• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Back to the 100 OS Idea...

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Fedorenko

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2002
Location
Brisbane, Australia
Hi,

After running through some of my other *cough stupid *cough* ideas I have come to the conclusion that the easiest, cheapest and most practical idea is the 100 OS's in a box idea.

As you proabably already know, this sint the first time I have brought up the idea, but this time I have some new ideas. The most important new theory is emulation. I think, that will help me cut down the numbers I need.

So, out of my previous lists, I can add the AmigaOS XL.

That makes the current list:

-Plan 9
-Windows XP
-BeOS Pro
-QNX RTOS
-AtheOS
-TriangleOS
-FreeBSD
-RedHat Linux
-eComstation
-NeXTSTEP
-Solaris
-DGE
-PetrOS
-SkyOS
-MenuetOS
-Inferno
-Rhapsody DR 2
-OpenBSD
-Oberon
-AmigaOS XL

I need some new OS's. Just 1 rule:

-1 OS Type, 1 OS (Not 50 linuxes).

Any ideas are aprectiated. If you help, you get a 50 dolalr discount of the ones I sell over OC.com.
 
Last edited:
How about some of these?
I don't have any clue how many of them are even for x86 computers, but I know that some of them are.

Just one thing: why? That's a whole lot of work for a minimal return. I'm sure that by the time you finish you'll know enough to pull a Garfield, but other than that, you'd have no use for more than a couple percent of the OSs on your computer.
 
Pull a garfield, I like it.

Anyway, While there will be some effort (HCLs anyone?) It should be ok. Im prety sure that the computer I will run it on will not be top of the line, as alot of the OS's I will have to sue wont run on such new hardware.

Its main aim is to a talking piece (like most of my computer related ides). It will be in a Micro-ATX case with on of those 12" LCD screens they use at Supermarkets.

Also, as a note, I new OS can be thrown on the pile:

-KOS
 
eComstation = OS/2

OS/2 was sold or something to a new company, and that is the name of the latest version. Sort of like how Windows NT5 was called Windows 2000 and not Windows NT5.

You might want to add NetBSD to that list. And Darwin x86. And you spelled Solaris wrong.
 
Christoph said:
Just one thing: why? That's a whole lot of work for a minimal return. I'm sure that by the time you finish you'll know enough to pull a Garfield, but other than that, you'd have no use for more than a couple percent of the OSs on your computer.

Speaking of which, when Pride comes out, I could use it....
 
Fedorenko said:
I spell lots of things wrong.....

Ah, isnt darwin just Rhaspody. I dont know as much about the MacOS camp.

No, it isn't. Its related to Rhapsody, but its an up to date thing, a condensed version of OSX in a sense.
Beneath the appealing, easy-to-use interface of Mac OS X is a rock-solid foundation that is engineered for stability, reliability, and performance. This foundation is a core operating system commonly known as Darwin. Darwin integrates a number of technologies, most importantly Mach 3.0, operating-system services based on 4.4BSD (Berkeley Software Distribution), high-performance networking facilities, and support for multiple integrated file systems.


http://developer.apple.com/darwin/
 
You could always slap 98SE on there.

Even though MS made it, it uses a different kernel than that of Windows XP, so I supose it'd be "ok" to use it.
 
XWRed1 said:
eComstation = OS/2

OS/2 was sold or something to a new company, and that is the name of the latest version. Sort of like how Windows NT5 was called Windows 2000 and not Windows NT5.

You might want to add NetBSD to that list. And Darwin x86. And you spelled Solaris wrong.

Isn't that the ridiculously expensive thingy that I laughed at a while back?
 
parkan said:


Isn't that the ridiculously expensive thingy that I laughed at a while back?

You seem to laugh at a great many things. eComStation looks pretty ugly, but I'm still happy to see OS/2 going along at some rate even though I've never used it myself.
 
Back