Dex is leaving, this forum

inflater · Post by **inflater** » Wed Apr 11, 2007 12:03 pm

www.dex4u.com

Dex has updated his site. You can find there an explanation of WebOS for those you dunno about, and more things.

inflater

ehird · Post by **ehird** » Wed Apr 11, 2007 12:44 pm

DexOS is a brand new operating system, based on a "true WebOS", by true i mean a WebOS that can also boot, like any other normal OS, as well as run some parts in a web browser.
This new WebOS will have a very small footprint, no bigger than 200k. This will include its own built in web browser, many servers, tcp/ip stack, ethernet drivers etc.
From the start, optimizing for both speed and size has been of paramount important in the over all design. To this end DexOS is coded fully in ASM. The entire kernel will fit into less than 100k.
DexOS is a bootable WebOS, that can be run from a floppy, cd/dvd, USB fob or direct from Hdd or from a web browser. It's got lots of built in functions and libs to help programmers.
You can boot it, without touching the underlining OS. There's a team of coder's working on tools to help you code. A full TCP/IP stack has been implemented. The way DexOS works, is it can be used locally or over the net, it does this by using servers for everything. Yes almost everything is a server or client, eg: if you want to load a file from hdd you go through a ftp server, even if it on the same PC. Even a lot of programs will be servers, this is our idea of a true WebOS, as well as the above we will be also deving our own way of sending info to servers, without needing to get a full page. Note: because of the design of DexOS, the server could just as easy be a window or linux or any other OS's server.

It's even worse than I thought. FTP?! Don't you people know anything about security? Or about protocol design and that ftp is an abortion of such?

Alboin · Post by **Alboin** » Wed Apr 11, 2007 1:09 pm

I think he used FTP figuratively to mean a sever type system.

~ · Post by ~ » Wed Apr 11, 2007 1:10 pm

ehird wrote:
DexOS is a brand new operating system, based on a "true WebOS", by true i mean a WebOS that can also boot, like any other normal OS, as well as run some parts in a web browser.
This new WebOS will have a very small footprint, no bigger than 200k. This will include its own built in web browser, many servers, tcp/ip stack, ethernet drivers etc.
From the start, optimizing for both speed and size has been of paramount important in the over all design. To this end DexOS is coded fully in ASM. The entire kernel will fit into less than 100k.
DexOS is a bootable WebOS, that can be run from a floppy, cd/dvd, USB fob or direct from Hdd or from a web browser. It's got lots of built in functions and libs to help programmers.
You can boot it, without touching the underlining OS. There's a team of coder's working on tools to help you code. A full TCP/IP stack has been implemented. The way DexOS works, is it can be used locally or over the net, it does this by using servers for everything. Yes almost everything is a server or client, eg: if you want to load a file from hdd you go through a ftp server, even if it on the same PC. Even a lot of programs will be servers, this is our idea of a true WebOS, as well as the above we will be also deving our own way of sending info to servers, without needing to get a full page. Note: because of the design of DexOS, the server could just as easy be a window or linux or any other OS's server.
It's even worse than I thought. FTP?! Don't you people know anything about security? Or about protocol design and that ftp is an abortion of such?

Sooner or later any network resource can be exploited in insecure ways. Although I wouldn't plan to implement an OS in such way, you should give a good pointer on how to implement security, to share your views.

But going this path, a P2P program like eMule could be considered a Web OS: it can interchange files, it has messaging, it has a built-in web server. The only things it lacks are real-time multimedia and dynamically generated content and the possibility to let one or another user to have read-only or read/write files and directories reciprocally.

This view seems to be the very same thing, and the only difference would be that the protocols and interfaces would be inside the kernel core instead of using some sort of P2P client.

There it's stated that even Windows and Linux can interact, but, maybe it would require to write clients for them, which in itself would be a suspicious pointer about it isn't required to merge such characteristics in a kernel, because if it can be satisfied by providing clients for other systems, then why would people migrate to the new WebOS if it doesn't offer anything an already existing OS can offer them? But if things are better, then good for it...

