3 ms·

The problem is probably going to be that if you really want to be innovative and not just reimplement decade old ideas then you will break a lot of existing app

The problem is probably going to be that if you really want to be innovative and not just reimplement decade old ideas then you will break a lot of existing applications. There are certainly hundreds or thousands of nice and well researched ideas out there but if you fundamentally change how you handle address spaces, perform inter process communication, isolate processes, store files or what not you will break applications and have to reimplement or at least adapt them, too. You will also need drivers for hundreds and thousands of components. And thousands of protocols and standards. A billion Dollar and a decade of work will probably not be enough to seriously compete with existing operating systems. Maybe you could build a POSIX layer for compatibility but now you are already building two operating systems.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago
So, after typing this I realized that it is all related to Desktop OSs, not servers, so keep that in mind when reading. I don't think applications are really the big problem these days with virtualization and all. If your OS can virtualize other OSs, that can act as your compatibility layer. Windows 7(?) did it for XP, MacOS X did something kinda like it for classic, etc. The real problem is you have to offer a compelling reason for people to A) want to use it over alternatives, and B) develop for it over alternatives. Personally I think if you can make it really developer and power user friendly a lot of applications might show up just because the system is a joy to work in for the kinds of people who make things. You'll note that this is pretty much the opposite of where Desktop OSs have been heading. Also, drivers. Not sure how to crack that nut.
- danbruc 9y ago
  If you virtualize applications then there will be no real benefit for using your new operating system, it just adds complexity and degrades performance over running natively and will hardly be able to make use of features setting your operating system apart. Maybe you could really attract developers but that would not change anything fundamentally, normal users wouldn't come until the developers have native and better replacements for applications users want to use. It just shifts the burden a bit from you building the operating system and the applications to you building the operating system and other developers hopefully building the applications. It won't change the amount of time and money required, maybe even increase both because it is no longer a single concerted effort.
  - nickthemagicman 9y ago
    He's saying if you built a new innovative OS with cutting edge OS research. The OS itself would be great to use and fast and have tons of features,etc etc...and you use virtualization for other things that aren't compatible.
    - AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago
      Right. The virtualization is just a way to allow you to use the legacy applications you need while they are phased out in favor of the new hotness. Of course, that'll get you nowhere unless the new hotness really is so much better that cost/benefit of running it, plus oldOS in a VM, is greater than that of just running oldOS.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago

So, after typing this I realized that it is all related to Desktop OSs, not servers, so keep that in mind when reading. I don't think applications are really the big problem these days with virtualization and all. If your OS can virtualize other OSs, that can act as your compatibility layer. Windows 7(?) did it for XP, MacOS X did something kinda like it for classic, etc. The real problem is you have to offer a compelling reason for people to A) want to use it over alternatives, and B) develop for it over alternatives. Personally I think if you can make it really developer and power user friendly a lot of applications might show up just because the system is a joy to work in for the kinds of people who make things. You'll note that this is pretty much the opposite of where Desktop OSs have been heading. Also, drivers. Not sure how to crack that nut.

danbruc 9y ago
If you virtualize applications then there will be no real benefit for using your new operating system, it just adds complexity and degrades performance over running natively and will hardly be able to make use of features setting your operating system apart. Maybe you could really attract developers but that would not change anything fundamentally, normal users wouldn't come until the developers have native and better replacements for applications users want to use. It just shifts the burden a bit from you building the operating system and the applications to you building the operating system and other developers hopefully building the applications. It won't change the amount of time and money required, maybe even increase both because it is no longer a single concerted effort.
- nickthemagicman 9y ago
  He's saying if you built a new innovative OS with cutting edge OS research. The OS itself would be great to use and fast and have tons of features,etc etc...and you use virtualization for other things that aren't compatible.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago
    Right. The virtualization is just a way to allow you to use the legacy applications you need while they are phased out in favor of the new hotness. Of course, that'll get you nowhere unless the new hotness really is so much better that cost/benefit of running it, plus oldOS in a VM, is greater than that of just running oldOS.