Do you understand what is Operating System?

[gizmoarena]

Dear mates, I want to discuss about something important [for my thesis actually].
Do you know what your "operating system" is?

If yes, let us know about what do you know, how long you are aware of it and what do you like or dislike about it. What do you expect from it and what are the things you think useless.

If no, why don't you care for it?

Most of the people are stuck with Windows Operating System. Why is that? If something new comes up why don't they want to move into that?

Lets start discussing.

[jargs]

Eh? Yes i know what my operating system is: Windows Vista.

[LaRoza]

What?

Most members of this forum use Linux bases systems, but there are Mac OSX users, BSD users, and Windows users. There might be a very other OS's used like Solaris.

[gizmoarena]

I didnt mean the name of the oeprating system.

The query was, do you understand what an operating system does? Why do you need it? If there are different operating systems, what are your criterias to choose them?

You can post about your comments about your system as well. (why you like it comparing to others)
Just few words / keywords will do.

thanks both of you for your replies.

[jargs]

I need an operating system so my computer can work...

[gizmoarena]

Eh? Yes i know what my operating system is: Windows Vista.

Alright, so why you are here (in this forum). You definitely have some points. Please post them. :)

[Vadi]

No, I don't really. Because there's the Kernel, the Desktop Enviroment, then some GTK/KDE frameworks.. where does the OS come in, I have no idea.

Don't care either, I like Ubuntu a whole lot better than other OS'es.

[gizmoarena]

I need an operating system so my computer can work...

Why vista? For example ubuntu could run more smoothly that windows. ubuntu is free along with it's softwares. You don't need a separate office suit. Hardware support is pretty much alright. Most of all, it can make your computer work (for free with support).

[jargs]

Alright, so why you are here (in this forum). You definitely have some points. Please post them. :)

I think Linux is interesting. Fun to mess with, wouldn't use it as a desktop OS though.

[Vadi]

(which is fine, because you're using services provided by it everyday already)

[gizmoarena]

No, I don't really. Because there's the Kernel, the Desktop Enviroment, then some GTK/KDE frameworks.. where does the OS come in, I have no idea.

Don't care either, I like Ubuntu a whole lot better than other OS'es.

Nice post. Thanks.

So, you are familiar with kernel, you run few softwares of GTK/KDE platforms and you are happy with the desktop environment.

You like ubuntu better than other OS's. Can you compare some points.
With OS X / Vista or XP?

[jflaker]

Dear mates, I want to discuss about something important [for my thesis actually].
Do you know what your "operating system" is?

If yes, let us know about what do you know, how long you are aware of it and what do you like or dislike about it. What do you expect from it and what are the things you think useless.

If no, why don't you care for it?

Most of the people are stuck with Windows Operating System. Why is that? If something new comes up why don't they want to move into that?

Lets start discussing.

An Operating System is a program which provides low level management of the computer's resources such as memory, disk, interupts, dma, etc. The OS MAY OR MAY NOT have a user interface (graphical or otherwise). Todays newest kitchen appliances may have embedded Linux which will control such things as timers or temperature........there is no user interface direct to the OS, but high level controls on the appliance which are queried by the OS.

[gizmoarena]

I think Linux is interesting. Fun to mess with, wouldn't use it as a desktop OS though.

I guess you are talking about customization.

Do you play games? Do you use Microsoft Office?

[Game_boy]

Do you not think you should do your own research?

In addition, you will need to use better grammar than that when writing a thesis.

[original_jamingrit]

It is difficult to say what the operating system is. An operating system should basically be the kernel and drivers, and then some way to interact with that, like a command line or desktop enviroment. But operating systems often include extraneous stuff, libraries, and application such as movie players, simple games.

So we might be able to say that the operating system consists of the stuff you need for it to run, and the rest are additional apps that can be installed or removed without affecting much of the rest of the system. But I wonder, where do you draw the line? Can Konqueror be considered part of an operating system that run KDE? Can KDE itself be considered part of the operating system? A compiler isn't necessary for an operating system, but it used to be considered one of the more important parts of it. Is this still true?

I know I'm asking more questions than I'm answering, but it's something worth thinking about.

[gizmoarena]

An Operating System is a program which provides low level management of the computer's resources such as memory, disk, interupts, dma, etc. The OS MAY OR MAY NOT have a user interface (graphical or otherwise). Todays newest kitchen appliances may have embedded Linux which will control such things as timers or temperature........there is no user interface direct to the OS, but high level controls on the appliance which are queried by the OS.


Nice, you know a lot of things. Thanks for posting. :)

Do you as a use care for how your operating system is taking care of Low level management? You obviously care for disk, memory management - because you get directly effected by their performance. But do you care other resources are getting managed by the OS?

