5 ms·

"Imagine how much better the industry would be if there were more than one computer maker trying to move the state of the art forward." It would also be a nigh

"Imagine how much better the industry would be if there were more than one computer maker trying to move the state of the art forward." It would also be a nightmare of complexity.

GeneralMaximus 17y ago
I think the benefits of having a diverse OS landscape are much greater than the cost of a little increased complexity. We already have languages that run on virtual machines, and we have the POSIX standard. Software portability shouldn't be a problem.
- jodrellblank 17y ago
  It should be a problem, otherwise the new OS would be so similar there would be little point in it existing...
  - GeneralMaximus 17y ago
    A POSIX compatibility layer should be enough. You can easily run UNIX programs on Windows using Cygwin, for example.
    - jodrellblank 17y ago
      What you want is a new and innovative OS that is also backwards/cross compatible and standards compliant?
      - eru 17y ago
        What's the problem? The standards compliant layer would perhaps just not be as fast as the native metaphors.
      - steveklabnik 17y ago
        You'd be surprised at what's possible. I'm actually working on one right now.
      - GeneralMaximus 17y ago
        Haiku actually does this. Haiku is not a UNIX, but there's a fairly complete POSIX layer for building UNIX programs. As far as I know, Syllable and SkyOS do something like this, too (I might be wrong, though).
mrshoe 17y ago
Not necessarily. Web standards could be a great foundation. The web is open and anyone is free to push the state of the art forward. Yet the result has often been more interoperability, not less.
- vorador 17y ago
  Do you seriously believe that webapps would eventually replace desktop apps ?
  - indranil 17y ago
    Yes. Not in the way they are right now, but yes, web based applications, running off remote servers, maybe interfacing with a desktop client or something similar to that is the future.
  - edu 17y ago
    Some desktop apps yes, actually many of them have been already replaced. Other (data/processor intensive: graphic arts, multimedia, etc...) don't think so.
    - vorador 17y ago
      Could you give me some examples please ?
      - edu 17y ago
        Adobe Premiere for example?
        vorador 17y ago
        I was speaking of webapps that had actually replaced desktop apps.
        edu 17y ago
MikeCapone 17y ago
Because things are so simple on the Windows platform right now? Every time I have to go back to using Windows I can't believe how many hoops you have to jump through to get anything done.
raintrees 17y ago
I agree. Ask someone who was involved with developing Borland's Turbo Pascal. When I used to help duplicate it (think digital Kinko's) we had what seemed like 50 masters to dupe from: DEC Rainbow, Heath/Zenith, HP, ACT Apricot, NorthStar, CP/M, Eagle, Pixy, many, many others. Oh, and MS-DOS and IBM DOS.
pohl 17y ago
That was absolutely true way back when the industry was new and there were myriad system vendors with their own operating systems. We have learned a lot since then, and we know how to address these problems: openly specified document formats and protocols. Programming languages with portable runtimes and libraries. Open source software. Web Applications. The world is a much different place from when you felt trapped because your Visicalc files were on LDOS floppies that could only be read by a TRS-80 Model IV.

"Imagine how much better the industry would be if there were more than one computer maker trying to move the state of the art forward." It would also be a nightmare of complexity.

GeneralMaximus 17y ago

I think the benefits of having a diverse OS landscape are much greater than the cost of a little increased complexity. We already have languages that run on virtual machines, and we have the POSIX standard. Software portability shouldn't be a problem.

jodrellblank 17y ago
It should be a problem, otherwise the new OS would be so similar there would be little point in it existing...
- GeneralMaximus 17y ago
  A POSIX compatibility layer should be enough. You can easily run UNIX programs on Windows using Cygwin, for example.
  - jodrellblank 17y ago
    What you want is a new and innovative OS that is also backwards/cross compatible and standards compliant?
    - eru 17y ago
      What's the problem? The standards compliant layer would perhaps just not be as fast as the native metaphors.
    - steveklabnik 17y ago
      You'd be surprised at what's possible. I'm actually working on one right now.
    - GeneralMaximus 17y ago
      Haiku actually does this. Haiku is not a UNIX, but there's a fairly complete POSIX layer for building UNIX programs. As far as I know, Syllable and SkyOS do something like this, too (I might be wrong, though).

mrshoe 17y ago

Not necessarily. Web standards could be a great foundation. The web is open and anyone is free to push the state of the art forward. Yet the result has often been more interoperability, not less.

vorador 17y ago
Do you seriously believe that webapps would eventually replace desktop apps ?
- indranil 17y ago
  Yes. Not in the way they are right now, but yes, web based applications, running off remote servers, maybe interfacing with a desktop client or something similar to that is the future.
- edu 17y ago
  Some desktop apps yes, actually many of them have been already replaced. Other (data/processor intensive: graphic arts, multimedia, etc...) don't think so.
  - vorador 17y ago
    Could you give me some examples please ?
    - edu 17y ago
      Adobe Premiere for example?
      - vorador 17y ago
        I was speaking of webapps that had actually replaced desktop apps.
        edu 17y ago

MikeCapone 17y ago

Because things are so simple on the Windows platform right now? Every time I have to go back to using Windows I can't believe how many hoops you have to jump through to get anything done.

raintrees 17y ago

I agree. Ask someone who was involved with developing Borland's Turbo Pascal. When I used to help duplicate it (think digital Kinko's) we had what seemed like 50 masters to dupe from: DEC Rainbow, Heath/Zenith, HP, ACT Apricot, NorthStar, CP/M, Eagle, Pixy, many, many others. Oh, and MS-DOS and IBM DOS.

pohl 17y ago

That was absolutely true way back when the industry was new and there were myriad system vendors with their own operating systems. We have learned a lot since then, and we know how to address these problems: openly specified document formats and protocols. Programming languages with portable runtimes and libraries. Open source software. Web Applications. The world is a much different place from when you felt trapped because your Visicalc files were on LDOS floppies that could only be read by a TRS-80 Model IV.