Home | Reviews | GUIpedia | Forum | Fun500

BrandonLinux Kernel
I'm always thinking (well lately its been about my gf, but I had some free time today) and I always hit the conclusion that DOS has a few real issues: 1 It can't multitask, 2 It has some viruses, 3 Its dated- 16bit-XMS/EMS Crap-No dual core. But Linux doesn't have these issues and its free! So my latest crazy idea it to use the Linux kernel and a stripped version of X11, and then code everthing else, from the GUI, to the WM, to the desktop all in FB for DOS. Depending on how well the WM works, with a few dendancys you could run Firefox 3 and Pidign even. Think about it, we make a perfect base OS in FB, and it could run big apps if needbe. I suppose I'm in over my head, but I'm not happy with the OS choices on the market.		2008-11-188:17 PM
Re:Linux Kernel
sounds plausible...i'm in! lol :laugh:		2008-11-1810:26 PM
ToddRe:Linux Kernel
You'd have to do some reading on WMs and Linux GUIs. Plus you might have to learn C/C++ to do it. Most programmers use it since it's very efficient. Most incorporate Assembly on the side so it might mean copying a few snippets here and there. Still I thought of doing that too. I just never had the time to sit down and look at the code for something like Xfce or FVWM95.		2008-11-1810:33 PM
Re:Linux Kernel
Are you saying that only now you have found out about the limits and problems with DOS? Were you thinking that DOS and qbasic guis was some new technology and it was all going beyond everything we have today? I thought that this was all about the fun of making gold out of shit? First it was working with the limits of QBasic trying to make something functional. Then you took on freebasic which was 10x fast, many more built in functions, limitless memory, ..... Now you all code in freebasic? So the point now is to make DOS better. But you finally found out that DOS is old and outdated with many limits. And that it was really made for slower computers which were used for simpler things. So now you move on to trying to make a window manager for linux? So its from making gold out of shit to making shit out of gold. Maybe this GUI place had a different idea then what I had in mind.		2008-11-1810:39 PM
jasonwoodlandRe:Linux Kernel
[b]ysft wrote:[/b] [quote]Are you saying that only now you have found out about the limits and problems with DOS? Were you thinking that DOS and qbasic guis was some new technology and it was all going beyond everything we have today? I thought that this was all about the fun of making gold out of shit? First it was working with the limits of QBasic trying to make something functional. Then you took on freebasic which was 10x fast, many more built in functions, limitless memory, ..... Now you all code in freebasic? So the point now is to make DOS better. But you finally found out that DOS is old and outdated with many limits. And that it was really made for slower computers which were used for simpler things. So now you move on to trying to make a window manager for linux? So its from making gold out of shit to making shit out of gold. Maybe this GUI place had a different idea then what I had in mind.[/quote] Ysft, I can see clearly where you are coming from. This site to me is still called qb gui blog. Not fb. I thought that we were making the stuff that could have been made in 1992, not Y2K. Maybe QB is M$ but who gives a crap, Most of us hate him but we still use/d his software. We still can.		2008-11-194:56 AM
ToddRe:Linux Kernel
M$ isn't one person, Horatio. lol But I agree about it. I liked writing in QB since it was fun having limits on what you could and couldn't do and just seeing how far you could push it. Not to say FB isn't bad, but QB has been the older brother to FB and shouldn't be forgotten completely.		2008-11-1910:35 AM
BrandonRe:Linux Kernel
I suppose everything depends on your goals. If your goal is to make the most you can in QB like Ysft say thats cool, but my goal is to use BASIC for most or part of a usable OS, I want to see something I don't like and fix it in a few seconds.		2008-11-191:42 PM
ksrRe:Linux Kernel
For me at least, the 'point' is not to show off my oldskool pure QB hacking skillz. The 'point' is not to make DOS better. The point is to have a bit of fun, become more familiar with the higher-level programming concepts, and have something to show for it. The main application of Reflow, if there is one, is to run live off a CD as a little recovery/diagnostic platform. I've personally no interest in bringing DOS to a usable-daily level; that would be pointless (let's be real - how many of those old QB GUIs were run more than that one time after you downloaded them? How many have you actually used to do work?). This is why I use FB. Technologically there is no contest. [quote]So now you move on to trying to make a window manager for linux?[/quote] What surprises you about this statement? Technology moves on, and doing something like this is far more productive than making a QB GUI demo.		2008-11-191:50 PM
ToddRe:Linux Kernel
I agree. I mean I think it's good to raise your goals but not to forget the things you did before. We all move on and change is something we don't always like. Whether we like it or not, things change, sometimes for the better or for the worse. Yeah I had fun making a GUI just for the pure fun of it. I really wasn't much of a competitor since I worked on my own level and thought that what I made was perfect and a big accomplishment. While we all see things differently, we still have our own hobbies and side-projects.		2008-11-192:43 PM
agumaRe:Linux Kernel
lol honestly idc what language i use, qbasic is just the one my mom taught me. just saying anyway ysft is right, ksr is right, todd is right, brandon is right, horatio is right, everyone's right for god's sake! but the point is that qbasic just happens to be a language that runs on DOS! forgive me for sounding stupid, i'm having...uh, issues i need to think about BTW: This doesn't clear anything up at all, does it? lol pswel;		2008-11-196:09 PM
SonicBritRe:Linux Kernel
So whats interesting is I had a version of dr-dos called concurrent dos, which could multi-task (it provided 4 separate dos windows which you could use to flip between apps), last time I checked I dont think it ran under a vm, but it actually booted on my machine (a pentium d). Granted its not going to use 2 cores, but it would be interesting to see if you could tap into the 'power'. As it is I think qb is great but I think at one point we have all hit limitations which we wish it didn't have but it was written in another time, where those were the restrictions, fb does provide a way out of those (faster, more memory), question is if you go that route or not. I think its fun to see how far you can stretch qb to its limits.		2008-11-198:02 PM
ToddRe:Linux Kernel
[b]aguma wrote:[/b] [quote]lol honestly idc what language i use, qbasic is just the one my mom taught me. just saying anyway ysft is right, ksr is right, todd is right, brandon is right, horatio is right, everyone's right for god's sake! but the point is that qbasic just happens to be a language that runs on DOS! forgive me for sounding stupid, i'm having...uh, issues i need to think about BTW: This doesn't clear anything up at all, does it? lol pswel;[/quote] aguma, don't let people boss you around or tell you what you SHOULD and SHOULDN'T do.		2008-11-199:46 PM
agumaRe:Linux Kernel
um...i'm not really falling for anybody's opinion. i'm just falling. down. a lot.		2008-11-1910:24 PM
ToddRe:Linux Kernel
Just do what you want and don't care about what others say. If you want to work on Spark, work on it. Or if you want to work on new ideas that you've been having, do it. No one here can make you do something.		2008-11-207:36 AM
agumaRe:Linux Kernel
lol i just said that!!!		2008-11-205:45 PM
ToddRe:Linux Kernel
No, you said you didn't let people boss you around. I said you should do what you like.		2008-11-206:23 PM
agumaRe:Linux Kernel
aren't they close enough!? lol		2008-11-206:39 PM
ToddRe:Linux Kernel
No. lol		2008-11-207:34 PM

Other

2021 Brandon Cornell