Lets keep the conversation between Desktop OS's only.

[Lostincyberspace]

Well Giz the thing I like most about Linux is the level of customization that you can achieve with it and how easy it can be. I have edited my current desktop theme with almost no knowledge of how to do it just by copying and pasting a folder.

[aysiu]

This is a bit like asking people to define the word the.

People who can speak English (even people who aren't formally educated) understand what the is and how to use it, but they can't articulate a clear definition of the word.

Same goes for operating systems. Probably most Ubuntu users know what an operating system is but can't properly define it.

[gizmoarena]

Do you not think you should do your own research?

In addition, you will need to use better grammar than that when writing a thesis.

My research is about User Experience Evaluation. On my own, I guess I won't be able to come up with general user's ideas, thoughts and comments.

English is not my primary language. On last 4 years I was into technical English only [for university]. It was easy for me to forget grammar.

Thanks for your concern :)

[gizmoarena]

This is a bit like asking people to define the word the.

People who can speak English (even people who aren't formally educated) understand what the is and how to use it, but they can't articulate a clear definition of the word.

Same goes for operating systems. Probably most Ubuntu users know what an operating system is but can't properly define it.

True.

I wanted to know the general issues. There are ubuntu users who do not want to pay for OS. There are few users who want Linux power. Some wants desktop customization, some wants to show off.

Most of the users uses operating system just to use other softwares. [which is the real usage of an OS]. These uses do not care what OS they are using.

I want real users comments about these.

thanks for your reply :)

[gizmoarena]

Well Giz the thing I like most about Linux is the level of customization that you can achieve with it and how easy it can be. I have edited my current desktop theme with almost no knowledge of how to do it just by copying and pasting a folder.

Point noted. Thanks :)

So you customize the desktop themes and that is the reason you prefer linux. On windows / OSX you can't do theme customization unless you use some tools. Most of the times they are non-free.

You really don't need to know about internal stuff of customization. There are tutorials and nice sites kde-look, gnome-look. Which are pretty nice for customization.

Thanks again. Your post was helpful.
If there are other points, please let me know.

[DarkOx]

The query was, do you understand what an operating system does? Why do you need it? If there are different operating systems, what are your criterias to choose them?

I didn't choose Linux for the operating system. I've only got a vague idea of what the OS does: interacts with hardware, processes info, whatever. For the most part, the operating system was a qualifying dimension, and the programs it could run were the differentiating factors.

What I mean by that is the operating system must make certain basic requirements before I'll even consider it. I must be able to install it easily, and be able to easily install additional programs once it's running. It must be reasonably fast, and offered at a reasonable cost. It must be compatible with my hardware.

Once that bar is met (and most OS's do meet it), I'll choose which one to use based on the programs I need to get my work done, or game, or whatever it is I want to use a computer for. I tend to prefer Linux's programs to Windows programs and when I don't, the gap between them isn't very great (I'm thinking of Open Office here). So I use Linux.

[gizmoarena]

It is difficult to say what the operating system is. An operating system should basically be the kernel and drivers, and then some way to interact with that, like a command line or desktop enviroment. But operating systems often include extraneous stuff, libraries, and application such as movie players, simple games.

So we might be able to say that the operating system consists of the stuff you need for it to run, and the rest are additional apps that can be installed or removed without affecting much of the rest of the system. But I wonder, where do you draw the line? Can Konqueror be considered part of an operating system that run KDE? Can KDE itself be considered part of the operating system? A compiler isn't necessary for an operating system, but it used to be considered one of the more important parts of it. Is this still true?

I know I'm asking more questions than I'm answering, but it's something worth thinking about.

It is one of the most honest answer about any technical question. I appreciate you dude.

Check your answers on you PM inbox.

[sujoy]

An Operating System is a system software, that is used for

Process Management
I/O Management
Disk Management
File Management

and ofcourse to facilitate the use of other applications to execute so that every application developer doesn't have to be concerned with the minute details of the workings of the hardwares involved.

An application programming interface (API) and a hardware abstraction layer are its other properties.

In simple term, its only evident that in order to use a computer that consists of various types of hardwares, one manager is needed to control them. Thats the OS.

I am a linux user because of a number of reasons, all of which are equally responsible for my using it.


