aaaa ;-;

No wonder KolibriOS is so fast and small, it's written completely in x86 assembly code.

unpin comment lmao

I will add some things as a tetrio player: it seemingly doesn't use the usual seven bag randomization which is odd; it seems to lack a hold piece feature; & the colours of the tetrminos are random which is cursed.

@@average-neco-arc-enjoyer only the random tetromino colours are off to me, the rest is normal in classic Tetris rules, which these clones often use. Ofc. there's way more depth to the modern rules, with super-rotation, lock delay and hold. But this is more a fun add-on to a 1,44MB OS, so the simpler implementation makes sense.

Why would you want to port it?

​@@lukealadeen7836because ARM64 and RISC-V would be nice

isn't this written in fasm tho ? i feel like it wouldnt be impossible to port to arm

That explains everything actually. All my assembly projects were super unstable, probably helps to know what you're doing though 😂

Chatgpt from 2040 can do it easy!

The thumbnail "It's so small!" is probably not what you wanna hear in bed from a partner. ha-ha

JFC I died from laughter when I saw that. Not into the whole catboy thing, but hey, good content is good content.

It's not just the operating systems in themselves, but also the amount of different drivers, driver stacks, and the layers of abstraction required to support 238979823498235234 different hardware combinations really add up. There's a severe lack of standardization and unification in computing. That, and of course the calculation under capitalism is that developer time is more expensive that computing resources, so there is mostly little incentive to be efficient.

Well, this OS is literally assembly language if I don't remember wrong. Cuts down the amount of instructions to the *absolute* minimum required, but it's somewhat difficult to be productive when programming for something like that... I believe that you can run it in a VM though, so there's that...

Win 11 со всеми обновлениями может весить 50 ГБ. Это просто дичь какая-то.

@@redtex но линукс все еще может быть очень худым (разные дистро конечно могут и дофига занимать)

​@@Luredreier It is, yeah - 32-bit x86 FASM, IIRC. I haven't written enough assembly, let alone ancient i386-era assembly, to have a strong, informed opinion on how brutal it really is. But for what it's worth, assemblers like FASM, NASM, etc, are "macro assemblers", meaning you can effectively create reusable libraries, "functions", etc. And in the case of things like OS kernels, while C is common, you generally don't get the typical "ease" of C, C++, Rust, or whatever you're writing it in; you're going to be writing straight C [or insert language here] without any sort of standard library features, since those are all things that are generally implemented on top of the kernel -- which means you're going to be in for similar levels of brutal wheel-reinventing and extreme low-level development until you've got enough of the system implemented. While doing it all in assembly is still super hardcore, I could imagine an experienced person reaching relatively close to C levels of productivity, especially given that FASM in particular has surprisingly decent tooling and libraries available -- even purpose-built fully-fledged IDEs fresh.flatassembler.net/index.cgi?page=content/1_screenshots.txt I think the bigger "issues" are: - A. Lack of general mindshare; "popular" non-Linux operating systems, like the BSDs, already have a much smaller pool of users and developers available. - B. Lack of people familiar enough with x86 assembly to contribute - C. Being tied to particular platform; again, while macro assemblers make code re-use much easier (and therefore porting easier too), you're still writing assembly for a particular ISA, tying you to a particular architecture or subset of said architecture -- running something like Kolibri on anything that doesn't natively do 32-bit x86, or at least support some form of odd-ball x86 hardware-level translation, like Elbrus or Transmeta, requires significant porting or some sort of software-level x86 translation layer (e.g., something similar to QEMU, Box86, Blink, Rosetta). Also worth noting, while the majority of Kolibri is in assembly, there is nothing stopping you from writing a libc to make use of non-assembly programs when necessary, which is exactly what it appears they've done for a few bits and pieces -- e.g., the browser is a port of NetSurf, a tiny C browser. Similarly, I could imagine binary translation being viable; since Linux doesn't have any sort of "official" libc, the kernel syscalls tend to be very stable, making it a great lingua-franca for when applications are either distributed as proprietary Linux binaries or rely on loads of OS-specific code paths. Several daily-use-ready operating systems, like Illumos, FreeBSD, NetBSD, Windows (WSL1), and previously, OpenBSD, all have/had varying support for running unmodified Linux binaries using this approach. A number of hobbyist OS kernels do it as well. Fiwix is about ~30k sloc in total of pretty much pure C89, making it tiny and easy to compile, yet provides convincing-enough support for 32-bit x86 Linux ABI that it has been really useful for me in terms of producing verifiable builds; I currently bootstrap from a couple hundred *bytes* of hand-written, verifiable hex on "baremetal" to a modern Linux kernel + GCC/LLVM thanks to its simplicity and support for Linux binaries. And as a more real-world example: Prior to Joyent being acquired by Samsung and then eventually shutting down, they ran a large public cloud (think: AWS, GCP, Azure) based on SmartOS, their own own derived from Illumos (OpenSolaris). While they offered proper Linux virtual machines on top of bhyve/kvm for those who truly needed/wanted them, Joyent also ran a successful container-based service. With VMs, you've got overhead from all of the hardware virtualization, plus the overhead of running another Kernel, plus the millions of lines of extra code ripe for security vulnerabilities, but you also typically end up with either the physical server being under-utilized due to giving each and every VM truly dedicated resources [when the majority of the time, applications are not going to be maxing out memory nor pegging all cores], or you end up with poor performance due to the opposite problem - overcomitting/overselling resources, starving VMs for CPU/IO/whatever. So, containers made a ton of sense; why virtualize an entire machine, run multiple kernels, and so on, when you can just isolate applications and give the host kernel full transparency over resource allocation, thread scheduling, etc? In the Linux world, Docker and similar were new, and the way they were built was very different from the approaches taken by FreeBSD and Illumos/Solaris -- Linux essentially provided some primitive APIs you *could* possibly use to sandbox things, and then Docker was built on top of that, whereas Jails and Zones were built from the ground up as containizeration solutions. Because of that, and probably a variety of other reasons, container escapes were (are?) rampant, and so you commonly find people running Docker *on top of VMs*, essentially defeating the point. However, again, Joyent ran Illumos, not Linux; Solaris had Zones since ~2005 and they were pretty battle-tested at this point. Joyent had the competitive advantage of actually being able to run containers on multi-tenant hosts without it being a major security risk. But... again... Illumos, not Linux; it's a hard sell trying to convince your customers to port all their software to Illumos/Solaris when A. maybe they can't, B. it may cost a lot, and C. they'd be risking vendor lock-in. Joyent's solution was to just write a convincing Linux syscall translation layer -- almost something like Wine. But unlike Wine, the surface area of Linux kernel syscalls is a lot smaller than what needs to be done for Windows translation. So, [while still painful] this was actually super feasible and worked out great for them -- you could upload unmodified "Linux" Docker images and they'd transparently be converted to Illumos LX-Branded Zones with you, as the customer, being [hopefully] none the wiser.

