Not “if it’s not open source, it’s EVIL! It’s WORTHLESS! I won’t waste my time on it!” I don’t know where this mentality came from, but it’s really starting to turn me away and back to my “worthless closed source” community, while I secretly try to learn GCC and do some work of my own.
Open Source is, to be sure, a wonderful thing in the right situations. But the problem with it is, no matter what the license — it gives anyone a chance to “fork” the code off into their own work, and I can understand why that’s not wanted at this point in development.
Being that Sequel is not a BeOS clone, I wonder why whoever posted the news chose to use the BeOS icon on the front page of osnews.com?
I believe that does contribute to the confusion.
Well, not only icon. The topic isn’t really clear and correct, which making many people’s thought wrong.
It will be confused with SQL, since it’s commonly pronounced as sequel.
I’m no good with words, still after reading all the posts I just had to try and say something.
I say putato and you say potato. Who’s right? We could discuss it to decide, hell who knows even go to war about it but what good would that do? The same is happening here one says OpenBeOS another Sequel, one says Open Source another says Closed Source. Why can’t we accept each other’s opinions and respect them? Our basic goals are the same we all want a new OS that will replace our beloved but defunct BeOS, we are just taking different roads.
Came on people let’s rise above our differences and help / encourage each other.
Zeta uses licensed code from Be Inc. and Palm.
As mentioned previously by others it is effectively BeOS R6, but with added drivers and apps.
So if you want to experience the way BeOS would have ended up if Be Inc. had have continued with it, buy Zeta.
You’ll like it.
If it’s a separate OS, nothing to do with BeOS whatsoever, then fine, keep it that way and please, don’t even mention BeOS of OpenBeOS in your presentations, don’t confuse people (just look at beosjournal.org to see how confusing the whole Sequel issue was).
If, however, in addition to being an OS incompatible with BeOS, it also aims (even if inadvertedly) at diluting the efforts going into OpenBeOS, then fuck Sequel.
Sequel doesn’t “dilute” any efforts of OBOS or anything like that. It is a completely seperate project and has nothing to do with anyothing else but itself.
Hey moooooooo
It’s not made by Be.Inc. so it can’t be BeOS. BeOS is over. The vision and savvy that Be Inc. had doesn’t come along very often. What chance YellowTab has it? 0.1%. It just isn’t going to be the same. You know that.