3 ms·

Well it wasn't as simple as "killed off by better competitors". It was actually both much better than Windows 98 and Mac OS at the time. But ultimately the dea

Well it wasn't as simple as "killed off by better competitors". It was actually both much better than Windows 98 and Mac OS at the time. But ultimately the deathblow came from Apple which, after struggling with low sales and poor quality software, almost chose to buy BeInc's tech but dropped it so they could bring in Steve Jobs. So it was more like vendor lock-in (Windows) and corporate deals (Apple) as well as failing partners (Palm).

DennisP 7y ago
Apple also dropped it because they couldn't come together on price, partly because BeOS was in a fairly unfinished state: > Apple's due diligence placed the value of Be at about $50 million and in early November it responded with a cash bid "well south of $100 million," according to Gassée. Be felt that Apple desperately needed its technology and Gassée's expertise. Apple noted that only $20 million had been invested in Be so far, and its offer represented a windfall, especially in light of the fact that the BeOS still needed three years of additional expensive development before it could ship (it didn't have any printer drivers, didn't support file sharing, wasn't available in languages other than English, and didn't run existing Mac applications). Direct talks between Amelio and Gassée broke down over price just after the Fall Comdex trade show, when Apple offered $125 million. Be's investors were said to be holding out for no less than $200 million, a figure Amelio considered "outrageous." > ...With Be playing hard to get, Apple decided to play hardball and began investigating other options. http://macspeedzone.com/archive/art/con/be.shtml http://macspeedzone.com/archive/art/con/be.shtml
city41 7y ago
Yeah, I feel saying "better competitors" really does Be a disservice. They largely failed due to an unfair playing field and very shady practices.

DennisP 7y ago

Apple also dropped it because they couldn't come together on price, partly because BeOS was in a fairly unfinished state: > Apple's due diligence placed the value of Be at about $50 million and in early November it responded with a cash bid "well south of $100 million," according to Gassée. Be felt that Apple desperately needed its technology and Gassée's expertise. Apple noted that only $20 million had been invested in Be so far, and its offer represented a windfall, especially in light of the fact that the BeOS still needed three years of additional expensive development before it could ship (it didn't have any printer drivers, didn't support file sharing, wasn't available in languages other than English, and didn't run existing Mac applications). Direct talks between Amelio and Gassée broke down over price just after the Fall Comdex trade show, when Apple offered $125 million. Be's investors were said to be holding out for no less than $200 million, a figure Amelio considered "outrageous." > ...With Be playing hard to get, Apple decided to play hardball and began investigating other options. http://macspeedzone.com/archive/art/con/be.shtml http://macspeedzone.com/archive/art/con/be.shtml

city41 7y ago

Yeah, I feel saying "better competitors" really does Be a disservice. They largely failed due to an unfair playing field and very shady practices.