What would you like to see in an OS?
-
With all the Lemmings that follow whatever the current mood is, I am sure we will hear a lot of anti Windows 7 stuff here soon since so many people on this Microsoft side of CP are anti-Microsoft (in what galaxy does that make sense?). Before that flood of dibble really gets going, for those that have any serious desires out of an OS, let me ask you all a question: Being developers, what would you like to see in an OS that is currently not there? With many things moving to a web world and the expansion of Web OSes, are there still things that would really make a major difference in a desktop OS? Maybe I have just been looked on the web world too long, but the desktop arena seems to be dying at a fast rate and they only thing that is really needed anymore is a host for a web OS. I am thinking that within the next 5-7 years the desktop OS will no longer exist. Thoughts?
Rocky <>< Recent Blog Post: Netflix coming straight to HDTV! Thinking about Silverlight? www.SilverlightCity.com
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
when the machine is powered on, would return to the last powered-on state
Isn't that just the hibernate / restore that's been present since XP?
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Something that would let us install/modify/uninstall applications and services, but not tamper with other applications/services we (as a user) didn't install
You can do this now. Under the Windows security model, individual services are securable objects. It isn't defined as a standard "out of the box" OS group, but you could certainly create one.
Graham Bradshaw wrote:
Isn't that just the hibernate / restore that's been present since XP?
Yeah, but it doesn't persist between power cycles. If you turn your box off, it doesn't restore to the last powered-on state (with all of your applications running and at the same place they were when you powered off).
Graham Bradshaw wrote:
Under the Windows security model, individual services are securable objects. It isn't defined as a standard "out of the box" OS group, but you could certainly create one.
I *know* you can create one (or at least something close), but IT people (you know, the guys that don't want ANYONE to have local admin rights on their own box) are much more acquiescent of allowing a role if it's pre-defined by the OS.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
Graham Bradshaw wrote:
Isn't that just the hibernate / restore that's been present since XP?
Yeah, but it doesn't persist between power cycles. If you turn your box off, it doesn't restore to the last powered-on state (with all of your applications running and at the same place they were when you powered off).
Graham Bradshaw wrote:
Under the Windows security model, individual services are securable objects. It isn't defined as a standard "out of the box" OS group, but you could certainly create one.
I *know* you can create one (or at least something close), but IT people (you know, the guys that don't want ANYONE to have local admin rights on their own box) are much more acquiescent of allowing a role if it's pre-defined by the OS.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Yeah, but it doesn't persist between power cycles
Yes it does. It saves a full image of the system memory to a file (C:\Hiberfil.sys), and then shuts down. On boot up, it restores the memory. You get complete system state returned. You can remove power from the PC, and it doesn't matter. The memory image is stored on the hard disk as a file.
-
That point is wrong (morally). No consumer is ever going to give a damn what the precise legal meaning of "buying a DVD with a movie on it" is. They just want to watch it, and if they can't, they're scammed. The movie industry uses weird legal tricks to scam the masses. Shame on them. All the more reason to pirate their movies.. after all, if you pirate the movie, you can just watch it - anywhere, on any computer, no matter what screen you have. But yea. The point was, that HDCP is only ever going to annoy honest people who "buy a movie" and then have to watch it in bad quality for some reason that is totally unfair - pirates will just happily continue to pirate, HDCP or no HDCP. The only reason it exists is greed, and it isn't even going to help them make money
So presumably, you have nop objections when software you develop is pirated? After all, no consumer is ever going to give a damn what the precise legal meaning of a software licence is.
-
So presumably, you have nop objections when software you develop is pirated? After all, no consumer is ever going to give a damn what the precise legal meaning of a software licence is.
They would do it anyway, objection or no objection. But all software I personally develop is free (and public domain whenever possible) anyway - and other software is not owned by me anyway so why should I care? But objecting to software being pirated wouldn't really hurt paying customers would it? So it's not as evil as HDCP by far. Edit: By the way, why do you even ask that? It's completely besides the point. The point is that HDCP hurt honestly paying customers. They should find a better way to battle piracy (or admit defeat. It's not like they're poor.)
Last modified: 29mins after originally posted --
-
I'd like to see 0) An OS that, when the machine is powered on, would return to the last powered-on state (essentially a memory image stored on a flash memory card). 1) A new standard role defined called "Developer" that would allow certain admin-level permissions/roles but not complete admin rights. Something that would let us install/modify/uninstall applications and services, but not tamper with other applications/services we (as a user) didn't install.
Rocky Moore wrote:
I am thinking that within the next 5-7 years the desktop OS will no longer exist.
I think you're insane.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
return to the last powered-on state
That's not something I want. I like a computer to start up the same way every time, so I have a clean slate. When my father had his first Mac I decided I didn't like that feature*. When I got Windows 3.1 I disabled it*, I even had WIN.BAT modify the INI files to ensure consistency. *Realizing that that was just the desktop, not the apps; but still.
