OSDev.org

So, put the laptop to sleep rather than shutting it down. That's the way a lot of people work.

Guys - if you don't like Windows the answer is simple; don't use it. No-one is forcing you to. But continued religious arguments about it on forums like this are a real drag.

Hi,


Which religious arguments?

Mostly, now a year after that notorious thread, I think I'm more headed towards "every OS is bad, they are just bad in different ways". Right now, I just happened to criticise Windows, but it's true that many Linux distros are hard to setup (I haven't used Gentoo so I can't speak specifically for it).


Regards,
glauxosdever

glauxosdever wrote:Right now, I just happened to criticise Windows, but it's true that many Linux distros are hard to setup (I haven't used Gentoo so I can't speak specifically for it).

A lot of distros are no harder to install than Windows. Pick a locale, pick a disk to install everything to and enter a username/password/hostname.

Hi,

matt11235 wrote:

glauxosdever wrote:Right now, I just happened to criticise Windows, but it's true that many Linux distros are hard to setup (I haven't used Gentoo so I can't speak specifically for it).

A lot of distros are no harder to install than Windows. Pick a locale, pick a disk to install everything to and enter a username/password/hostname.

It doesn't contradict my point - it actually complements it. Both of our points were referring to parts of the total number of Linux distros.

In fact, I'm using Debian 8 currently and, if we exclude installing a driver capable of setting a native screen resolution, it was about as hard as finalising installation of Windows 8.1.


Regards,
glauxosdever

iansjack wrote:So, put the laptop to sleep rather than shutting it down. That's the way a lot of people work.

A lot of people only know how to make it shut down. There's also the worry of draining battery even if overheating isn't an issue (and then risking not having enough battery if you later use it without plugging it in, e.g. in case of a hurry so you can't afford to plug it in). Or really, just don't assume people are always taking the smartest decision all the time.

The annoying problem is that Windows needs to do that long wait to install updates. Ubuntu gets away with installing patches under the hood and then they're already functional the next time you boot (at least that's definitely how security updates are working on my end). Time for Microsoft to get Windows doing the same so none of this is a problem at all. It may even convince people to stop trying to hunt down how to disable updates at all costs.

a joke about linux distro installation hassles quickly mutates into linux fans' offended moaning about how Windows makes their lives worse. xD Reading the second page shows zero signs the OP was about a humour.

So, in the spirit of ignoring an original intent to be a fun topic, and to balance somewhat, I am going to say, that I really like Windows. NT architecture (and WinAPI too) is the reason for me to have passion about OS development I have.

matt11235 wrote:

glauxosdever wrote:Right now, I just happened to criticise Windows, but it's true that many Linux distros are hard to setup (I haven't used Gentoo so I can't speak specifically for it).

A lot of distros are no harder to install than Windows. Pick a locale, pick a disk to install everything to and enter a username/password/hostname.

Linux distros are easy to install until you run unto installation problem and droid to something like busybox. Windows is better but I hate windows due to its other aspect anyways. In fact I hate em both.

I'll take a peck at the "update" thing, if I may, as it is at least topical for OS design.

iansjack wrote:The computer will switch itself off when it has installed the updates, so what's the problem?

[...]

So, put the laptop to sleep rather than shutting it down. That's the way a lot of people work.

Let's say I have a hard drive encryption system running. When I boot up, before the OS is even loaded, the encryption software asks my password to unlock the encryption. Without that password, no OS is loaded, no HDD data is retrievable.

If I put the laptop to sleep, will the HDD decryption token expire, or did I just weaken my system security?

At least at my company (where we're handling personal customer data on a regular basis), you are to shut down the laptop before leaving it out of your sight, to avoid exactly the above szenario. That means you have to sit there and wait until the system actually powers down. (It doesn't really matter how Windows / the encryption software handle things, that's the ruling done by the ISO and you have to stick by it.)

