Page 1 of 1

What computing needs is...

Posted: Mon Mar 06, 2006 8:21 pm
by Patz QuickBASIC Creations
Feel free to add to this list.

A free open-sourced FileSystem which would be easily accessed in any Operating System. NTFS is too closed off, EXT2 is losing it's usefulness to journaling filesystems, like EXT3. Many others are supported, but not as much. So far I only find FAT32 to be easily accessed by Linux and Windows...

Posted: Mon Mar 06, 2006 11:54 pm
by DrV
Apparently, you can access ext3 (and ext2) file systems from Windows with this thing:

In any case, I've given up on running multiple OSes on one box, so Samba/Windows file sharing works just fine for file transfer.

What computing really needs is quieter, cooler equipment and less moving parts. Traditional hard disks need to die.

Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:58 pm
by Guest
A powerful, stable OS with Universal Binary Compatiblity, no need to build anything from source(unless you choose yourself), one click install, and viral invulnerability

Posted: Sat Mar 18, 2006 10:42 am
by {Nathan}
Linux. That's what it needs. With:

Free CD shipping (Ubuntu)
1 click installation
Great, fast commandline, but you don't have to use it (for the n00bs)
Better driver compatibility between OSes (Like ndiswrapper)
Better use for 64 bit processors (I had to switch to 32-bit linux...)

New floppy drive system & floppies (They COULD be more usefull)
Better cooling systems (Fans?! ???!)
Remote control controlling (like turning on, off, ect)

A programming languege that is multi-platform, simple, and fast...

WAIT! Thats freebasic!

Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 5:22 pm
by Patz QuickBASIC Creations
Billgatus of Borg wrote:A powerful, stable OS
Anything is 'powerful'. Stable: Linux
Billgatus of Borg wrote:with Universal Binary Compatiblity
Windows is the closest, since most programs that come precompiled are for Windows.
Billgatus of Borg wrote:no need to build anything from source(unless you choose yourself)
Any OS except Linux (being general). But, not all Linux programs have to, though.
Billgatus of Borg wrote:one click install,
Windows and MAC OS X
Billgatus of Borg wrote:and viral invulnerability
UNIX-based OSes (MAC OS X included)

Speaking of MAC OS X, the one thing that drives me away from it is the fact that you have a different architecture to run it on. If MAC OS X were released for PCs, then I would use it :) (the closest you're gonna get so far) Having the 'Intel' MACs released confused me at first. I thought they were going to be i486 architecture, not some PPC-imitation Intel chip. (grrrrr!)

Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 1:57 am
by bungytheworm
Ill ratherly do some "real" installing instead of "clikck and play", what is very common on M$ os's.

Anyway, i can see some major changes in near future of computers.
Peoples skills and experiences with computers grows all the time. Peoples can and prolly wants to do/know more than "click yes to install". Computer is allmost one of those "kitchen words".

Here just came 3G mobile phones. Practically, it's computer on phone. I dont think it takes long anymore when computer, phone, tv etc. are really, one and same machine and it controls then so much that peoples definately wana know more about em than just "click and play". Alltho, updating tv by compiling code from source aint prolly either what peoples wants.

I guess future computing goes somewhere between M$ and *nix worlds.

Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 4:27 am
by Z!re
Patz QuickBASIC Creations wrote:
Billgatus of Borg wrote:and viral invulnerability
UNIX-based OSes (MAC OS X included)
Ha h a h a haa hh h aah ha aa hhh aah ha ha ahh aha ahh ah aha

Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 7:58 am
by rdc
Quantum computing. No moving parts, clock cycles at the speed of light, true multitasking with a single cpu, unlimited memory.

Of course a new version of FreeBasic would have to be written. :)

Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 8:04 am
by MystikShadows
LOL of course ;-)....

Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 11:40 am
by bungytheworm
cpu's that can produce good rock and cold beer in speed of light.
Done, end, quit, system, return 0; :lol: