OSDev.org

Hi i've started an OS called Asyrd OS. It's aims are to maintain an easy-to-use, user-friendly system and to emulate other OSes executables, dlls etc.
I'm putting together a team with a maximum of 10 people, i currently have 7 if you want to help please add my MSN and talk to mevia messenger ([email protected]) or email me thanks.

yes, i want to join your team, because thousands of PROFESSIONAL coders are coding WINDOWS, LINUX, *BSD and your ultramegasuperprofessional team of 10 noobs will make operating system which emulates all these goldies

reddragon2007 wrote:Hi i've started an OS called Asyrd OS. It's aims are to maintain an easy-to-use, user-friendly system and to emulate other OSes executables, dlls etc.
I'm putting together a team with a maximum of 10 people, i currently have 7 if you want to help please add my MSN and talk to mevia messenger ([email protected]) or email me thanks.

Projects like these are really unrealistic.. might be an unreachable goal for what sounds like a bunch of kids.

But who knows..

May I ask if you plan to code it in VB also..?

Nah man that dude is 1337 he will totally be able to code it in PHP4 and then backend it to MySQL for total architectural independence.

Wine did it, VMWare did it...its not impossible and im doing t in C++ and x86. It is impossible in PHP or VB, they are reliant on other run time packages, of course i knew you were being sarcastic, but still answering your question. Anyways, ive stopped recruting now. Also it is ongoing, and will take years before the emulation is finished.

reddragon2007 wrote:Wine did it, VMWare did it...

Isn't it funny that he compared Wine with VMWare?

VMWare emulates an x86 compatible computer..
Wine provides a compatibility layer for running Windows applications on x86 UNIX systems.

reddragon2007 wrote:It is impossible in PHP or VB, they are reliant on other run time packages, of course i knew you were being sarcastic, but still answering your question.

Well thats good.. at least you knew we were being sarcastic

Anyway, You must understand projects like Wine have been around for a every long time:

Wiki article wrote:The Wine developers released the first beta version of Wine (version 0.9) on October 25, 2005 after 12 years of development.

And other systems like Linux and BSD's have had decades to get where they are now..

The Universal OS theory is really unrealistic: Our OS can run the binaries of every OS out there!

This OS will not be 100% universal. 1) itll take ages. 2) there are just limits that cant be broken. Also, didnt i mention that it says an easy-to-use, user-friendly OS. thats the first goal, emulation comes when this OS is finished, it will be just like other emulators, apart from they run within the kernel therefore allowing faster emulation.

reddragon2007 wrote:This OS will not be 100% universal. 1) itll take ages. 2) there are just limits that cant be broken. Also, didnt i mention that it says an easy-to-use, user-friendly OS. thats the first goal, emulation comes when this OS is finished, it will be just like other emulators, apart from they run within the kernel therefore allowing faster emulation.

Right

Have fun then, and good luck with your project.

I..Uh...Just thought of something....I suggest you make an exokernel. That is, if you do plan on making such a system. From research I've read, they can get incredible speed, and allow multiple OS layers called LibOS's. .............. Just a thought.................
Toodles.

Hey, why such critisism against him? Look at the OpenBeOS (aka Haiku) team. Basically they were 10 developers, with a few from the original BeOS project and look where they are now. They have had some amazing inspiration and now they have an almost completed replica in BeOS that is so sophisticated and yet so simple and all in all is just such a wonderful, extremely powerful OS. They have over 7 Million lines of code by the way, and now that have a crap load of developers. But the same idea really.

Remember.... nothing, is impossible.

maddog39 wrote:Hey, why such critisism against him? Look at the OpenBeOS (aka Haiku) team. Basically they were 10 developers, with a few from the original BeOS project and look where they are now. They have had some amazing inspiration and now they have an almost completed replica in BeOS that is so sophisticated and yet so simple and all in all is just such a wonderful, extremely powerful OS. They have over 7 Million lines of code by the way, and now that have a crap load of developers. But the same idea really.

Remember.... nothing, is impossible.

Weren't they also OS Developers. The reason for the criticism is the obvious lack of knowledge in his goals. He, like many of us did in our first years assumes you can simply make a "User Friendly OS" as easy as that. Not realising that if it was that easy it would have been done a million times over.

I believe the light comments we have given will help them to realise the seriousness of there goals and the possibility of toning it down to a more realistic level. For example, my goal includes have the framework in place to add extensions to spport any operating system executable. No actually specific operating system code but my kernel and user land is built to easily exapnd to these functions.

Hmm.. I suppose I see your point. Although, I started OS development not to long ago and the first time I tried it, I immediatly realized that it was as easy as expected. Well actually, in some respects it was easier than expected. But anyway, I do see that they are sort of "over achieving" here, but I thought I'd make the point anyway.

Tyler wrote: Weren't they also OS Developers. The reason for the criticism is the obvious lack of knowledge in his goals. He, like many of us did in our first years assumes you can simply make a "User Friendly OS" as easy as that. Not realising that if it was that easy it would have been done a million times over.

I believe the light comments we have given will help them to realise the seriousness of there goals and the possibility of toning it down to a more realistic level. For example, my goal includes have the framework in place to add extensions to spport any operating system executable. No actually specific operating system code but my kernel and user land is built to easily exapnd to these functions.

Erm...i see your point but i didnt say that it was easy...
Also i do have a bit of experience

Use XML! Lots and lots of XML. Use XML everywhere. You'll have a Windows-compatible OS up and running within weeks.

I'm using XML, and my OS already supports Ubuntu iPods and Web 2.0. It's tops.

M

Use XML!

Yes, use XML ! Use it on your file system, in the GDT, in protected mode and in the whole OS! Don't use plain-text, use XML as assemblers like ?ASM compile with it better! Bring down ASCII and ANSI to its knees!

You'll have a Windows-compatible OS up and running within weeks.

Oh yea! Bill has used XML all over in his OS and everybody is doing it! Windows 1.0 had a file viewer with XML support! You do multitasking and multitthreading better when you use XML format, ASM will generate these routines automatically for you! Just need to specify <?xml version="1.0" with_multitasking="true">!!!

Together with XML you absolutely must use Cobol! COBOL is a award-winning programming language for beginners and designed for making a cr.., ehm, professional operating systems! You don't need any special utilities, assemblers and even any knowledge of assembly! COBOL with XML will do it for you automatically!

Download link:
//EDIT: The link was broken. COBOL programmers are working on new version of COBOL 2.0 gamma, supporting XML and even HTML! This will be the hottest version you have ever seen! You can make Windows 95 with XML support in less than a week!

inflater