5 ms·

Correction, BeOS was killed. I’ll never get over Microsoft getting in trouble for including a browser in Windows but not for forcing companies to not allow BeOS

Correction, BeOS was killed. I’ll never get over Microsoft getting in trouble for including a browser in Windows but not for forcing companies to not allow BeOS to be installed when it was getting legs.

limagnolia 7mo ago
I studied the MS antitrust case extensively when it was happening, and I agree that the abuse against BeOS was MS greatest antitrust offense. However, as a fan of BeOS, I see no evidence at all that Be Inc. would have been successful if MS hadn't abused its position. Unfortunately we will never really know what might have been.
- tvaughan 7mo ago
  OS/2 Warp was out before Windows 95, and better.
  - pjmlp 7mo ago
    If we ignore the fact that it required 1000 euros more in additional hardware, thus most folks went with DOS/Windows 3.x instead, and when Windows 95 came around it was already too late for adoption.
    - hamburglar 7mo ago
      To pick a nit, I highly doubt you bought your OS/2 hardware with euros. :D
      - pjmlp 7mo ago
        If I used Escudos it would be useless for the folks reading my comment.
        hamburglar 7mo ago
        It’s ok. The pedantry was unavoidable.
        mikestorrent 7mo ago
        Not so, now I know the pre-EU denomination of Portguese currency
    - Shebanator 7mo ago
      Exactly: it depends on what you mean by "better". OS/2 had a much more modern basis, but: * it was painful to program compared to Windows * it required a lot more hardware (and thus money) to achieve the same level of performance. * the UI was terrible
  - tobinfricke 7mo ago
    I ran OS/2 Warp and was a fan of it... But to say that it was simply "better" than Windows 95 is a bridge too far. It had its strengths (rock solid multitasking) but also plenty of rough edges.
    - tensor 7mo ago
      Honestly any OS with real multi-tasking, real security, and real memory protection was better than Windows 95 (and 98). OS/2 was better. BeOS was better. Linux was better. Windows NT was better.
      - markus_zhang 7mo ago
        It was just the games were on 95.
- tialaramex 7mo ago
  Yeah, Be Inc. made no sense at all for its own purposes. The reason it existed is that Apple (yes, that one) had fired one of its executives - Jean-Louis Gassée often abbreviated to "JLG" - and he wanted to show they were wrong. AIUI the intended exit was either an acquihire (Apple gets JLG back and the Be Inc. "journey" ends once people tidy up) or maybe Apple's software side fully embraces Be Inc. (after all JLG is sure he's correct about what Apple should do) and absorbs the entire entity as Be's operating system BeOS becomes the new Apple OS. That part isn't crazy, it's the early 1990s, affordable CPUs have virtual memory support, the physical size limit is looming, software reliability is worsening, Apple's 1980s co-operative multi-tasking operating system is not up to the job. If you understand the big picture it's obvious that you want something closer in principle to a Unix. You could hire somebody to build one (as Microsoft had for "Windows NT") or some people might build one in their bedrooms (Linux) or you could buy one which already exists, so, that's what Be Inc. set out to be. In the end Apple decided that if they're going to re-hire an executive who they have fired previously it should be Steve Jobs. The moment they've made that decision, Be Inc. was superfluous -- JLG knows Steve isn't going to hire him, Steve hates him, so next the priority now is to help the money get out so that investors will continue talking to JLG. Fortunately the Dot Com bubble happened, Be floated on typical bubble era nonsense, about how their system is somehow perfect for the Internet, and that was enough for the big money to get out, leaving the wreck for the poor Be fans who were still buying even after the last dregs were gone.
  - dnautics 7mo ago
    jlg posts here occasionally! im pretty grateful to beos for proving a young me with an offramp from MS architecture that got me using cli, understanding api architectures, making it easy to tinker, etc.
  - fouc 7mo ago
    NeXTSTEP was developed from 1989 and then acquired by Apple in late 1996. BeOS first release was Oct 1995. Perhaps BeOS just wasn't far enough along in comparison? Shame..
chem83 7mo ago
I learned recently that Hitachi actually shipped computers that would dual-boot into Windows 98 and BeOS R4, except that Microsoft's license didn't allow for dual-boot, so the option was removed from the bootloader (or, rather, the Microsoft bootloader was defaulted to, instead of the Be bootloader). It wasn't that hard to boot into Be, but I suppose most users wouldn't bother because all games and applications were on Windows anyway. Ultimately, lack of apps was probably what held it back, although Microsoft's commercial practices definitely played a role in curbing OEMs and app developers. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitachi_Flora_Prius https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitachi_Flora_Prius * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44217322 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44217322

limagnolia 7mo ago

I studied the MS antitrust case extensively when it was happening, and I agree that the abuse against BeOS was MS greatest antitrust offense. However, as a fan of BeOS, I see no evidence at all that Be Inc. would have been successful if MS hadn't abused its position. Unfortunately we will never really know what might have been.

