Linked by Kroc Camen on Thu 5th Nov 2009 21:05 UTC
There's no right way to do it, only ideas that are better than others in certain situations. But if you had the opportunity to head up the design of a new OS, one to Put Things Right, one that could be radical enough to varnish out those UI/X bumps that have clung on for years, but practical enough to be used every day, what would you design? How would you handle application management? What about file types and compatibility? Where would you cherry pick the best bits from other OSes and where would you throw away tradition? I've tackled this challenge for myself and present (an unfinished idea): KrocOS (warning: HTML5 site, will display without CSS in IE/older browsers). OSnews Asks: What would make your perfect OS?
Permalink for comment 393491
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-11-02
I am using inflammatory language because you seem to be deliberately missing the point. Such language makes it unambiguous what I am saying. A stable kernel ABI promotes proprietary software and this is a problem, not an advantage.
We can debate the nuances of antisocial, evil and so forth at another time. It remains my belief that proprietary software is not good and should not exist in any form. Allowing peaceful co-existence with proprietary software that exists already is acceptable, but promoting the creation of (and reliance on) more proprietary software is not good and is probably malicious.
I know you do not agree. I am just informing you: The people who want Free software for the sake of Free software are not nutcases and cannot simply be ignored because you don't care about the cause. It is they (and I) who object to a stable ABI on idealistic grounds and since you do not provide a technical reason to have one, one should not be added.