Subj : Re: Computer operating system of choice?
To   : boraxman
From : tenser
Date : Thu Feb 10 2022 02:51:39

On 09 Feb 2022 at 10:11a, boraxman pondered and said...
 
 bo> For example, I can choose my graphical environment of choice, configure
 bo> daemons as I see fit, choose to use the CLI over the GUI, or not use a
 bo> GUI at all.  FVWM is still highly configurable and I can change aspects
 bo> of the startup, and the kernel if need be.

If that's what you're into, go for it.  I used to be very into
configuring my environment, having for instance, lengthly X11
startup scripts and resource files, elaborate shell configuration,
etc.  Now, I mostly don't want to have to care: the interesting
thing for me is what I get to do _with_ the computer, not what I
do _to_ the computer.

 bo> We never really did have control at the CPU level. What has changed is
 bo> that where we used to be able to program the CPU at a fundamental level,
 bo> we are now dealing with an abstraction.  The machine may be doing things
 bo> we don't realise it is doing. 

If by, "we never really did have control at the CPU level" you mean
that you were constrained by the ISA, then I guess that's true, though
FPGAs have been available for a long while now.  Most machines you've
used have probably been microcoded as long as you've used them.

 bo> The external appearance is the same, but what is happening "under the
 bo> surface" as increased. 

Indeed it has.  So much so that the "operating system" is actually in
charge of a pretty constrained slice of the machine.  Timothy Roscoe's
OSDI'21 keynote nicely illustrated this very nicely.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/24 (Linux/64)
 * Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

.