OS design principles

0.OS should be as fast as possible.
1.OS should use the least memory, unless it hurts #0.
2.OS should have the most security, unless it hurts #1,#0.
3.OS should have the most compatibility, unless it hurts #2 , #1,#0.
4.OS should have the most features, unless it hurts #3,#2,#1,#0.

Operating systems are essentially deprecated, I can already do 99 percent of what I want from within a web-browser.

>>2
A web browser is just a layer which utilizes OS resources. You're still using an OS.

>>3
What's your point?

NIGGER ARSE

Security is more important than speed and memory.

>>6
Just don't have bank accounts or credit cards and you'll be fine.

>>7
Says the stalker.

If you're making an embedded system like Rockbox, your rules are the best. If it's connected to the Internet, security is king. If you can get rooted just by connecting to the Internet, it's crap. If it automatically downloads and runs executable code a la ActiveX in IE 4, it's crap. If every program has raw access to every device as an ordinary user, it's crap. If there's no memory protection (per-process address spaces, segments, a VM, or type tags), it's crap.

>>9
For embedded systems reliability and predictability become the most important rules. For practical reasons, you often also have to prioritize resource consumption over speed.

5. OS should allow for the easiest getting of dubs, even if it hurts #3,#2,#1,#0.

0. OS should be like Unix

Done.

OS should have the most security, unless it hurts #1,#0.
So basically no encryption at all.

Your design sucks. It would be fast, memory wasting and insecure.

>>13
So... Windows 98?

Fast when? Least memory where?  You can't just say ``hurr durr, design choice is optimize speed'' - there are tradeoffs you need to take into account.

>>14
No, Windows ME.

>>2
What I want to do is different from you, so bleh.

OS should let you customize stuff and not shove bullshit gimmick crap down your throat.

1. Stability
2. Simplicity
3. Security

Everything should be standardised.
There should be alternatives to everything.
Everything should be file.

0. Security
1. Security
2. Security
3. Security
4. Security

It should be written in C.
It should use lightweight C library like musl.
Everything should be statically linked.
The tools should work efficiently together.
The base system should be minimal.
The file system hierarchy should be simple and minimal.
It should be combine the best features of BSD and GNU/Linux.
It should have package management and trusted software repositories.
It should use rolling-release.
Everything should be well documented.
It should have good hardware support.
It should have good APIs to attract developers.
At first it would be good to have emulation for dynamically linked binaries, linux binaries, linux proc filesystem etc..

lel I'm such a nerd I start my lists at index 0. *giggles*

OpenBSD?

>>23
0. Must be developed by an absolute cunt.

Btw is there any good competitors to POSIX?

>>25
Inferno OS

>>25
Let's:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POSIX
Let's scroll to the bottom and look at the "See also" section, which may have relevant nformation on the article that I am reading.
TRON project – alternative OS standard to POSIX
why oh my, there are such things

>>25
Windows NT