I have previously brought up this topic when I first joined about two months ago. We essentially agreed to disagree. Previously, I was working on writing the design specs for my CLR-based OS, which I named Ensemble (I'm the author of that "400-page" paper, which is more really like 20 something. And it was written two years ago as a final-semester independent research project right before graduation). While I'm a software guy, I have a heavy musical background, and Ensemble seemed an appropriate name (microkernel, where multiple different pieces are working together).
I, too, disagree with the FooOS type naming scheme. As was argued at the time, there have been appropriately "popular" FooOSs, such as AmigaOS, BeOS, and of course MacOS. However, none of those were really well marketed in the general public sense, save maybe MacOS. But even then, people are more inclined in the marketing sense to the Apple name, rather than the MacOS name. MacOS became popular as a side-effect of the Apple branding popularity. But who knows whether anyone wants to dig this argument back up. --S Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu wrote: > Ok pulled down the SVN tree. ISP is playing around with connection today so > it took some time after some resets. > > Anyways... I have a few issues and suspicions but will try to dig for myself > first before bothering you guys. But the first thing I'd like to bring up > for discussion... > > The name SharpOS. I think that as a name itself its ok. But I think there > are some issues with it. > > 1) Is this OS really tied to C#? Or IMO its more .NET. So SharpOS is a > misnomer. NETOS, or ILOS would be more appropriate. Granted I don't like > either one, but I have presented them as an example. CLROS is best of my > initial ideas. But point is moot because of point #2. > > 2) I don't think it makes sense to name an OS based on what it is written > in. Should Windows be COS? Linux CPPOS (granted its kernel is C, not C++), > etc... I think its better to name it after its goals, or something the OS > identifies with or does. DOS was clear - managing disks. Windows is clear. > Linux is clear (Linus Unix). > > As far as what to name it - well I have some ideas what I would name it, but > it depends if you guys have clear goals besides just making a .NET/IL/CLR > based system. Aside from running on managed code - what are your goals? > > Im not trying to rock the boat here, but I think its worth discussion. > > -- > Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu > "Programming is an art form that fights back" > http://www.KudzuWorld.com/ > http://www.Woo-Hoo.net/ > http://www.DelphiToDotNet.com/ > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. > Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. > Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. > Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ > _______________________________________________ > SharpOS-Developers mailing list > SharpOS-Developers@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sharpos-developers > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ SharpOS-Developers mailing list SharpOS-Developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sharpos-developers
