On 5/5/2012 1:27 AM, Martin Kelly wrote: > What comes across to me is that if you remove the what i was > suggesting entirely from the equation... That a) it all seems like to > much effort and its much easier to whinge about the current > compatiblity issues than try and implement a possible solution or b) > You don't want to because your afraid of breaking what already exist... > > I find both in either case rather pessamistic. To me i would much > rather spend the energy to experiment the worst that can happen is it > doesn't work in which case your put back to the current situation. Or > alternatively you find something new out that a) can provide a new > feature/s for DOS. > > As Rugxulo as already mentioned is it such an insane idea to implement > or attempt to implement a new filesystem or is it that developers > would much rather be lazy about it all. (No offense intented) > > To me it comes across as the latter. Much rather find excuses for why > it won't work than reasons for how to make it work.
I have been trying to inject a bit of reality to this and it doesn't seem to be working - If you break compatibility with existing DOS, you break compatibility with a lot of applications. A lot of people use DOS because it runs the applications that they want to run. So you might wind up with a technically better operating system with few users. - The level of effort and technical skill you are talking about is enormous. You can have great thoughts and sketches of what the future should be, but redoing even a simple OS like DOS is not trivial. And then you still need the applications. Here is a small example - I started working on mTCP in late 2005. It was 2008 before I had an application suitable for an end-user to run. In 2011 the code was finally clean/stable enough to release. Right now the next version is over 36000 lines of code and comments. It's taken thousands of hours over the last six years to do this. That includes 228K of user documentation and another 60K of developer documentation, which is woefully inadequate and needs more time. Am I lazy for pointing out the level of effort and skill required to implement some of your ideas? How much effort do you think it takes to build a better DOS with the features that you are talking about? How about the applications to go with it? Do any other current active developers want to chip in with their experiences? Georg? Eric A.? Jack? I think it would be helpful to hear how much time it takes to maintain and develop applications and drivers for the existing DOS that we have. I've been spending my time and energy where I think it is most productive and does the greatest good. It's your time and energy to spend as you please, so go ahead and go big. But I really don't think you have an idea of the size of the undertaking. Don't be disappointed if everybody else doesn't jump right away - it is for you to lead and build that momentum. But please be more aware of what you are asking for. Mike ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
