There are many out there Windows Mac Linux are the first 3 that come to my mind instantly My question is why does Microsoft have most computers clamped down with their operating system windows. I found with most programs out on the market there are copies of copies of copies. Anti virus programs, Text editing programs, anti spyware, browsers Why not operating systems. I understand that an operating system as a whole is way more complicated then any single program that runs on it. But why not 100 companies out there making operating systems for computers competing in one huge market dance. Sure, Windows has the market by the balls with Mac and Linux mingled in the mess. why not something new. why isn't there someone somewhere revolutionizing the operating system as we know it. Does it take that long, and is it that hard? or am i just being Ignorant Why not create a GUI where a person can choose how it looks as its installing. why so many limits thanks
Chicken and egg problem. Let's say a company makes a new killer OS tomorrow. Where are all the programs that are gonna run on it? Unless you're saying they have to make it run Windows programs, which is basically what Wine does on Linux.
Windows is too powerful and they eat up the competition. Most others don't gain enough of the market share to be worth developing new ones. JMO
Vista is far from powerful, it's restrictive, cluttered, overcoded, slow, resource hungry, it looks like a clone of a mac, and generally its really poor. I think the main reason as suggested is compatibility, microsofts code is closed source, and so to make an operating system that supports all the programs available for windows by default would be too hard if not impossible, libraries like wine have been in development some ten years and still don't have it completely right. The next thing that comes to my mind is that people dont actually want the next generation of operating system just yet; 2 weeks ago I bought a £400 Packard Bell Easy Note laptop from my local pc world, it came with microsofts latest blunder - this os survived less than a full hour before it was torn from the disk and replaced with good old trustworthy xp, I need to know that when I install programs they work in a timely manner, I also need to know when I make programs they will work everywhere else, Vista can't be sure of that, it's not good enough. Personal Computers are everyday things now, most of the western world have one in their house, and those of us that actually use our computer, the last thing we want is to wait for animations, or be asked for permission everytime we want to change something, or to wait minutes for my IDE to respond when the pc has more than 4 programs open, or to wait for 5 minutes to get permission to save a file outside of the docs folder. If windows is so crap then why do we use it ?? We have to, like you said the programs we rely on require that we use windows, however you do have a choice, there are literally hundreds of different versions of linux that differ from each other as much as a rhino and a rose do, if you really want to try what the OS world has to offer then use Linux, my laptop as I said is running XP, and I need that for msvc and my preferred php editor, however my personal computer is a dual core p4, with nothin but linux installed, three different versions, slackware, centos and debian.
yes it is very hard to design an OS. Now that the windows OS have been around for a long time, its difficult to change. That means if later some really smart mathmatician comp sci dude from MIT finds a problem with it, all they can do is cover up crap with more crap in hopes its OK. computers is like the car industry. instead of building the same honda civic from the 1970s for 3k brand new, you are forced to get a loaded car that does the same think as the older cars but you know have to pay 20k. so like vista, i remember 128mbs of memory is all you needed like 6 years ago, now you need 2gigs!
I have evolved through most major operating systems. I started with a Mac in 1988. Switched to OS/2 Warp in the mid-1990s because Macs were simply too expensive compared to build your own computers and I needed true multi-tasking for my work -- which was unavailable on the Apple operating system or Windows. I had used Linux by then, but I had so many problems writing graphical programs for Linux, that I gave up on it. And I could not afford Unix. I switched to Windows NT when I got my first dual processor machine because it was not supported by OS/2. I switched to Windows XP and then Server 2003 when I switched from a dual Pentium to a dual Athlon box because NT lacked the drivers. On my next computer upgrade I needed to switch back to XP because 2003 would not load on the machine. I recently started playing with a new machine. My son was running Vista beta on it, but it timed out on May 31, and I am not willing to pay the hundreds of dollars needed to relicense the OS. I tried installing Longhorn Server 2008, but it would not recognize the wireless network card. I tried installing Server 2003 and then XP, but neither would not recognize the network card. In fact, no version of windows recognized much of the hardware on the motherboard. And, without internet access, searching for drivers would be difficult. And, I want the OS on that machine to "just work". I tried installing the Linux distro called CentOS and it did not recognize the wireless card. I tried the 64-bit version of SimplyMepis and it did. So I installed it. It took around 10 minutes from that click to reboot into a fully functional desktop with internet access, including the ability to play video and music from the internet out of the box. I was surprised. It "Just works" on that box. So, I loaded VMWARE server and I will use SimplyMepis as the main OS. For any Windows progreams I need, I will run them in a virtial machine. If I have learned anything, it is that I will use any OS which works and I will switch to one which does, rather than stick with one that cannot keep pace with the advances in the computers that I use, when I am making the switch.
Thank you for the replies. It gave me more in site on the matter. Especially the program compatibility issues. On a side note i have Linux Kubuntu sitting on my desk, and i never tried it yet. The only version of linux i tried was Knoppix. Knoppix was fun. Its default was german so it took me 2 hours to figure out the default keyboard driver settings and a way to flip it to english. Ive been debating to swap Xp for Kubuntu. is it worth it? im above average user for computers. Im self taught and catch on quick. would it be worth my while to trash Xp and venture into the Linux world?
There are probably hundreds of OS companies out there. Many are based on the *nix core but there are many others too (if you include server OS's as well as desktop). Many however are fairly specialist and are aimed at a very small market. As others have said, the issue is getting people to write software for you for a start, there is the option of running emulators but then you have to ask the question of why run OS/2 on your PC and run windows applications under an emulator, potentially with problems, rather than just running windows? It is also a major task to write an OS and also keep it up to date with basic drivers for hardware which is why there are so many OS's based on the *nix core
totally ageed, it is the leadership in os market as the graphical interface is very easier to use than the command line option like linux. Though liunx gnome projects go on forever. As windxxx 3.0 starts are very popular in industry and i still keep a winxxx1.0 in my disk. rgds
Actually if you count each Linux distro as a separate operating systems, there's a ton out there. There's also the BSDs as well. For me, if all the games out for PCs were compatible with Linux, I'd switch over to Gentoo in no time. Everything else I need has really been replicated for Linux by now.