There needs to be an operating system built from scratch, and built right from the start. Linux is a big bloated shitball, Windows is a big bloated unstable and closed source shitball, and OS X is like a big cube of gay disappointment. BSDs are all stuck in the 90s and every Unix distro except maybe Solaris is completely dead, and those are stuck in the early 2000s at best. Plan9 is 80s autism.
If you want to know what a really good desktop OS looks like, take a look at Haiku OS. It has a good looking and consistent GUI that just works, and as a result it's simple and convenient to use. The installer works flawlessly in under a minute. Due to it's Unix-like underpinnings, you get a fantastic file system (BeFS) and other tools like Bash, and partial POSIX compliance makes porting a lot easier. It uses a hybrid kernel that's rock solid and offers many of the features of a full microkernel, including the isolation of device drivers.
The ideal server/embedded OS is Sculpt OS. This is a full microkernel system that's based on the seL4 kernel and the Genode framework. This is literally space age software being made available to the public, which was previously only used in the consoles of fighter jets and other advanced weapons systems. You never have to reboot for updates, and it's damn near impossible to knock it offline unless you break the hardware. The modular design allows it to heal itself. If one process crashes, even in the kernel, another can simply restart it without restarting the whole system.
you cannot compare linux to windows. windows is a deteriorated mess, unexamined. they have lost control of it.
Both are, my friend.
We should kill Apple and loonix, thus making Microsoft a monopoly, and then getting the DOJ to break them up into smaller companies and opensource Windows, then we'll scrap Windows 10 and port its kernel back to Windows 2000, and start from there.
most of linux's "bloat" (which is actually necessary if you don't want an ad-hoc piece of shit) is driver code, and its implementation was well designed so they can be disabled when you compile the kernel.
>It uses a hybrid kernel that's rock solid and offers many of the features of a full microkernel, including the isolation of device drivers. Thats great, but does it have a reincarnation server able to restart even non-critical drivers like the video, audio and printer drivers?
Everyone working on that that could make it worth the effort is 80 years old and senile now
>BSDs are all stuck in the 90s Why do you say that? You sound absolutely clueless. The PS4 runs on freebsd, as does Netflix. OpenBSD works great a desktop system. Installation is very quick and simple, and I bet it's more stable than Haiku.
More chance a 96 y/o grandpa with ED can get his dick up than GNU/Hurd getting double digit users. Microkernel shills, ay. Haven't seen those in a while. Wanna know why no market OS uses a microkernel? Because it's a failed concept. It kills performance to just be "smaller". Since the days of MINIX we were always told, microkernels are the future, they will be king and monoliths will be dead, that utopia set by a retarded professor was, is, and will continue to be, a lie. >Installation is very quick and simple, and I bet it's more stable than Haiku Don't need to bet, can confirm. Although drivers on OpenBSD are janky at best and my X200's track point was as usable of a pointing device as fingering an actual clit, Haiku's nightly build system that's just a gamble if it'll boot or not is pathetic and constant freezing every 20 seconds is more than enough to drive you to schizophrenia levels of insanity.
>muh performance meme Intel sacrificed system security for performance too. Look how well that’s going for them.
Also, your mentality when it comes to microkernels comes from a very mach-era time period. Since then, we have had major developments such as the L4 series, which provide a much more performant design while keeping the advantages of microkernels intact. Hell, even Google is redpilled on this front, as their new Fuchsia OS uses a microkernel design.
You don't know anything about operating systems you retarded kiddie, fuck off.
> Because it's a failed concept. It kills performance to just be "smaller". Only unsafe languages Like C kill performance of micro-kernels.
>The ideal server/embedded OS is Sculpt OS. You misspelled Minix
this. you can have your minimal linux kernel, but then you'd complain that nothing works when you plug it in.
Fuchsia is all-new based on Zircon (Little Kernel)
No, Windows is shit to the core.
Who told you that? I only ask because you are clearly and obviously far too fucking dumb to have learned that yourself.
Have you at least looked? Yeah, but Fuchsia is a mobile OS. Fucking Christ, using anything else than C or C++ in kernels... You people really are hipsters.
> No one is proposed to do a logo.
/gee/ i'm disappointed :(
lol, no one cares which OS hosts your browser, the web is the desktop now, bow to your JS overlords plebs
Look into urbit, friend
Bow to your weblog assembly overlords. Php in the browser. Sure you can do that.
Haiku is retarded and just slightly better than classic mac os. Plan 9 is the future, and microkernels are like communism, Stallman
Any sufficiently advanced program is a bloated mess, it is just unavoidable. Reinventing the wheel every time it happens is setting yourself up for a lot of wasted time, which ultimately accomplishes nothing.
>Any sufficiently advanced program is a bloated mess, it is just unavoidable. a program can be advanced and big without being bloated, it's more a factor of how many people are working on it and for how long
>OS X is like a big cube of gay disappointment How? It's based on a microkernel and closer to Unix than all the other shit.
>a program can be advanced and big without being bloated One would hope so, but it doesn't seem to happen. Bloating is often the result of different interest groups pushing for different things and a lot of things are implemented which weren't necessary to begin with, just to keep all sides happy.
