2004-12-21 22:09:23 GMT
J. Scott Edwards OS geek has written a nice article on OSNews about his ideal operating system. A lot of his ideas feel familiar to me (except from the 3D UI which I think is totally braindead and useless).
When he talks about the global object store as I would call it, I can really feel his pain. Let's take a short break... it's object store because it's a layer above the filesystem (ideally without a file system, but because backward compatibility it makes sense today using the Unix VFS API) that lets one define and create his/her own objects and relate them together. And it's global, because it not only stores which is accessible but it also stores which is inaccessible (off the disk - archived to CDs, DVDs, ...). So it's a 2 in 1 solution. I've been very concerned with archivation and sturctural storage problems in the last few months (years?).
Storage promised to implement this long-awaited architectural piece, but seeing how it progresses I'm not sure it's ever gonna ready.
When he talks about continuity, he thinks of orthogonal global persistence featured in the EROS OS.
I think another extremely important trait of a future OS is strong interprocess communication and code reuse. Applications are rather monolithical because of the diverse APIs and languages. Maybe language oriented programming really has a place because laguages are long term while APIs are rather short term. Ideally an OS is a set of strongly interconnected state machines with no multiplied, only reused code.
I like the philosophy of the Unununium OS. On the main page you can see Hans Reiser's quote: "The utility of an operating system is more proportional to the number of connections possible between its components than it is to the number of those components." I cannot tell in words how much I feel this statement true.
This guy even started his own project implemting this stuff in Eiffel among other languages. It seems to me like yet another idealistic never-will-be-ready project. Good luck dude! Anyone knows Eiffel by the way?
I don't like C++. In my opinion it's a hack, an OOP layer above C. I'm not alone, of course. I've just written an application in it. It was a prerequisite for a job and I had no choice in language, that's why I've used it. The task of the application was to create image maps and the related (X)HTML document from image files contained in a set of directories. It's a CLI application. I've used gd which is a C library so the mixed C, C++ code is ugly like shit and I sucked a lot with some segfaults too as expected and stdstream bugs (less expected), but it works pretty well by this time. However several things left that I couldn't figure out completely. I wanna clean up the code and completely get it. Here's how it looks like:
Apart from the hack feeling of C++, the separate definition (.h) - implemetation (.cpp) layout makes me mad. It's so disturbing editing dozens of these stupid files separately.
Amarok doesn't seem to be yet another winamp clone. I like its unique features and design. Especially the song playing statistics, the CD cover preview, its fancy visualization and the advanced playlist. It's worth reading the OSNews interview with the Amarok developers. Gstreamer is probably very flexible also. If everything goes well, I'll test it within a short time.