OSDev.org

Hey i am skyteknology.com I am New developer i am trying to search with what i can do an os like windows Vista and xp

you can throw both in a garbage bin Seriously you can do anything you like, but what has that to with osdevving ? But if you wish to develop an OS like vista or XP then i would say that you at least need a lot af dedication and about 15 years of your time.

Well it took *all* the OS Developers in Microsoft ~23 years to come up with XP. Let's say there were only 1000 of them. If each of the developers has been working on this from 9 to 5 for 5 days each week, then we will have:


Each year = 12 months
Each month = 4 Weeks
Each week = 5 working days
Each working days = 9 hours of work.

12 * 4 * 5 * 9 = 2160 (hours per year for each programmer)

2160 Hours per programmer for each year. Assuming there were only 1000 programmers working on that project for 23 years:

2160 * 1000 * 23 = 49680000 hours of work in total (With assumptions)


Now let's say you work on this project 24 hours per day, 7 days a week (24/7). Then:


49680000 / 24 = 2070000 days or
5671.23 ~ 5671 years.

So you will have to work 24 hours per day for 5671 years to be able to write Windows XP.

Instead of writing an OS like XP or Vista, why not just buy XP or Vista? o_0 Seriously.

Instead of creating an OS like another OS, why not just develop your own? After all, is that not the reason you would want to develop an OS in the first place?

Of course, you can provide some compatibility with Windows (Such as filesystem), but make your own OS

Why on earth would you want to re-invent an OS?
Improving on an OS is one thing, and so is adding in functionality and support for an OS, but making a replica or something so close that it is hard to signify which is which is a rediculous idea that has almost no real gains or benifits.

01000101 wrote:Why on earth would you want to re-invent an OS?
Improving on an OS is one thing, and so is adding in functionality and support for an OS, but making a replica or something so close that it is hard to signify which is which is a rediculous idea that has almost no real gains or benifits.

So says the guy reinventing SmoothWall?

Microsoft is not a good example of the standard by which to abide for defining the time it takes to make an OS.
They releases OSes at a regular pace, and each os release is done to exploit more the new hardware. It's not a matter of "it took microsoft 20 years so it will take you 5000 years", NO! If you want to make a multitasking, multithreading OS with an interface similar to XP, I would say one year is a reasonable time frame. For vista it's more difficult since there's the 3d cards for them you need to write drivers. YOu also need to write network support for your os to be like microsoft's.
But please remember, The microsoft operating system is plagued with politics, negociations, legacy support and all that, and if making an operating system just like what microsoft did is really what you want, Im sure you can do it in less time microsoft did it, if you work on it full time. But about this particular opensource operating system that just want to be exactly like windows, I don't know. Reactos is its name, http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html

wow, way to go Messiah. You managed to sound like an @$$ all while staying grossly off-topic.

I'm not re-inventing smoothwall at all. You have no idea what my OS does. Think before you speak.

01000101 wrote:wow, way to go Messiah. You managed to sound like an @$$ all while staying grossly off-topic.

I'm not re-inventing smoothwall at all. You have no idea what my OS does. Think before you speak.

I in particular didn't like your previous comments. I am making a POSIX clone, but it attempts to be smaller and faster than other POSIX clones (and I have a different IPC model, among other things).

You can 'clone' something, and still have things completely different under the hood.

JamesM wrote:You can 'clone' something, and still have things completely different under the hood.

I agree. A person may install Minix on one machine and Linux on another and think they're the same, just because they both start Bash upon logging in, and they both run their favourite KDE office utility. While it might seem similar to the end user, they are completely different under the hood.

Haven't any of you heard of the expression "Shot for the moon, so that even if you miss you will land among the stars."?

@the original poster
Have you looked at the Getting Started page in the wiki? Also you should check out the wealth of knowledge at http://www.osdever.net/index.php