Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> I could open files on floppies, hard drives, and CD-ROMs all with the same 
> API under MS-DOS. In what was isn't that handling the details of the 
> operation of that hardware?

  Grub can do that too. Heck, grub can even load a RAM disk image from a
disk (which uses basically any file system known to man), load it in memory
and boot from it. Grub also supports keyboards and mice.

  I suppose that makes grub an OS as well.

> >   MS-DOS was nothing but an application launcher, which kept some routines
> > in memory for the application to call if it wanted. After the application
> > launched, it had absolute control of the machine.

> So? That doesn't mean it didn't manage the hardware and share resources.

  Then grub is an OS, and bios is an OS.

  Ever been to the bios setup screen? Lots of support for hardware there.
And bios can launch programs too.

  Too bad the "os" part of "bios" does not stand for "operating system",
but it could well do.

> It 
> just means there was no protection to keep you from bypassing the OS. No, 
> sorry, a machine without an OS is one where you dial in the codes on the 
> front panel switches to load your application off paper tape and then branch 
> to it.

  That's BS, and you know it.

> Did *you* ever write an MS-DOS program that had to avoid accidentally 
> stomping on other people's files on the same hard drive?

  I have written a MS-DOS application which accidentally made the HD
inaccessible because of a bug. It almost caused me tons of trouble too.

> Do you think that the applications in your cell phone don't have complete 
> control over the hardware?

  Actually I do. The apps in my phone are extremely restricted on what they
can do.

> Do you think your cell phone doesn't have an OS in it?

  It does, which is precisely why those apps don't have free access to
everything.

> Do you think the AmgiaOS wasn't actually an OS?

  I don't know the specifics of AmigaOS to tell.

> Other than scoffing, what do you think, specifically, an OS has to do that 
> MS-DOS doesn't do at least in a primitive way?

  Maybe I could answer with a question: If grub is not an OS and MS-DOS is,
then where exactly is the line?

  Your definition of "operating system" seems to be "if the author decided
to call it an operating system, it is one".

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message