A Hypothetical New Operating System

why bother when macOS is already perfect

Nobody here is intelligent and experienced enough to answer that question

From a layman (concerning OS architecture):

Ubiquitous and easily implemented compatibility with any and all non FOSS systems, programs, and peripherals while being completely FOSS and KISS. Also a very marketable and continuity driven UI like all the good things about macOS. Maybe based on Unix.

>>62244245
I like what templeos does with those hyperlinks. taldo? I forget what it was called but it is very cool.

P O R TO A G E
I
R
T
A
G
E

I CANT STRESS IT ENOUGH THIS IS THE ONLY PACKAGE MANAGER WORTH USING

the one thing I'd like to see is way more focus on UI. I have no clue how MS can employ all of India and still not have anyone tell them that Windows looks like crap. Apple has strayed from the path recently but they still know that a good UI is key to a general user satisfaction. Linux is completely hit and miss of course depending on what you use but even the most developed DEs have annoying bugs that show a lack of professionalism

>>62244245
because the /g/tard likes wasting his time with inane things, like compiling from sources and fixing configs after every update, we shall create a non deterministic kernel which corrupts files and processes randomly

>>62244245
>Are there any other features or ideas you would like to see implemented?
Compatibility with every program in existence. Literally the perfect OS.

>>62244245
>monolithic
>why: basically CUZ IT GUUD
>filesystem: ext4
>no it shouldn't after a certain year. If people are too lazy to upgrade and love obsolete shit they can use linux; they don't deserve to be catered to
>DE: both a windows-like and MacOS-like DE. People like what they are used to. Changing the environment to be different doesn't work here.

>>62244245
It would use a hybrid kernel. Pure micro kernels are robust, but have too much overhead for practical use. Monolithic kernels are fast but are a mess, and sacrifice security and robustness. A hybrid design combines the best of both. Put things that require performance in the microkernel, and expose many kernel objects to keep the userspace from dragging ass.

FS is a very broad question. Modern features like COW, atomic operations, and fine time-granularity are obvious. One would really be reinventing the wheel here.

Backwards compatibility support needs to be addressed to some degree, but that's also dependent on the developer/user culture around the OS. If nobody is willing to keep the ball rolling your going to be stuck supporting old software/hardware.

DE? As in describe it, or pick from something like GNOME or KDE?

Honestly I think XNU is the best kernel in wide use. It's far from perfect, but it's the best we've got for now. If Apple were to re-implement macOS's kernel I'd like to see them address the horrid IPC and VM performance.

Something like Linux. But with a monolithic kernel that isn't quite as monolithic as systemd

>>62244245
>what would you like to see?
A nice looking logo.

>>62244245
What type of kernel should be used?
Microkernel because I have a micropenis.

>What type of filesystem?
Just use a relational database.

>Should such and OS focus on backwards compatibility with older hardware/software/porting or should it focus on modern hardware and only be forward looking?
Just throw as many drivers, modules and libs in it as possible to support everything. Don't write a single line of code other than to put shit together. Somebody's done it before anyways.

>What type of desktop environment should be used?
JVM

>Are there any other features or ideas you would like to see implemented?
Keep all my shit in the cloud, access by scanning your face with camera.
Online account and internet connection required to log in.
Graphic scheme designed in PowerPoint.

>>62244452
Although I despise you for making typos, this statement represents the truth.