On Sun, 15 May 2016 22:02:47 -0500, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 05/15/2016 07:56 PM, wrote:

[snip]

All you need is Chrome

Chrome OS. I prefer to have more control over my system. For one thing,
I DO NOT want to go through GOOGLE just to print a page to the networked
printer 2 feet away.

BTW, same thing for cloud thermostats, etc.. I'm NOT going to have
something like that controlled only by someone else's server.
If you want just a dead stupid web machine, that's all you need
though.

I'd never have one because I need more than a poor browser.

On 5/15/2016 7:59 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 05/15/2016 07:17 PM, philo wrote:

[snip]

If something works better and easier on Windows, I don't hesitate to do
so...nor do I proselytize for others to use Linux.

I don't understand those who seem to think you have to do everything on ONE OS.
I like Linux, but have nothing against Windows when something works better on it.

Exactly.

But, the problem isn't just zealotry on the user side.

Folks developing (marketing) OS's also seem to think
their "solution" can apply to all problems/applications.

If it can, it does so poorly. If it does so "well",
it is bloated.

Windows as an application layer (NOT an OS in 3.0),
Windows as a desktop OS, Windows as an OS for PDA's
(WinCE), Windows as an OS for phones, Windows as
an embedded OS, etc.
"Well, what is it, guys?"

The RTOS I've developed for my current project would
be **** poor in a desktop environment. It doesn't
obsess over speed, has no notion of disks, or users,
or The Internet, etc.

OTOH, it is designed to be reliable, robust, secure and
seamlessly distributed. The application has no idea
that it is executing on a set of ~100 CPUs vs. "just one".
Nor *which* of those it is executing on at the current time.