-
A "source-safe-filesystem"! It'd be real sweet if I could 'mark' files to be saved with version-history. Meaning, the FS won't actually delete the file, but make a new one (transparent). Tortoise-SVN as an integral part of the OS, so to speak :)
I are troll :)
Yes! Bring back the VMS file system with user settable versioning. It wasn't on a file by file basis, as I recall, but you could set the number of versions to keep, and could always manually purge old versions. No fancy version tree required, just file.ext;version.
-
With all the Lemmings that follow whatever the current mood is, I am sure we will hear a lot of anti Windows 7 stuff here soon since so many people on this Microsoft side of CP are anti-Microsoft (in what galaxy does that make sense?). Before that flood of dibble really gets going, for those that have any serious desires out of an OS, let me ask you all a question: Being developers, what would you like to see in an OS that is currently not there? With many things moving to a web world and the expansion of Web OSes, are there still things that would really make a major difference in a desktop OS? Maybe I have just been looked on the web world too long, but the desktop arena seems to be dying at a fast rate and they only thing that is really needed anymore is a host for a web OS. I am thinking that within the next 5-7 years the desktop OS will no longer exist. Thoughts?
Rocky <>< Recent Blog Post: Netflix coming straight to HDTV! Thinking about Silverlight? www.SilverlightCity.com
Cloud computing, SAAS and all the other dumb buzzwords for "let me rent you that on a remote box" are a bad ideas promulgated by greedy marketing departments looking for a new and better way to squeeze more money out of customers while delivering less. Security issues alone will cause it to be stillborn. The desktop OS is hear to stay, in one form or another.
-
With all the Lemmings that follow whatever the current mood is, I am sure we will hear a lot of anti Windows 7 stuff here soon since so many people on this Microsoft side of CP are anti-Microsoft (in what galaxy does that make sense?). Before that flood of dibble really gets going, for those that have any serious desires out of an OS, let me ask you all a question: Being developers, what would you like to see in an OS that is currently not there? With many things moving to a web world and the expansion of Web OSes, are there still things that would really make a major difference in a desktop OS? Maybe I have just been looked on the web world too long, but the desktop arena seems to be dying at a fast rate and they only thing that is really needed anymore is a host for a web OS. I am thinking that within the next 5-7 years the desktop OS will no longer exist. Thoughts?
Rocky <>< Recent Blog Post: Netflix coming straight to HDTV! Thinking about Silverlight? www.SilverlightCity.com
I want less! I just want an updated Windows 3.11! I want to be able to boot to the command prompt with drivers installed (Mouse, Network, CD, USB, Sound, Printer, etc.) And then only start the GUI if I choose to. I spend most of my day (when not here) working in a DOS box; I don't need the GUI. I don't want file names to contain SPACEs. I don't want the system to overwrite my settings: if I say I don't want a bunch of "templates" on the context menu, then I don't flipping want a bunch of templates on the context menu! If I say I don't want an IE icon on my desktop, then I don't flipping want an IE icon on my desktop! When Windows starts I don't want the login screen until the system is fully ready. :mad: I'm severely peeved about this this week; I log in and try to start an app and it's a long time before the app starts, or I could wait that time and then when I start the app it starts right up. It's worse when my wife tries it; she's not as patient and understanding and starts clicking the icon several times. :sigh:
Rocky Moore wrote:
within the next 5-7 years the desktop OS will no longer exist.
I expect I'll still be running XP.
-
A "source-safe-filesystem"! It'd be real sweet if I could 'mark' files to be saved with version-history. Meaning, the FS won't actually delete the file, but make a new one (transparent). Tortoise-SVN as an integral part of the OS, so to speak :)
I are troll :)
OpenVMS's ODS-5[^] is your friend - checkout the versioning system it's had for almost 20 years!
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
-
Graham Bradshaw wrote:
Isn't that just the hibernate / restore that's been present since XP?
Yeah, but it doesn't persist between power cycles. If you turn your box off, it doesn't restore to the last powered-on state (with all of your applications running and at the same place they were when you powered off).
Graham Bradshaw wrote:
Under the Windows security model, individual services are securable objects. It isn't defined as a standard "out of the box" OS group, but you could certainly create one.
I *know* you can create one (or at least something close), but IT people (you know, the guys that don't want ANYONE to have local admin rights on their own box) are much more acquiescent of allowing a role if it's pre-defined by the OS.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
They would do it anyway, objection or no objection. But all software I personally develop is free (and public domain whenever possible) anyway - and other software is not owned by me anyway so why should I care? But objecting to software being pirated wouldn't really hurt paying customers would it? So it's not as evil as HDCP by far. Edit: By the way, why do you even ask that? It's completely besides the point. The point is that HDCP hurt honestly paying customers. They should find a better way to battle piracy (or admit defeat. It's not like they're poor.)
Last modified: 29mins after originally posted --
harold aptroot wrote:
other software is not owned by me anyway so why should I care?