>it's more a factor of how many people are working on it and for how long Yeah, but usually the more important and advanced a program becomes the more people work on it, that is what I meant.
it's easy to make an OS if you only have fixed hardware to deal with, so muh fighter jets and weapson platforms isn't really an argument. Unless you're building a kernel from scratch, you need to support every PC hardware configuration under the sun, with workarounds for shitty implementations (I can't say that would never happen with milspec or other high reliability systems, but i'd like to think not). Plus, the debate between monolithic and microkernels has been ongoing for decades now, it used to be the case that message passing overhead removed any performance advantages microkernels may have had, not kept up tho.
>not even POSIX compliant (it breaks from its own certification) >has a hybrid kernel and bunch of FreeBSD components Yeah, okay.
Fixed hardware is an interesting point. Perhaps it can be more broad than that, but I think it would be interesting to see operating systems geared towards a specific class of hardware. So a “Server OS” that only contains support for the hardware server systems might need, and no desktop-specific shit. Vice versa for a “Desktop OS”. As of right now we have an abundance of mediocre and bloated “General-Purpose” systems, and I’m not sure that’s a good thing. Windows and loonix can be servers and desktops, and are quite flawed at either of them. In a sense, it would be like if Microsoft’s business model was motivated by technology and not kikery. They offer desktop Windows 10 and for a higher price, Windows Server, but all they’re really doing is selling you the same “general-purpose” OS and paywalling the Server features behind the more expensive package. What i’m Talking about is mutually-exclusive design. Systems designed around their role in the network and a respective class of hardware, and ONLY that network role and hardware class.
>The ideal server/embedded OS is Sculpt OS. This is a full microkernel system Bla-bla. Yeah, i heard the same promise for QNX and Symbian too, but both are a unstable clusterfucks and consumed by a "big bloated shitball". Deal with it. >Microkernel shills, ay. Haven't seen those in a while lel
> I think it would be interesting to see operating systems geared towards a specific class of hardware. Buy an Amiga. At least you will have a gf of a kind.
>haiku >good looking Opinion discarded
how do i make my linux more minimal?
Genode is actually really well done for what it is. There's an OS with a network stack, semi accelerated graphics (faster than Xorg/Wayland on equivalent hardware!), and a basic shell in ~20MB. It bloats up real fast if you install VirtualBox or other Qt applications, though, and it's written in an unholy combination of C++ and XML. I think Redox OS will be a better take on the "capability based microkernel" approach if only because using Rust for most things - including the libc - provides compile time safely without the hell of a 15+ year old C++ code base.
>i can make a perfect OS that is better than linux Linux literally runs perfectly on everything except for the desktop environments which is filled with propriety shit that Windows and Apple has monopoly on. Games can run on Linux if NVIDIA would stop being a dick
The funny thing is that the combination of Linux's popularity, its monolithic nature, and the GPL are basically the perfect combination to force people to open their driver code. All these alternative microkernel OSes are running Linux drivers on rump kernels and GNU environments for unixy shell tools anyways, at which point you may as well use Linux.
Make clean menuconfig Make
>Fucking Christ, using anything else than C or C++ in kernels... You people really are hipsters. Says the freetard.
>Unlike most historic microkernels, its components execute in the same address space (process), which contains software-isolated processes (SIPs). These SIPs behave like normal processes, but avoid the cost of task-switches.
>Protection in this system is provided by a set of rules called invariants that are verified by static program analysis.
Task switches only cost you because you write in garbage languages. You can ditch the whole mmu because only garbage languages need that.
>ditch the whole MMU lmao no
best idea itt
microsoft is the only os vendor with real hardware support for anything other than server usage office, av editing, gaymez, even dev stuff is windows central
>How to write a horrible OS 101
Everything you just listed has nothing to do with hardware support. Linux already has all of those.
Eh, no. No Linux drivers and no GNU crap is the standard.
The MMU is useful even with secure languages, I'd prefer an MMU even if the language, OS and hardware is mathematically verified correct - the specification may still be buggy.
Everything becomes bloated, no matter how elegant and minimalist its creators intend for it to be. It's because software development is never "done," so people have to keep thinking of things to do. Everyone says "What if we add this feature? What if we add support for this OS? What if we add COBOL bindings and get it to run on a mainframe? What if we abstract everything and get it to run on this toaster with Harvard architecture and 3-bit middle-endian machine words with only K&R C?" Now your code base is an unreadable header soup of #ifdefs and a group of inspired newcomers says "Let's rewrite this project to be minimal and elegant for REAL this time." It's entropy, the 2nd law of thermodynamics. In a way it's kind of like the biological cycle of birth and death. Software starts out as a zygote, pure and ready to be molded . Over its lifetime it accumulates error and damage. When it dies it inspires a fresh rewrite that starts out pure and minimal again.
Lonix isn't os it's kernel. Soon gnu linux will be system/lonix Anyway what is the issue with monolithic kernels? Even windows you can't say it's totally monolithic, even more Linux. It's much more modular than older systems
Micro kernel is another pipe dream shit idea with lots of context switching to the point it inpair performance
Temple os remains beuftidul and perfect because you can't install anything, it's already perfect and complete as it was designed by God
Why not just use Haiku OS and Sculpt OS instead of creating a new one from scratch?