Open Source philosophy
Freedom to customize as needed
Security
Availability of Support
Ease of use
Large number of distros and apps available


I believe its(Linux in general) better than the rest of the lot because it doesn't restrict my ability to interact and experiment with the system, while also safeguarding me from damaging it.

my two cents :)

[intense.ego]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system

[happysmileman]

Well what I believe to be an operating system, and I'm sure is mostly correct, would be the kernel, as in it'd have to handle the hardware, along with drivers, it'd have to manage your memory and processes, handle the booting and basically get our system up and running to the point that other programs can run/

Then Desktop environemtn and all the programs run on thop of that, if they are needed (which they are in 99% of cases)

[jbaerbock]

I use a program that has the Linux Kernel as its base with other modules plugged into it to run seemlessly together as an Operating System for my computer.

I chose Kubuntu because I enjoy the KDE environment and the options it gives me to make my OS into whatever I want. Also enjoy it because it will always be free and the developement of it is done by people like me. People who want something that just works without corporations charging you hundreds for it.

In the end there are many reasons (such a stability) but I don't feel like typing all of them now.

[Kevbert]

Yes. My preferred OS is Ubuntu 7.10 x64, I also have the 32 bit version and ******* XP. By having an OS I can interact with the computer hardware.

[gizmoarena]

I didn't choose Linux for the operating system. I've only got a vague idea of what the OS does: interacts with hardware, processes info, whatever. For the most part, the operating system was a qualifying dimension, and the programs it could run were the differentiating factors.

What I mean by that is the operating system must make certain basic requirements before I'll even consider it. I must be able to install it easily, and be able to easily install additional programs once it's running. It must be reasonably fast, and offered at a reasonable cost. It must be compatible with my hardware.

Once that bar is met (and most OS's do meet it), I'll choose which one to use based on the programs I need to get my work done, or game, or whatever it is I want to use a computer for. I tend to prefer Linux's programs to Windows programs and when I don't, the gap between them isn't very great (I'm thinking of Open Office here). So I use Linux.

Points noted
1. must be able to install it easily
2. able to install additional softwares easily
3. Fast
4. Cost [that means you would like to pay if it suits your purposes, right?]
5. Hardware support

So you don't mind using any operating system that fits your needs.

Really helpful post. Thanks a lot :)

[gizmoarena]

[...]
I am a linux user because of a number of reasons, all of which are equally responsible for my using it.


Open Source philosophy
Freedom to customize as needed
Security
Availability of Support
Ease of use
Large number of distros and apps available




Another helpful post. Thanks sujoy.
I liked this thought


I believe its(Linux in general) better than the rest of the lot because it doesn't restrict my ability to interact and experiment with the system, while also safeguarding me from damaging it.

As I use linux for the same reason.

ubuntu for experiment, OSX for everything else :)

[gizmoarena]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system

I actually asked for your thoughts about OS. :)

[gizmoarena]

I use a program that has the Linux Kernel as its base with other modules plugged into it to run seemlessly together as an Operating System for my computer.

I chose Kubuntu because I enjoy the KDE environment and the options it gives me to make my OS into whatever I want. Also enjoy it because it will always be free and the developement of it is done by people like me. People who want something that just works without corporations charging you hundreds for it.

In the end there are many reasons (such a stability) but I don't feel like typing all of them now.

Points noted
1. You like the desktop environments. (desktop environment is important for you)
2. Free of cost (both software and support)
3. Community driven software

I have noticed your signature. Can you tell me why you wrote that? just few keywords will do.

Thanks for your helpful post :)

[tuebinger]

Dear mates, I want to discuss about something important [for my thesis actually].
Do you know what your "operating system" is?

If yes, let us know about what do you know, how long you are aware of it and what do you like or dislike about it. What do you expect from it and what are the things you think useless.

If no, why don't you care for it?

Most of the people are stuck with Windows Operating System. Why is that? If something new comes up why don't they want to move into that?

Lets start discussing.

I always thought the OS was the entire package. The kernel, the interface, and everything. I know linux is just the kernel and Ubuntu is the user interface built around the kernel, but I would say Ubuntu is an OS, like Windows VISTA and Mac OSX are considered OSs because they are complete packages.

I like the stability and security of Ubuntu linux and that it's free (free as in beer but also free as in open-source). I don't like that Ubuntu has some buggy features, like it doesn't give an accurate picture of how much battery life I have left and my screensaver doesn't always work like it's supposedtot. But things like this, that make it not so polished, are really minor issues and are outweighed by the security, stability, and open-source benefits.

I think most people are stuck with Windows because they trust Windows since it's the dominant operating system in the world. They're afraid to leave Windows because they won't have all the softwre available to them. They've invested a lot of money in Windows software. They feel like they are getting a quality product if they pay for it (this is psychological basis I believel).

