Linked by iseyler on Thu 16th Sep 2010 17:16 UTC
Permalink for comment 441379
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-11-18
It's very ignorant and arrogant to relegate any substantial work to "hobbyist," unimportant, or inconsequential.
The code and design is nicely structured. It provides everything many "serious" developer needs to write "serious" applications. Which isn't a lot. :-P
Unfortunately it's not a multi-tasking operating system. (Yet? Ever?) I also I disagree with the decision to integrate the library-type (string) routines into the OS.
This would make an excellent, simple, stable lightweight dedicated host operating system for a "serious" software project. ;-) Allowing a software developer to FULLY exploit the processing power of a computer.
Cries of "proprietary bootloader?" That sounds like a religious cult crusade to me. Just be happy that the developer(s) were generous enough to release the source.