Linked by Kroc Camen on Thu 5th Nov 2009 21:05 UTC
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y 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?
Thread beginning with comment 393136
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Why was he modded down?
by shadoweva09 on Fri 6th Nov 2009 02:16 UTC in reply to "RE: Why was he modded down? "
shadoweva09
Member since:
2008-03-10

Linux is open source, which means that everybody can do whatever they want; there is no central authority. Therefor, most of your point is silly. Some points I do agree on are that it would be nice to replace X, have a stable ABI for userspace programs, and get rid of dependencies for user-oriented applications (i.e. a web-browser, but not Apache).

However, a stable ABI for drivers would be extremely bad. I love open source, but I understand that there are valid reasons to create closed source/commercial software. However, there is no reason at all why a driver should be closed source. It simply doesn't make sense. Closed source drivers are less secure, hold back progress in the kernel, and make reduce portability. The only reason for closed source drivers that is even at all close to being somewhat valid is to protect IP. But that really only applies to graphics cards. And even then, I imagine it's just nVidia being lazy.

I can't do it without hiring a bunch of programmers, and I don't have the money to do that. So it doesn't really matter whether it's open source or not; all that matters is who the money is currently going to, and they've already spoken on how they love it the way it is.

Also about the drivers, it's not the OS vendors place to criticize 3rd parties, they need to be doing all they can to make all stakeholders jobs easier (including hardware vendors). As for compatibility, all of my vista drivers work on 7, doesn't matter that their closed source as long as they work is all most users care about.

Reply Parent Score: 1

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

In terms of Linux based platforms, the OS developers are doing all they can to make it easier for hardware manufacturers. Kernel and Xorg folk will write the drivers taking development costs away from the vendor. The linux driver project provides a point of contact for hardware manufacturers rather than them having to figure out if they talk to Linux, Xorg, Alsa or some other project that provides direct hardware support.

Free platform support in exchange for the minimal interface specs to write drivers against; how much easier for the hardware vendor can it get? This is like your neibour saying; "point out where the endge of your driveway is and I'll shovel the snow out of it each morning while I'm doing mine" - 'I'm sorry, that's too complicated, I'll keep shoveling my own driveway."

Reply Parent Score: 2

shadoweva09 Member since:
2008-03-10

It's completely unrealistic to think that they will continue to maintain every driver in existence for Linux, and that the ones they do will always work perfectly for every release. It could still be argued that having people continually update drivers instead of just being able to use the same ones is a waste of resources.

Reply Parent Score: 1

boldingd Member since:
2009-02-19

As for compatibility, all of my vista drivers work on 7, doesn't matter that their closed source as long as they work is all most users care about.


Because Vista and Win7 have very similar software stacks. I know that certainly wasn't true with the XP-to-Vista transition; I interned with the County Governement in undergrad, and I was there when they moved from XP to Vista for many of their machines. There was a sizable minority of devices and programs that we just could not, for the life of us, get to work with Vista (or that caused unreliable behavior, or could crash the system -- thanks, Norton AV). And "devices" is not just graphics cards; it also included, right off the top of my head, a number of parallel-port printers.

So, I'll repeat my motto: Hey, Windows Has This Problem Too.

Reply Parent Score: 2