[hessiess]

i have a verry basic knolage of how a os works, it just assigns resorces to aplications, switching quickly between them giving an ilusion that thay are all running at the same time. this is done becouse you would not have 1 core pur every app.

personaly i hate gui's that try to hide all the tecnical details. i use linux becouse i find windows boring, i use ubuntu becouse i want to use my pc, not spend howers seating it up

[gizmoarena]

This is the first post which literally answered my questions. Thanks a lot :)


I always thought the OS was the entire package. The kernel, the interface, and everything. I know linux is just the kernel and Ubuntu is the user interface built around the kernel, but I would say Ubuntu is an OS, like Windows VISTA and Mac OSX are considered OSs because they are complete packages.

Recent trends changed the formal definition of OS. If anyone releases only the kernel as a whole OS consider what would happen. No one will even bother to try it.

What do you think is right (not considering formal bookish OS definition). Now, OS means a collection of packages. Kernel, drivers, framework libraries, desktop environment and few applications comes in OS distribution package.

So, you have general idea of what OS is.



I like the stability and security of Ubuntu linux and that it's free (free as in beer but also free as in open-source). I don't like that Ubuntu has some buggy features, like it doesn't give an accurate picture of how much battery life I have left and my screensaver doesn't always work like it's supposedtot. But things like this, that make it not so polished, are really minor issues and are outweighed by the security, stability, and open-source benefits.

Points taken

You like
1. stability
2. security
3. free

You dislike
1. buggy feature (wrong info about battery life)
2. screensaver issue

(by the way, both of them are fixable.)


I think most people are stuck with Windows because they trust Windows since it's the dominant operating system in the world. They're afraid to leave Windows because they won't have all the softwre available to them. They've invested a lot of money in Windows software. They feel like they are getting a quality product if they pay for it (this is psychological basis I believel).

It's true that people are afraid to leave windows for several reasons. Most of them have never heard of anything else rather than windows. Some of them thinks Linux needs windows to run. I'd like to call it ignorance.

Most of the users are paying for windows unwillingly. It is not their fault. It became a custom to bundle windows operating system with new PC's for a long time. Again their are Mac users, who will never use windows or linux just because they feel windows/linux "complicated". Psychology kicks in again :)

Hey thanks your post again.

[/home]

Yes Doh

[gizmoarena]

personaly i hate gui's that try to hide all the tecnical details. i use linux becouse i find windows boring, i use ubuntu becouse i want to use my pc, not spend howers seating it up

Points noted

1. GUI's that hides technical detail [I didn't understand it properly, does Liinux GUI's shows technical detail?]
2. Windows is boring. [I agree, for me windows looks "pale"]

Thanks :)

[Kvark]

My understanding is that a computer consists of:

The hardware (and it's BIOS/firmware).
The OS.
Libraries.
Applications.

The OS is the software that makes the hardware do what it is designed to do and provides an environment for the applications to run in. This is mainly the kernel, the hardware drivers, various daemons/services and most importantly the toolchain that translates it all from readable source code to machine code that almost magically makes things happen. Some applications that are designed to manage the computer rather than to get stuff done can be considered a part of the OS, for example window managers, panel applets, file browsers, administrative tools like package managers and most command line programs.

Since I mentioned libraries I should also say that they are pre-made parts that can be used to build many different applications. For example rather than implementing a separate widget set for each application one can use pre made ones like gtk or qt when making applications.


My opinions about operating systems is that I use the hardware and the applications that are designed to get stuff done such as for example word processors, text editors and image editors. The OS and it's support applications that are used to manage the computer should take up as little of my time as possible and be noticed as little as possible as it's only the productive applications I want to interact with (or the fun ones, I like to play games too).

I use Ubuntu because it requires almost no maintenance. I think many are 'stuck' with Windows because most people don't want an OS so they don't look for an OS. They want a computer and applications so they look for that and end up with the OS that was pre installed on the computer when they got it. People may think "I want a great image editor that I can use to do lots of cool stuff with my photos." but non-geeks usually don't think "I want an OS with more efficient better memory management, hardware drivers, filesystem etc.". The ones who actually know of and consider alternatives but discard them due to misconceptions like "Linux is hard" are more computer literate than most.

[hessiess]

GUI's that hides technical detail [I didn't understand it properly, does Liinux GUI's shows technical detail?
to a digree yes, becouse it presents the terminal as a usfal tool rarther than hiding it away under start>all programs>acsessories>terminal. also you can run an app fom the terminal and use it like any outher gui app, but it also outputs infomation/ errors to the terminal.

i suppose "i hate os's that try to hide technical details" would have made more sense

[AndyCooll]

As has been mentioned accurately describing an OS can be like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

However for my customers I usually try and simplify it by saying it is the basic platform upon which all the apps run on.

