| Why would you want that?
That is the last thing I want. It is like saying that in ten years we will only have Pepsi Cola. As the only soft drink. You can get Pepsi Cola Mint ,Pepsi Cola Cherry, Pepsi Cola regular etc. But no matter what it will always be Pepsi Cola. I want more, a lot more viable operating systems than we have ow. Now is a sad place to be. Linux was never created to be a modern operating system. Parts in Windows NT -> were derived from VMS, though more and more of it removed. Some parts were removed and had to be reinvented (WSL). Bacm in the days, you could pick different hardware you could pick different oses (often tied to specific hardware). I liked Atari ST TOS/GEM. I thought it was way ahead of its time. I did not think that PCs in the beginning of the Atari STs were even comparable. Lots of peple loved the Amiga, great machine. Some people had the Archimdes. (ARM).
You had Macs with PowerPC. Lots of choice and lots of competition. Now you buy a computer of a specific design with little direct competition, though that is improving now. And you can pick between Linux or Windows. A single computer architecture.
A singe choice +1 for operating systems. I would really want to own a POWER powered Linux machine
but the are tragically expensive.For the most part they
do share the same architecture still. On mobile, we have Android or iOS.
Android has a lot of shared architecture for obvious reasons
and iOS most certainly does. It is like the American election, which white geriatric misogynists would you like? Linux is fully geriatric.
WindowsNT is getting there too. Can we please have a couple of teenage operating systems?
Some new viable babies? |
And hey, I’m sure if you work on implementing one maybe others will be interested in writing software for it. And that’s kind of the point, I guess: it’s a huge undertaking with little financial value for a business as opposed to extending on existing work. Standards give us a common language.