Any other good Operating Systems that are 'modern' enough? - Hardware & Software

Do you know how old and fragmented some parts of the Linux kernel are? You should take a look some time.

[QUOTE=ricchan;27775531]You must either know your config files very while, copy them over, or don't use many applications. It takese me quite a bit of tweaking to get things how I like. I wouldn't call the install long, but the setup afterwards. But yeah, basically my point was it turned out to be as if I installed something like Ubuntu since it had all the crap that helped it boot on almost any PC via USB.[/QUOTE] after the initial setup, adding users and such, I just install openbox and the xfce goodies, from there it's just a bit of fine tuning, and copy my old openbox config files over.

Just throwing my 2 cents in here, but Virtual Machines are your friend. Also BSD

[QUOTE=rieda1589;27777644]Do you know how old and fragmented some parts of the Linux kernel are? You should take a look some time.[/QUOTE] Do you know how old and fragmented some parts of Windows are? You should take a look some time....oh wait... [img]http://ompldr.org/vNzhrYw/1296274253765.jpg[/img]

ReactOS is pretty cool. I'd mess with it if I had a PC I didn't know what to do with.

[QUOTE=n0cturni;27785746]ReactOS is pretty cool. I'd mess with it if I had a PC I didn't know what to do with.[/QUOTE] I would use it if my old laptop didn't have a USB built in keyboard (They don't support USB keyboards or mice)

[QUOTE=rieda1589;27777644]Do you know how old and fragmented some parts of the Linux kernel are? You should take a look some time.[/QUOTE] The linux kernel is as solid as can be, it's just that sometimes the distributions can be messy. If you want complete clean you might want to install gentoo or arch. Also on the point of windows being a patch of a patch of a patch of a patch, I actually think the DOS kernel is pretty cool too. The freeDOS project did an excellent job of bringing it back up to speed with the UNIX family. Now only if microsoft could only bend to the will of its superiors :smith:

[QUOTE=jjsullivan;27786329]The linux kernal is as solid as can be, it's just that sometimes the distributions can be messy. If you want complete clean you might want to install gentoo or arch. Also on the point of windows being a patch of a patch of a patch of a patch, I actually think the DOS kernal is pretty cool too. The freeDOS project did an excellent job of bringing it back up to speed with the UNIX family. [b]Now only if microsoft could only bend to the will of its superiors :smith:[/b][/QUOTE] Lol, they never will. There's still 16-bit icons in Windows 7. They have YET to build a new version of Windows starting from scratch, and it's much needed. Windows is indeed a powerful OS, but if they started over from nothing (as in... no borrowed code from previous versions), they could have a chance to optimize the hell out of it and keep it slimmed down, making for one lean, fast, and powerful OS. many people disagree with me, but I think Windows 7 is bloated beyond belief.

[QUOTE=.:GHOST:.;27788201]Lol, they never will. There's still 16-bit icons in Windows 7. They have YET to build a new version of Windows starting from scratch, and it's much needed. Windows is indeed a powerful OS, but if they started over from nothing (as in... no borrowed code from previous versions), they could have a chance to optimize the hell out of it and keep it slimmed down, making for one lean, fast, and powerful OS. many people disagree with me, but I think Windows 7 is bloated beyond belief.[/QUOTE] Yeah, pretty much every version past NT DOS is. The only kind of good feeling I have for microsoft anymore is the days of good 'ol DOS. Past that I wish they would just phase windows off the map and embrace UNIX and Linux and just develop software for those platforms. (In fact, the only large software and solution company that even embraces windows anymore is microsoft, Dell is crying in a corner because of the agreement they made with them. And IBM, Apple, and Google are all having to deal with everyone elses inability to break from their norm. Apple may not be a good alternative example but IBM always has. The last version of windows they officially supported was XP now the rest of their solutions are based on BSD, Linux, And Solaris.) [editline]31st January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=n0cturni;27785746]ReactOS is pretty cool. I'd mess with it if I had a PC I didn't know what to do with.[/QUOTE] [img]http://www.reactos.org/media/screenshots//2009/ros_039_msworks_85.png[/img] How the fuck did they get a DOS kernel to do that.... (I don't believe this is written from scratch, I want to, but I don't)

[QUOTE=ricchan;27782743]Do you know how old and fragmented some parts of Windows are? You should take a look some time....oh wait...[/QUOTE] I'm not even saying Window's isn't. I know Windows is messy, but so is every other OS.

[QUOTE=rieda1589;27788791]I'm not even saying Window's isn't. I know Windows is messy, but so is every other OS.[/QUOTE] Ah but you said the Linux kernel. Which is just the kernel and a few simple tools like a text editor and a compiler. With windows you don't even have the option of getting just a base kernel install, you have to deal with the rest of their bullshit like MS works and all of that extra plugin crap. So the Linux kernel is definitely more well put together.

