About 5 years or so. OS was in ROM

About 5 years or so. OS was in ROM.

Other urls found in this thread:

github.com/mist-devel
youtube.com/watch?v=lJJfuQTjSQ8
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Nowadays you have an entire OS hidden in your CPU.

You mean like a Commodore 64?

this, it still is.

Yeah, most old, simple computers like that had OS in ROM. The Amstrad could also boot CP/M from floppy disk, if you really wanted to. That was mostly just useful for businesses, due to the huge CP/M software library. But there were also many business programs for native OS too.


But you can't use that one. I'd not for us, it's for them. ;-(
We need TempleOS in ROM! We need to be able to boot in one second flat into comfy OS where you can draw on screen with just one line of code. MINIX isn't comfy anyway, it's just another Unix clone. Booooring!

5 years? Are you dumb?

its IN THE PROCESSOR these days,
have you heard of MINIX IN INTEL CPUS

Now, ROM is in OS.

github.com/mist-devel

Isn't TempleOS distributed in iso form which is meant to be burned into ROM.

Intel ME isn't "In the CPU". It's part of the Platform Controller Hub that replaces the North/South bridge

Thanks for the info. It sounded like Intel had put a small ARM core on die with everything else, but this makes more sense.

One could argue that C64 didn't have operating system, it was just striped down Microsoft basic and a kernel (which they called kernal)
Amiga for example had the operating system split into two parts. The kickstart was in rom (except for the very first Amiga model, it had to boot from floppy) and it had the multitasking kernel, most of the disk commands and graphics library, but it still couldn't do anything on it's own. The second part was "workbench" and it had all the software. It was also possible to just kill the system and take the control over the whole hardware and most intensive applications like games and drones did that, booting straight from the floppy.

If it lets you operate the computer, edit/run programs, read/write files to a storage device, interface with other hardware via serial/parallel ports, and so on, then it qualifies as an OS. That's basically all MS-DOS did, and CP/M too. The Amiga was really advanced for its time, and so had a more powerful OS.
The tragedy of modern computing is that OS's (and software in general) have become so complicated that they're always in flux - to fix bugs, add stupid "features" (that half the people didn't want), and other wastes of time. In the old days, you could just sit down at the computer and have fun, not worry about the OS crap constantly. I really miss that. Back then it was even common to make your own tools, like this guy explains:
youtube.com/watch?v=lJJfuQTjSQ8
These days the only way to have fun is with experimental stuff like TempleOS, or cobbling together old chips and/or microcontrollers into custom board, and then write your own simple OS. Modern stuff is a snozze fest and endless grind.
Btw, the OP was supposed to be attached to the thread "What's the longest you've ever gone between OS upgrades?" I probably got distracted by multitasking or cianiggers or someshit.

And one would be a gnutard who takes IT lessons from someone who has never installed a Linux distribution.

sure. I don't argue that. I find it very impressive that Amiga multitasking kernel was just 14kb. Amiga was so much superior than the PC. It's a damn shame the company went under. And if you listen to interviews of the engineers or of the Commodore UK boss you'll learn how much they were hindered by the retarded management in usa. It could have been so great. The last chips they were working on were on par with ps1 or better in 1994. 4 playfields of 16bit colour, chunky mode. Risc based graphics chip with 3D. 5.1 stereo audio
...

Did you know that Stallman is a very experienced operating system programmer? He was a pioneer in the field of os programming.

Too bad they didn't just make the Amiga hardware open, so anyone can build it. Even more than 20 years later, they haven't done anything with it except sell KS rom and WB disk images. Instead people had to reverse engineer everything for emulation and FPGA, but yet they still want to sell those kickstart...

the pcb layout was always open, the only thing that is not open are the custom chips, of course that's the hearth of it all, but I doubt they even still have the die shots. these were made by hand without any computers.

Yeah, I'm getting really tired of this shit.

Yep, and all of the firmware for it is held in the BIOS ROM except for the newer version. The newer version switched from an ARC core to an x86 core and part of the boot firmware is a module called ROMP that's burned into the silicon, and it acts a bootloader for the ME, though the rest of the modules like the BUP and KERNEL are still on the BIOS ROM.

RISC OS is comfy, the whole thing is in ROM and it's a full graphical coop multitasking OS with lots of software

You can't run Emacs without a kernel though, I don't think it counts.

That sounds pretty good, and they have newer versions that can run on ARM SBC, with ROM image on SD card. But can you use it without a mouse? I hate all the desktop shit and being forced to use mouse constantly. Even the Amiga had a powerful shell, and some people just used that instead of loading the Workbench.

I spent almost as much as the price of the whole machine for a 4 MB fast RAM expansion for my A500 to always keep the whole AmigaDOS directory and my personal scripts and extensions in memory. The Amiga had persistent RAM disk, so it would survive resets and stay in memory until you powered down the machine. You could even boot from RAM disks.

It required a 3-button mouse as all 3 buttons were actively used. I imagine it still does.
Such is dealing with a real GUI. It can run vim though.

yeah, the rad device it would survive resets. that disk had fixed size though, where the real ram disk was dynamic allocating 1kb at a time. funny how windows still can't do that.

Without EFI and BIOS bloat, you could fit a useful OS in ROM today. BIOS was originally the system-dependent part of CP/M and DOS, and EFI is an OS itself with a file system, networking, graphics, and EXE format, but it's only really used as a bootloader.

hasn't ESR said something similar? I don't think he even installed Ubuntu on the desktop he got a couple of years ago.