Linked by J. Scott Edwards on Fri 17th Dec 2004 18:51 UTC
Every hard-core OS aficionado has done it: Laid out a grand scheme for creating the perfect OS. Taking all the best features and attributes from the OSes we love, and making sure to assiduously avoid the pitfalls of the OSes we don't. Maybe our goals were modest, and we just wanted a slightly tweaked version of an existing OS. But sometimes we're feeling ambitious, and we have large, creative ideas for revolutionizing computing. Long-time OSNews reader and contributor J. Scott Edwards just couldn't help himself, and he has set about to not only plan, but to try to build his dream OS.
Permalink for comment
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
Is it just me, or does it strike any one else that the people that can't stand having to remember where they put files are the same people that can never refer to things by name. Instead they refer to things such as "bring me that thingamig" or "wheres that hooseywhatsit". The entire concept of the file system, directories and files, denotes refering to things with exactness. if you goto a row of file cabinets can you just reach in and grab something and automaticly get what you want? you need to know which cabinet, which draw, and the label on the file. Thats the concept. I fail to see this as a drawback. I understand that in the modern system we have a seemingly unending number of files litered about, which is why i do support adding metadata the fs space. However i do not support throwing all our data into one giant DB system as many people have suggested. (thankfully the article didnt)