So you don't care about things that don't directly affect you? Here's a specific question: Would you knowingly pirate commercial software? My defintion of 'pirate' in this case is to use the software in a manner not allowed by the software licence. It's a simple question - just give me a yes or no answer.
-
OpenVMS's ODS-5[^] is your friend - checkout the versioning system it's had for almost 20 years!
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
MVS has had generation data groups for even longer.
-
harold aptroot wrote:
other software is not owned by me anyway so why should I care?
So you don't care about things that don't directly affect you? Here's a specific question: Would you knowingly pirate commercial software? My defintion of 'pirate' in this case is to use the software in a manner not allowed by the software licence. It's a simple question - just give me a yes or no answer.
-
With all the Lemmings that follow whatever the current mood is, I am sure we will hear a lot of anti Windows 7 stuff here soon since so many people on this Microsoft side of CP are anti-Microsoft (in what galaxy does that make sense?). Before that flood of dibble really gets going, for those that have any serious desires out of an OS, let me ask you all a question: Being developers, what would you like to see in an OS that is currently not there? With many things moving to a web world and the expansion of Web OSes, are there still things that would really make a major difference in a desktop OS? Maybe I have just been looked on the web world too long, but the desktop arena seems to be dying at a fast rate and they only thing that is really needed anymore is a host for a web OS. I am thinking that within the next 5-7 years the desktop OS will no longer exist. Thoughts?
Rocky <>< Recent Blog Post: Netflix coming straight to HDTV! Thinking about Silverlight? www.SilverlightCity.com
-
I want less! I just want an updated Windows 3.11! I want to be able to boot to the command prompt with drivers installed (Mouse, Network, CD, USB, Sound, Printer, etc.) And then only start the GUI if I choose to. I spend most of my day (when not here) working in a DOS box; I don't need the GUI. I don't want file names to contain SPACEs. I don't want the system to overwrite my settings: if I say I don't want a bunch of "templates" on the context menu, then I don't flipping want a bunch of templates on the context menu! If I say I don't want an IE icon on my desktop, then I don't flipping want an IE icon on my desktop! When Windows starts I don't want the login screen until the system is fully ready. :mad: I'm severely peeved about this this week; I log in and try to start an app and it's a long time before the app starts, or I could wait that time and then when I start the app it starts right up. It's worse when my wife tries it; she's not as patient and understanding and starts clicking the icon several times. :sigh:
Rocky Moore wrote:
within the next 5-7 years the desktop OS will no longer exist.
I expect I'll still be running XP.
-
Wow. Admitting to software piracy on a software development message board. There's more than a few people who use this site who make their living from software, you realise?
-
Wow. Admitting to software piracy on a software development message board. There's more than a few people who use this site who make their living from software, you realise?
-
I want less! I just want an updated Windows 3.11! I want to be able to boot to the command prompt with drivers installed (Mouse, Network, CD, USB, Sound, Printer, etc.) And then only start the GUI if I choose to. I spend most of my day (when not here) working in a DOS box; I don't need the GUI. I don't want file names to contain SPACEs. I don't want the system to overwrite my settings: if I say I don't want a bunch of "templates" on the context menu, then I don't flipping want a bunch of templates on the context menu! If I say I don't want an IE icon on my desktop, then I don't flipping want an IE icon on my desktop! When Windows starts I don't want the login screen until the system is fully ready. :mad: I'm severely peeved about this this week; I log in and try to start an app and it's a long time before the app starts, or I could wait that time and then when I start the app it starts right up. It's worse when my wife tries it; she's not as patient and understanding and starts clicking the icon several times. :sigh:
Rocky Moore wrote:
within the next 5-7 years the desktop OS will no longer exist.
I expect I'll still be running XP.
Those are some of the worst ideas I've ever heard. Honestly. People talk about the 80s and early 90s as the glory days of computing. I remember those days too; they friggin' sucked. We take for granted that we don't have to fiddle with hardware IRQ resources before installing software or playing games. X|
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
-
Rocky Moore wrote:
I am thinking that within the next 5-7 years the desktop OS will no longer exist.
I've spent most of my professional life working on systems hosted on desktop operating systems that aren't capable of being run in a web environment. These are process control systems that use real-time and near real-time methods for dealing with physical phenomena that can't wait for a response from a server that may never arrive. At that, we're ignoring data rates that would make the pipes coming out of Google rupture from the strain. Given how more and more processes are being automated and integrated into the business infrastructure, I can't see 'Big Iron' operating systems going away any time soon. Even if we change the name to a 'real-time programming environment' or somesuch, the features required will still be there. We still need a robust system to manage processes/tasks/threads, a file system, devices, and a user interface, all of which don't rely on a remote server.
Software Zen:
delete this;
Fold With Us![^]Actually, I am referrring to the client OS, the front side. There will always be some that require so much heavy lifting that it will have a dedicated OS, but for the masses it appears to be changing.
Rocky <>< Recent Blog Post: Netflix coming straight to HDTV! Thinking about Silverlight? www.SilverlightCity.com