[QUOTE=jjsullivan;27788379]Yeah, pretty much every version past NT DOS is. The only kind of good feeling I have for microsoft anymore is the days of good 'ol DOS. Past that I wish they would just phase windows off the map and embrace UNIX and Linux and just develop software for those platforms. (In fact, the only large software and solution company that even embraces windows anymore is microsoft, Dell is crying in a corner because of the agreement they made with them. And IBM, Apple, and Google are all having to deal with everyone elses inability to break from their norm. Apple may not be a good alternative example but IBM always has. The last version of windows they officially supported was XP now the rest of their solutions are based on BSD, Linux, And Solaris.) [editline]31st January 2011[/editline] [img_thumb]http://www.reactos.org/media/screenshots//2009/ros_039_msworks_85.png[/img_thumb] How the fuck did they get a DOS kernel to do that.... (I don't believe this is written from scratch, I want to, but I don't)[/QUOTE] It bases on Wine libraries so it's not [b]COMPLETLY[/b] written from scratch.

What the fuck is going on in this thread, you should all be ashamed. Also. [quote]ReactOS (React Operating System) is an open source computer operating system intended to be binary compatible with application software and device drivers made for Microsoft Windows NT versions 5.x and up (Windows 2000 and its successors). A spin-off of a previous attempt to clone Windows 95, development started in early 1998, and has continued with the incremental addition of features already found in Windows. ReactOS is primarily written in C, with some elements, such as ReactOS Explorer, written in C++. The project is ported to the ARM and AMD64 processor architectures, and partially implements Windows API functionality. The latter is assisted by including parts from the Wine compatibility layer for Unix-like operating systems, but other functionality is implemented by the developers themselves. However, progress has been hampered by a lack of developers with the relevant skill-sets. An extensive code audit is in place to protect against legal problems, such that implementation of the Windows API is only done by means of a complete clean room reverse engineering process. This has been in place following claims made in 2006 by a former developer and a third party in separate incidents that the project has either contained disassembled assembly code from Windows, or files directly originating from Microsoft. Both allegations have had no adverse legal consequences to the project, and development continues to this day. ReactOS has been noted for its information on undocumented Windows APIs and more generally as an open-source drop-in replacement for Windows. The project aim, as cited from itself, is to allow users of Windows to completely renounce use of proprietary commercial software without having to switch to a different operating system, such as Linux. However, a lack of corporate backers and dedicated developers have limited its efforts to realize this.[/quote] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReactOS[/url] read it for the love of god.

[QUOTE=Baldr;27794794]What the fuck is going on in this thread, you should all be ashamed. Also. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReactOS[/url] read it for the love of god.[/QUOTE] What did someone say that you feel the need to post that for?

To the guy with the image about the bits: Windows NT was originally 32 bit. You're confusing that with Windows 9x, which were DOS based 32 bit operating systems. Windows NT based OSes don't have an ounce of DOS in them. 32 bit Windows NTs have a copy of MSDOS with them, but it runs completely segregated from the OS itself in a VM. Learn up.

Keep in mind, Windows-Bashers: Windows is designed to be as compatible as possible with programs that could be 10+ years old. Thankfully, 32 bit is being phased out. Still, MS can't just "Start from scratch" because many people are dependent on older programs. Apple never had 15+ years of compatibility-weight on it's shoulders and could throw bat-shit insane things into the market and be called "Innovative".

[QUOTE=Venice Queen;27830391]To the guy with the image about the bits: Windows NT was originally 32 bit. You're confusing that with Windows 9x, which were DOS based 32 bit operating systems. Windows NT based OSes don't have an ounce of DOS in them. 32 bit Windows NTs have a copy of MSDOS with them, but it runs completely segregated from the OS itself in a VM. Learn up.[/QUOTE] it never said NT

[QUOTE=Venice Queen;27830391]To the guy with the image about the bits: Windows NT was originally 32 bit. You're confusing that with Windows 9x, which were DOS based 32 bit operating systems. Windows NT based OSes don't have an ounce of DOS in them. 32 bit Windows NTs have a copy of MSDOS with them, but it runs completely segregated from the OS itself in a VM. Learn up.[/QUOTE] Learn something new everyday.

Commodore's "Amiga OS Workbench"

[url=http://www.jolicloud.com]Jolicloud![/url]

[quote]Jolicloud is an Ubuntu-based [b]Linux[/b] operating system developed by the company Jolicloud.[/quote] I don't think there are many desktop OSes that aren't Linux-based. (Besides Windows and ones already mentioned)

[QUOTE=Pery;27750783]It's too popular.[/QUOTE] Hipster faggot.