And anyways, "shutdown might take a while, so put it to sleep" -- I need to be aware of the potential delay involved in shutting down, and chose something I don't actually want in order to avoid the problem. (I want to power the thing down without unnecessary delay.)

That's called a "workaround". It doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist, just that you can alleviate it.

desktop linux = tens of tousands of individuals who lack any relevant technical knowledge decided to create operating system distributions and corresponding userland for extremely complex propriretary computers inspired by multinational corporations containing together millions of people - after all, within the 5 million people there were nobody who actually had an usable knowledge as riding quads and farting from governmental moneys not actually result software development knowledge, so they introduced software communism instead, where everybody can be a yolo swag developer boy who prints a tux poster on his wall.

it resulted hundreds of tousands of packages depending on each other to run scripts and gui clickclick tools meant to used by people without knowledge, so they can puzzle programs together with 800% bigger size, memory and cpu demand than they actually should consume with extremely poor stability, realibility, shared object hell, zero support.

and thats why i decided to make my OS.

also. gentoo, suse, and other ,,shiny'' pokemons are extremely poor choice, at least use debian.

Linux seems to be a little more successful than your OS. At least the hardware exists to run it.

iansjack wrote:Linux seems to be a little more successful than your OS. At least the hardware exists to run it.

mosquitos also seems to be a little more succesful than your os as there is 70000 billion from them
my os also can be emulated everywhere so your point is just purely invalid

I agree. Mosquitos are more successful than your OS.

Hi,


There are IC fabrication services that allow making your IC on the same wafer as other ICs, therefore reducing costs for small amounts of your ICs. Since yours has a low transistor count, it should be easier to choose a bigger process, therefore reducing costs even more. Then we will see if your CPU is more performant than current ones.

Note: Your CPU design doesn't allow for better performance anyway, so it will probably be a waste of money for you, so better don't attempt it. Unless, lower transistor count can get translated to lower transistor count per core and higher core count at the same time, but:

• there are programs that aren't multithreaded;
• there will be too much communication between cores;
• there will be too much difficulty designing a multiport RAM that can neatly satisfy the requirements of all cores.

Regards,
glauxosdever

Let's say If I had enough resource to start 3rd major O/S initiative:

Here are the main principles / philosophy:
- Prohibit rush to release newer release. This is probably most important aspect. Thus it is a non-profit O/S.
- Existing software defect takes priority over newer features/rush to release. This and above has to be ingrained in every contributor's developer's mind.
- Constrain the development team to certain size, always. If the size of team becomes thousands, trouble will ensue nevertheless, so always keep to small. Thus it is not an open source.
- Ultra high bar for developers. Contributor skills are assessed based on communication/critical assessment skills (remember SAT?) rather than software coding skills. Anyone that can not possess those skills are cut out.
- Backward compatibility, no useless change in UI in the name of "innovation".
- No popups, invasion of desktop without user authorization.
- Integrated browser that prohibits ads, popups.
- All useless notifications are turned off by default.

If any of these are broken, then it will be just another f**king Windows/Linux.

Geri wrote:desktop linux = tens of tousands of individuals who lack any relevant technical knowledge decided to create operating system distributions and corresponding userland for extremely complex propriretary computers inspired by multinational corporations containing together millions of people - after all, within the 5 million people there were nobody who actually had an usable knowledge as riding quads and farting from governmental moneys not actually result software development knowledge, so they introduced software communism instead, where everybody can be a yolo swag developer boy who prints a tux poster on his wall.

it resulted hundreds of tousands of packages depending on each other to run scripts and gui clickclick tools meant to used by people without knowledge, so they can puzzle programs together with 800% bigger size, memory and cpu demand than they actually should consume with extremely poor stability, realibility, shared object hell, zero support.

and thats why i decided to make my OS.

also. gentoo, suse, and other ,,shiny'' pokemons are extremely poor choice, at least use debian.

1. this is the reason I limit my linux usage to shell CLI, using few core shell commands and never waste time on building open source.
2. it is not just desktop linux, server linux suffers from same problems.