tvaughan 7mo ago
OS/2 Warp was out before Windows 95, and better.
- pjmlp 7mo ago
  If we ignore the fact that it required 1000 euros more in additional hardware, thus most folks went with DOS/Windows 3.x instead, and when Windows 95 came around it was already too late for adoption.
  - hamburglar 7mo ago
    To pick a nit, I highly doubt you bought your OS/2 hardware with euros. :D
    - pjmlp 7mo ago
      If I used Escudos it would be useless for the folks reading my comment.
      - hamburglar 7mo ago
        It’s ok. The pedantry was unavoidable.
      - mikestorrent 7mo ago
        Not so, now I know the pre-EU denomination of Portguese currency
  - Shebanator 7mo ago
    Exactly: it depends on what you mean by "better". OS/2 had a much more modern basis, but: * it was painful to program compared to Windows * it required a lot more hardware (and thus money) to achieve the same level of performance. * the UI was terrible
- tobinfricke 7mo ago
  I ran OS/2 Warp and was a fan of it... But to say that it was simply "better" than Windows 95 is a bridge too far. It had its strengths (rock solid multitasking) but also plenty of rough edges.
  - tensor 7mo ago
    Honestly any OS with real multi-tasking, real security, and real memory protection was better than Windows 95 (and 98). OS/2 was better. BeOS was better. Linux was better. Windows NT was better.
    - markus_zhang 7mo ago
      It was just the games were on 95.
tialaramex 7mo ago
Yeah, Be Inc. made no sense at all for its own purposes. The reason it existed is that Apple (yes, that one) had fired one of its executives - Jean-Louis Gassée often abbreviated to "JLG" - and he wanted to show they were wrong. AIUI the intended exit was either an acquihire (Apple gets JLG back and the Be Inc. "journey" ends once people tidy up) or maybe Apple's software side fully embraces Be Inc. (after all JLG is sure he's correct about what Apple should do) and absorbs the entire entity as Be's operating system BeOS becomes the new Apple OS. That part isn't crazy, it's the early 1990s, affordable CPUs have virtual memory support, the physical size limit is looming, software reliability is worsening, Apple's 1980s co-operative multi-tasking operating system is not up to the job. If you understand the big picture it's obvious that you want something closer in principle to a Unix. You could hire somebody to build one (as Microsoft had for "Windows NT") or some people might build one in their bedrooms (Linux) or you could buy one which already exists, so, that's what Be Inc. set out to be. In the end Apple decided that if they're going to re-hire an executive who they have fired previously it should be Steve Jobs. The moment they've made that decision, Be Inc. was superfluous -- JLG knows Steve isn't going to hire him, Steve hates him, so next the priority now is to help the money get out so that investors will continue talking to JLG. Fortunately the Dot Com bubble happened, Be floated on typical bubble era nonsense, about how their system is somehow perfect for the Internet, and that was enough for the big money to get out, leaving the wreck for the poor Be fans who were still buying even after the last dregs were gone.
- dnautics 7mo ago
  jlg posts here occasionally! im pretty grateful to beos for proving a young me with an offramp from MS architecture that got me using cli, understanding api architectures, making it easy to tinker, etc.
- fouc 7mo ago
  NeXTSTEP was developed from 1989 and then acquired by Apple in late 1996. BeOS first release was Oct 1995. Perhaps BeOS just wasn't far enough along in comparison? Shame..

chem83 7mo ago

I learned recently that Hitachi actually shipped computers that would dual-boot into Windows 98 and BeOS R4, except that Microsoft's license didn't allow for dual-boot, so the option was removed from the bootloader (or, rather, the Microsoft bootloader was defaulted to, instead of the Be bootloader). It wasn't that hard to boot into Be, but I suppose most users wouldn't bother because all games and applications were on Windows anyway. Ultimately, lack of apps was probably what held it back, although Microsoft's commercial practices definitely played a role in curbing OEMs and app developers. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitachi_Flora_Prius https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitachi_Flora_Prius * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44217322 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44217322