Re: UAPI [Re: [ros-general] ReactOS UI...]

Ok Thomas. I'll try and put it another  way.
The Original Windows is having anormous problems fighting off Virus and Malware.
It is known that it's vunerability is builtin to its original design i.e. the TSR.
Where does the ROS current design correct that inherent problem?
If ROS is short staffed now how bad is it going to get, if and when things do take off.
If a multi billion dollar enterprise cannot stop it how can ROS stop it?
This is not a trivial question.
Thanks
Justin

---- Thomas Weidenmueller <thomas(a)reactsoft.com> wrote: 
>   jwalsh(a)bigpond.net.au wrote:
> >   Hi Al.
> >  
> >  Please correct me if I am being too naive.
> >  But what you have just said makes so much sense to me.
> >  The windowblinds will in fact be a matter for the CGI; separating the Form from the
> > Content.
> >  I think I understand what you have said as being a kind of UAPI: Universal Application
> > Programming Interface.
> >  I did a quick google on the abbrieviation and it does not yet exist. Only API.
> >  I hate inventing new terms when old ones serve just as well, if not better.
> >  However it comes from my old hardware days when the second biggest chip on the board was
> > the UART: Universal Asynchronous Receiver Transmitter.
> >  It was cleverly reduced by TI to a tiny 16 pin package, the rest done with a special 4KB
> > bit memory and a few instructions.
> >  It (the "UAPI") does pretty  much the same thing which the Ethernet OSI 7 Layer
> > Model tries to do. So far it The API looks and feels like software but is actually
> > softWire, cleverly disguised. 
> >  I no NOT mean softwire as another name for software.
> >  Idealy the "UAPI"  reduces 7 layers of Meta-drivers to one Application.
> >  The use of the word Ether (like softwire) in the Network also lends false credence to the
> > meaning of the API.
> >  The Ether was once thought to be Matterial which conducted light i.e. a kind of invisible
> > wire. We now know it to be mere a Mode of the existence of Matter.
> >  Not an Object in the real sense but a purely Mental one.
> >  The concept may serve the interest of the Hardware (wire) Industry but not ours.
> >  Our R&D team is working  on this now.
> >  
> >  Thanks for the the enlightening thought 
>  
>  ok....what? Sorry, can't follow...
>  
>  - Thomas
>  _______________________________________________
>  ros-general mailing list
>  ros-general(a)reactos.org
>  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-general

[Thomas Weidenmueller]

jwalsh(a)bigpond.net.au wrote:
>   The Original Windows is having anormous problems
> fighting off Virus and Malware.
>  It is known that it's vunerability is builtin to its original design i.e. the TSR.
>  Where does the ROS current design correct that inherent problem? 
If we can't run viruses designed for windows (except those exploiting
bugs), the level of compatibility is rather low...

>   If ROS is short staffed now how bad is it going to
> get, if and when things do take off. 
We're not going to have an OS that I would consider stable in the near
future. There are bugs and flaws everywhere you look, kind of the same
problem that wine has.

>   If a multi billion dollar enterprise cannot stop it
> how can ROS stop it?
>  This is not a trivial question. 
Money can't fix everything, sometimes better decisions would help.

- Thomas

[Richard Campbell]

Last i checked, the ROS design isn't designed to correct anything.  It 
is designed to be a drop in replacement for Windows NT, 2000, XP that is 
compatible with applicatons and drivers.  It is then up to other 
projects to mod that as they see fit.

Richard

Thomas Weidenmueller wrote:

>  jwalsh(a)bigpond.net.au wrote:
>   
>
> >  The Original Windows is having anormous problems
> > fighting off Virus and Malware.
> > It is known that it's vunerability is builtin to its original design i.e. the TSR.
> > Where does the ROS current design correct that inherent problem?
> >     
> >  
> If we can't run viruses designed for windows (except those exploiting
> bugs), the level of compatibility is rather low...
>
>   
>
> >  If ROS is short staffed now how bad is it going to
> > get, if and when things do take off.
> >     
> >  
> We're not going to have an OS that I would consider stable in the near
> future. There are bugs and flaws everywhere you look, kind of the same
> problem that wine has.
>
>   
>
> >  If a multi billion dollar enterprise cannot stop
> > it how can ROS stop it?
> > This is not a trivial question.
> >     
> >  
> Money can't fix everything, sometimes better decisions would help.
>
> - Thomas
> _______________________________________________
> ros-general mailing list
> ros-general(a)reactos.org
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-general
>
>   
>