OSDev.org

guyfawkes wrote:But thats has killed the hobby C OS.
Every ASM coder needs to fight OS's like linux, that's why we end up coding our own.
But if i was a C programmer, i would love linux and never want to code my own, that's why they have no incentive to code anything new, when theres so much free open source linux code about.

I would like a reasonable argument put forward to support these claims, because at the moment they seem very subjective, biased and illogical.

For instance, I don't see Linux as having killed the hobby OS. Indeed, I think it's enabled more programmers to get involved in hobby OS programming (due to the wonderful tools available on GNU/Linux that aren't easily available on Windows), and that's a good thing.

I am a C programmer, and I do "like" Linux, but I do want to code my own, without using any existing code at all... your point is now invalid.

guyfawkes wrote:But if i was a C programmer, i would love linux and never want to code my own, that's why they have no incentive to code anything new, when theres so much free open source linux code about.

...but you do realise that there are more differences between OSes than just the language they are written in?

guyfawkes wrote:All i will say is i coded one of the OS's in the links.

Too sad that you can't say which one because you would immediately be banned.

Anyway, it kind of explains why you keep defending these OSes, you probably feel offended by the fact that I'm not impressed by your OS.

JackScott wrote:Indeed, I think it's enabled more programmers to get involved in hobby OS programming (due to the wonderful tools available on GNU/Linux that aren't easily available on Windows), and that's a good thing.

Very conveniently ported to the Windows platform. Otherwise we'd all be stuck with Visual C!

guyfawkes wrote:I agree with you Combuster, linux wins as the most successful OS, that started as a hobby.
But thats has killed the hobby C OS.
Every ASM coder needs to fight OS's like linux, that's why we end up coding our own.
But if i was a C programmer, i would love linux and never want to code my own...

Sometimes I try to fathom what quirks of thinking could lead a person into believing that "having to fight Linux" and "loving linux" has anything to do with the programming language of preferrence.

Then, I quit the habit (again), because it makes my head hurt.

For the archives, my language of preferrence is C++, or C for certain projects. I'd also call myself proficient in Perl and Bash (plus a couple more that are not of general interest here).

Nevertheless, I hate Linux' guts, because it did kill the "hobby OS" to some extend, IMHO. I'm a Linux user, though, because I hate Microsoft that little bit more for killing the "small commercial" OS. (And for being such a crappy OS even when tempered with a Cygwin installation, and for charging outrageous prices, then charging again in a year or so.)

And my head still hurts from trying to understand what this could possibly have to do with programming languages.

Oh, wait... that argument came from someone who argued the general superiority of a programming language above all others, right? I should really stop trying to understand those types...

Am I the only one who doesn't make his decision about what OS to use based on the varying degrees of love and hate against the candidate OSes or their creators, but who justs uses what works best for him?

Kevin wrote:Am I the only one who doesn't make his decision about what OS to use based on the varying degrees of love and hate against the candidate OSes or their creators, but who justs uses what works best for him?

No, of course not. You can hate an OS on several levels: General Architecture, personal usability, policy / agenda. Windows got 3 out of 3, Linux just 2.75.

Every ASM coder needs to fight OS's like linux, that's why we end up coding our own.

Pause for a moment and explain how that makes sense.

But if i was a C programmer, i would love linux and never want to code my own, that's why they have no incentive to code anything new, when theres so much free open source linux code about.

"I" != "they". Your reasoning does not apply to most people, stop thinking it does.

Kevin wrote: Too sad that you can't say which one because you would immediately be banned.

I will give you all a good example of how linux has killed the hobby C OS.
Take SkyOS a great example of a hobby OS, but the more successful it became, the harder it became to justify not using a linux kernel.
In the end they gave in
http://www.skyos.org/?q=node

That was the beginning of the end for skyOS.
Also i do not want to point fingers, as to how much linux code was already in skyOS, but they seem to have ported it very fast

That means if you want a original hobby OS that will be still developed in 5 years time, your better sticking with 100% ASM or getting a linux kernel and start add your ideas.

As a side note the OS i am must impressed with, was coded in C and is very original and small (but not a hobby os) thats the qnxdemo
http://toastytech.com/guis/qnxdemo.html

So i can be done, if you put your heads together.

Why does language have anything at all to do with SkyOS' switching to a Linux kernel? Writing an OS in 100% assembly would just make it harder to keep up driver-wise, which was their main problem.

Someone who is willing to throw his C kernel away in favour of Linux would also throw an ASM kernel away. And if he badly needs all the device drivers that Linux provides, it probably makes some sense to do so.

Kevin wrote:Someone who is willing to throw his C kernel away in favour of Linux would also throw an ASM kernel away. And if he badly needs all the device drivers that Linux provides, it probably makes some sense to do so.

Can any of you name one ASM kernel thats switched to a linux or unix kernel ?

guyfawkes wrote:

Kevin wrote:Someone who is willing to throw his C kernel away in favour of Linux would also throw an ASM kernel away. And if he badly needs all the device drivers that Linux provides, it probably makes some sense to do so.

Can any of you name one ASM kernel thats switched to a linux or unix kernel ?

I can't name them because many didn't have names but 15 years ago many embedded software companies produced their own kernels in-house as part of there products. Some were written in C and some were written in assembler. I worked on both. Now almost all use Linux. It has nothing to do with C or asm.

Yes ASM OSes are more successful in being famous. To be honest though the fact that c programmers can copy each other's code is not a problem if you are experimenting in design. About 80% asm OSes have the same design!

gerryg400 wrote:I can't name them because many didn't have names but 15 years ago many embedded software companies produced their own kernels in-house as part of there products. Some were written in C and some were written in assembler. I worked on both. Now almost all use Linux. It has nothing to do with C or asm.

Exactly. It has to do with the global market and making people obsolete. If you chose a global product like Windows or Linux, you can replace your workforce with thousands of other people. It is the same in many other areas. Creative and inventive people are no longer needed on the local scale, and on the global scale we see poor designs becoming world standards not because they are good, but because of marketing and that you can pick people directly from the street to work with them.

Are we ever getting to a conclusion on any such topics? Since it is obvious that we aren't, what is the purpose of having this discussion?