I originally chose Linux because it was free. However I've become hooked with the whole open-source philosophy behind it. I like the freedom, choice and flexibility it brings, the community it enthuses, and the fact that we have one OS but differing flavours to suit everyone.

I cannot think of anything I consider to be useless, simply because I'm aware of aspects of the OS that I don't use but others find extremely important.

People are stuck with Windows simply because it was the OS that was installed on their computer. And because they know no different, they aren't aware of alternatives. Even if they are they are unlikely to be confident enough to install an alternative. Or if they could, while the OS may not be perfect, it does enough for them to not consider it worthwhile jumping from the unknown to the unknown. It's what they have become familiar with and the thought of trying something different (when they don't actually have to) seems a bit too much.

:cool:

[jpkotta]

Dear mates, I want to discuss about something important [for my thesis actually].
Do you know what your "operating system" is?

I consider the operating system to be the base system software needed allow a computer to run useful tasks and control hardware. The OS is what makes different hardware look sufficiently similar so that application programs don't need to worry about what the hardware is. The OS manages access to hardware so that all application programs can use it "simultaneously", or (if the hardware doesn't work like that) ensures that only one application can use it. OSes manage the application programs too, allowing many to run at the "same time", ensuring that each gets a fair share of CPU time and memory. In a sentence, OSes control hardware and manage access to it. Without an OS, you just have one program on the CPU, constantly looping and having complete control over all available hardware.

In a Linux system, this would be the Linux kernel, libc, and maybe a few other things. You don't even have a shell or things like ls and cp in this definition. Consider an embedded system that has a application that is a control loop that uses sensor readings to control some piece of hardware (e.g. temperature sensor readings used to update the amount of power going to a heating element). Systems like this may use OSes, but very possibly have no means of user interaction (command line, GUI) in the traditional sense.

The problem is that there is another colloquial definition of OS. It is the general purpose software that people interact with. Things like a filemanager, a menu to launch applications from, a web browser. In this definition, Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, etc., are all different OSes. I consider this definition incorrect.

I guess what I'm saying is that OS is the wrong term for what you're after. The closest term I can think of is "platform". This would be the colloqial definition of OS.


If yes, let us know about what do you know, how long you are aware of it and what do you like or dislike about it. What do you expect from it and what are the things you think useless.

If no, why don't you care for it?

I like Unix systems because they are relatively simple and rational. They are unfortunately not the most user friendly systems. I like Linux because it is a Unix system, it's free in both senses of the word, and it is popular enough to have the critical mass of people working on it so that it supports most hardware and applications that I care about. I like Ubuntu because it has a great package manager, is easy to install, and has a philosophy I agree with.

I couldn't care less about Gnome and KDE and other DEs. I use FVWM and various standalone programs.

I want to spend a minimal amount of time maintaining my system. I want support for common hardware. Mostly I just want to run my favorite applications.


Most of the people are stuck with Windows Operating System. Why is that? If something new comes up why don't they want to move into that?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_effects
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandwagon_effect

First, people need to know about the other system and why they would want to switch. The new system would have to work with the dominant system (Windows) pretty much seamlessly, since by definition most people use the dominant system, and people need to work together. The new system would have to be more than just better. It would have to be so much better that one could justify learning to accomplish the same tasks differently. This can be a very significant barrier, even if the different way is better.

[ice60]

here's some online lectures about OSes. i wanted to watch them, but didn't get around to it lol
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2668008653549333527

[NovaAesa]

An OS is all the stuff that gets installed when you stick in an OS CD and load it onto your computer (bar application software that may come with the OS, such as office suites and games). It includes the kernel, and the interface (desktop environment for *nix systems). The line that is draw as to which components make up as OS will change from person to person. But I draw the line as everything appart from application software, unless the applciation software is heavily integrated e.g. I would consider Internet Explorer to be a part of Windows 98, but I wouldn't consider it to be a part of Windows Vista, as it is not integrated as tightly.

I use different OSs depending on their different uses:

I use Linux for productivity for a variety of reasons. 1) It's very stable. 2) I'm doing a batchellor of software engineering at uni, and Linux is superior to Windows in the software-making-tools-department. 3) It's free (as in beer) so it's easy on my pocket. This is very important because I'm a student and don't have much money. 4) It's free (as in freedom) and this fits in with my phisosophical position. Also when I get better at computer programming I will be able to contribute to the GNU/Linux project. 5) The coolness factor. I like to be different. Makes me feel superior to me Windows friends.

But I also use Windows. The reasons for this are: 1) Gaming. Gaming is awsome on Windows. Gaming sucks on Mac OS and Linux. 2) ermmm, there was only 1 reason I use Windows :)