Tyler · Post by **Tyler** » Wed Apr 11, 2007 1:33 pm

ehird wrote:
DexOS is a brand new operating system, based on a "true WebOS", by true i mean a WebOS that can also boot, like any other normal OS, as well as run some parts in a web browser.
This new WebOS will have a very small footprint, no bigger than 200k. This will include its own built in web browser, many servers, tcp/ip stack, ethernet drivers etc.
From the start, optimizing for both speed and size has been of paramount important in the over all design. To this end DexOS is coded fully in ASM. The entire kernel will fit into less than 100k.
DexOS is a bootable WebOS, that can be run from a floppy, cd/dvd, USB fob or direct from Hdd or from a web browser. It's got lots of built in functions and libs to help programmers.
You can boot it, without touching the underlining OS. There's a team of coder's working on tools to help you code. A full TCP/IP stack has been implemented. The way DexOS works, is it can be used locally or over the net, it does this by using servers for everything. Yes almost everything is a server or client, eg: if you want to load a file from hdd you go through a ftp server, even if it on the same PC. Even a lot of programs will be servers, this is our idea of a true WebOS, as well as the above we will be also deving our own way of sending info to servers, without needing to get a full page. Note: because of the design of DexOS, the server could just as easy be a window or linux or any other OS's server.
It's even worse than I thought. FTP?! Don't you people know anything about security? Or about protocol design and that ftp is an abortion of such?

He has fucking cracked... The only reason this WebOS bullshit has any attention is because the Web is new to huge amount of the world right now, the second the novelty wears of and practicality sets back in, the fact that desktop computers are a million times power powerful then they need to be to just browse the web will rebalance the intelligence that has been sucked from the face of the Internet.

Brynet-Inc · Post by **Brynet-Inc** » Wed Apr 11, 2007 1:37 pm

I personally think Dex is a loon, Always have.. This isn't his most creative idea, Thats for sure..

~ · Post by ~ » Wed Apr 11, 2007 1:42 pm

Hey, but if such thing attracts the attention of the general public, why not then do a separate project of that nature, present it to the users in an effective way so they consume it and, we laugh behind their boxes while they pay us and while we build a monopoly on it?

Isn't it what Google is trying to do? A web-bases "desktop" that you can see through your browser?

Anyway, the one that gets to monopolize that market (if ever) will be able to bend it to its own needs (even implementing the very characteristics that really wants).

But, people could result reacting like that, they are simple... and the only way to introduce the ideas of oneself is to first monopolize by doing what has being conceived as a "WebOS" and then, start replacing it with what one really wants or needs.

ehird · Post by **ehird** » Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:36 pm

Google bends the web in interesting ways which often work. They're all minimalist and blend in with the web though.

Apart from gmail - that's just horrid.

bubach · Post by **bubach** » Wed Apr 11, 2007 6:22 pm

@Tyler, yes I've read his posts and spent time on his forum. And as you can see it's not a "WebOS" in the web 2.0 sense.

pcmattman · Post by **pcmattman** » Wed Apr 11, 2007 6:24 pm

ehird wrote:Google bends the web in interesting ways which often work. They're all minimalist and blend in with the web though.

Apart from gmail - that's just horrid.

GMail is good as an email service (2 gig space etc...) but the interface screams 'WEB 2.0!!!' and is quite frustratingly slow and tedious.

Google is like the king of web 2.0, almost everything they touch reeks of it.

binutils · Post by **binutils** » Wed Apr 11, 2007 6:25 pm

ppl bebind the google, plan9

Android Mouse · Post by **Android Mouse** » Wed Apr 11, 2007 6:27 pm

Belated april fools?

Kevin McGuire · Post by **Kevin McGuire** » Wed Apr 11, 2007 6:58 pm

I think the "Web OS" idea is a exaggeration of the current world's communication system on April 11, 2007. I expect applications to become more commonly streamed maybe to the point that no executable code will be downloaded onto the end user's machine with this being founded in the field of online gaming where I feel latency issues between the client and server colliding with the problem of exploiting data by malicious users could force the industry to move more and more processing power to central servers leaving just a shell that a online game might run in. You might pay sixty dollars for account creation up front to pay for that shiny new graphics hardware to sit in a two story building one hundred miles away where all the pixel data is calculated and transmitted over the communication lines. (streaming video and input)

It would allow the developers to cut out problems in patching and new data additions to their games. The problem of a user requiring special hardware would be eliminated (e.g. graphics accelerators). I imagine a reimbursement could be given for canceled accounts of that initial setup fee and that same graphics module plopped into that super computer might be reused for the next account creation.

It might help miniaturize hand held devices even further by removing the requirement of having to have storage devices on board.

I figure it depends on the cost of digital communication bandwidth and the availability of digital communication bandwidth which both are a problem in the world today.

However you still have latency issues which are hard to overcome. One from the fact that it still takes a certain amount of time for light to travel the circumference of the earth in a vacuum, and as you can guess copper wires and such are not a vacuum and electricity likes to slow down. So I am not sure about the entire computer being run remotely. It is still a high likely hood that things will tend to try and move in that direction.

Alboin · Post by **Alboin** » Wed Apr 11, 2007 7:21 pm

binutils wrote:ppl bebind the google, plan9

I can never understand your posts....

binutils · Post by **binutils** » Wed Apr 11, 2007 7:55 pm

:)

http://labs.google.com/people/r/