What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

kubeos · Post by **kubeos** » Sun May 17, 2009 3:28 pm

Well, I guess I'm sticking with the name Kube. http://www.ikongui.com/kube

jal · Post by **jal** » Mon May 18, 2009 3:45 am

kubeos wrote:I wanted to post a screenshot of the GUI so far.. so here it is.

Hey, there's some windows hiding the important parts of that screen! :) More seriously though, I do not know any graphics card that allows a linear frame buffer, but does not allow 16bpp, so I think you are restricting yourself more than necessary.

JAL

ruisleipa · Post by **ruisleipa** » Mon May 18, 2009 3:46 am

Kubeos: I really would like to see the screenshot in better quality

kubeos · Post by **kubeos** » Mon May 18, 2009 5:46 pm

Hey, there's some windows hiding the important parts of that screen! More seriously though, I do not know any graphics card that allows a linear frame buffer, but does not allow 16bpp, so I think you are restricting yourself more than necessary.

Another reason for the 8bpp is I'm still learning about alpha blending. Once I've figured that out I'll be able to upgrade. Then you'll be able to see what's behind the windows without the scary 8bit colors.

jal · Post by **jal** » Tue May 19, 2009 5:24 am

kubeos wrote:Another reason for the 8bpp is I'm still learning about alpha blending. Once I've figured that out I'll be able to upgrade.

I would think that 8bpp is somewhat more difficult to manage, as you're stuck with palette stuff. Unless you treat it as 2:3:3 truecolour RGB, of course.

JAL

Combuster · Post by **Combuster** » Tue May 19, 2009 11:43 am

jal wrote:Unless you treat it as 2:3:3 truecolour RGB, of course.

In which case you have very (too) few bits to make alphablending look good.

Alpha blending of itself is unrelated to the framebuffer's bit depth though.

jal · Post by **jal** » Wed May 20, 2009 4:24 am

Combuster wrote:In which case you have very (too) few bits to make alphablending look good.

True, but then again, you have too few bits to make anything look good. It is an easy way to avoid palette issues though.

JAL

flyingdoodltartz · Post by **flyingdoodltartz** » Sat Jun 06, 2009 2:11 am

god you all have really nice OSes, i hope one day ill be able to post a screen shot

. have any of you written your kernel in strict assembly???? im taking my shot at it

(hopefully i live to tell the tail...

).

Troy Martin · Post by **Troy Martin** » Sat Jun 06, 2009 9:02 pm

flyingdoodltartz wrote:god you all have really nice OSes, i hope one day ill be able to post a screen shot . have any of you written your kernel in strict assembly???? im taking my shot at it (hopefully i live to tell the tail... ).

I have.

It sucked.

bontanu · Post by **bontanu** » Sat Jun 06, 2009 10:51 pm

flyingdoodltartz wrote:... have any of you written your kernel in strict assembly???? im taking my shot at it (hopefully i live to tell the tail... ).

Yes I do write SolarOS in strict assembly.

It is perfect.

In fact I was so happy with ASM that I have also written my own assembler and now I am fully independent of any kind of software tool "chain".

ASM is no road blocker IF you know the language very well.

However if you do not know your programming language of choice very well then you do have a big problem in OSdev no matter what language you choose.

Here you have 2 new screen shots on SolarOS (aka Solos) written in full/strict ASM only:

brodeur235 · Post by **brodeur235** » Sun Jun 07, 2009 12:07 am

Bontanu, where did you learn assembly? I would kill for a beautiful looking os like that. Another question... I am much better with masm syntax than I am with at&t asm, but I hate having to switch into windows every time I develop. Is there any way that I can continue using masm syntax and compile in ubuntu or leopard? All help is appreciated,

Brodeur235

bontanu · Post by **bontanu** » Sun Jun 07, 2009 12:53 am

brodeur235 wrote:Bontanu, where did you learn assembly?

I have an ability to learn and understand anything very fast by myself.

I would kill for a beautiful looking os like that.

Please do not

Nothing is worth killing for

Instead try to find something that you are good at and you enjoy doing it even if you gain nothing from it and "just do it".

If you are honest about and dedicated to OSdev then one day your should be able to have your own written OS that looks exactly as you like it to. It is not such a big deal.

Another question... I am much better with masm syntax than I am with at&t asm, but I hate having to switch into windows every time I develop. Is there any way that I can continue using masm syntax and compile in ubuntu or leopard? All help is appreciated,

You could use my own assembler Sol_Asm found here: http://www.oby.ro/sol_asm/index.html.
The syntax reference manual is here: http://www.oby.ro/sol_asm/docs/sol_asm_manual.htm

Sol_Asm is written in Sol_Asm and it has a built in syntax that is very similar to MASM (.if .elseif .endif , invoke, macros) but not exactly the same and some conversion and re-learning will be needed.

It is functional since I use it to write Solar_OS ... BUT be warned that there might be a lot of bugs present and/or non implemented instructions since it is still in "alpha" stages. (version 0.25.04)

The advantage of Sol_Asm are:
- it works on Windows, Linux, Unix, MacOSX, and Solar_OS,
- it is very fast for huge projects,
- I do offer support on the forums,
- it is actively developed and I do add valid user feature requests fast
- has the MASM like HLL syntax built in to help you start developing without a lot of macro includes.
- It is able to directly generate binary files located at absolute address
- It can and emit debug information embedded inside the binary or in plain text files to help debugging a hobby OS.
- It generates 16/32/64bits code and SSE up to 4.2.

As another MASM alternative you could use JWASM. AFAIK it is written in C and open source and eventually you could compile it for MacOSX? JWASM's advantage is that it is almost 100% syntax compatible with MASM... even the bugs are compatible. The main problem is that AFAIK it does not generate 64 bits code.

And you could also use FASM. AFAIK it does work on Linux/Unix/DOS and with a lot of macros you could have a syntax that is similar to MASM(but not exactly).

Again, NASM or YASM could also work with a lot of macros to simulate MASM like syntax.

Those are the available options IMHO ...

Another very useful tool is the RadASM IDE (windows only). It is very helpful for developing big ASM only projects.

PS. AFAIK MASM's license does NOT allow using it for developing another OS or applications for another OS.

Troy Martin · Post by **Troy Martin** » Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:25 am

And one again, bontanu's OS makes ours look like ****.

flyingdoodltartz · Post by **flyingdoodltartz** » Sun Jun 07, 2009 3:42 pm

yea, i thought making my os in strict assembly was going to be insanely long and pointless at first, but after coding it for 2 days in strict assembly, im really starting to love assembly

. in this past week i have learned tons about computers and programming. but so far my os isn't much (just a simple command parser). oo and your os is absolutely amazing bontanu.

earlz · Post by **earlz** » Sun Jun 07, 2009 5:44 pm

Wow are you kidding me... you implemented all that, but still haven't got around to implementing the keyboard

(according to website..)

Really great project and all... I don't like how it's closed source though(and a strict freeware license at that even)

Have you been working on this since 2001?

Also, I think Sol_ASM is a pretty neat project also.

One of those top best 2% projects there really..

OSDev.org

What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)