NO BACK BACK BACK *meow*

meow :3

meow :3

mrow! :3

Also 14:11 Holy f K , it's upside down 😂

Same. Really refreshing and different to the norm style commenting. Love it

You should look up AmigaOS then, that fit on a DD diskette (half of the HD this one uses). :P

​@snotspat Ahhh, C= Commodore Amiga. Those were the days. 1.3, 2.0.

Just what I was thinking. My A1000 booted from a single floppy.

Well back in the day, the Amiga OS was on a floppy and Atari later brought out newer versions of GEM which were released on a floppy. The original Mac OS was on a floppy too. You would be surprised what was possible in the past.

@@cliffhulcoopofficial8075 not surprised at all. Got my first amiga in 1988.

Or Michael MJD, who I jokingly refer to as Druaga1 minus weed. Still convinced they're the same person.

Midnight Commander is still around, developed and maintained. I use the current version 4.8.30 on Linux every day.

DOS Navigator was (and still is) my absolute favorite.

@@worroSfOretsevraH In my dos days, I remember giving up of NC in favor of DN. I think it was version 1.5 and it was better in many ways than NC.

@@andreasklindt7144 I use MC on my slackware laptop, even under KDE. I find it more comfortable and easy to use than Dolphin or any explorer like FM.

​@@andreasklindt7144I tend to use gui on Linux because I'm not the most software savvy, but I always gotta get Midnight Commander because it always seems to save my ass when nothing else can...

What? It's a dude, don't be offensive

@@seemasse-more6333 meow :3

@@seemasse-more6333not according to her website

lmao@@seemasse-more6333

@@seemasse-more6333 I mean, they look like a trans girl, sound like a trans girl, and act like a trans girl...

MEOW!

seems still actively used and upgraded for other cpu ...

I thought BEOS was cool at 44 meg download

I thought Mac OS stopped supporting floppy boot by that point

@@charliekahn4205 Not Mac OS9, OS-9 I would also note that Mac OS9 is neither multi-user nor does it have preemptive multitasking.

lol. But does it have a GUI tho?

She more or less is who I wanted to be during college, a cute femme tech nerd with chill vibes. I'm only half of those sadly.

@@SonicBoone56 never too late :3

I had a rough day at work today, and I'm so glad that I had started watching this video before work and finished watching it after work. A real good palate cleanser at the absolute least. In seriousness though... mmmph, good vid!

Came here to find this. Yup the QNX demo was sweet.

QNX was amazing. I have tried a relatively small CD version but also came across the floppy one you mentioned. I also liked the similarly built linux distro called muLinux, which, however, formatted 1.44 floppies as 1.7 mb floppies (don't ask me how it did that, but it did). It had graphics, games and even a web and mail server built in.

@@tziuriky86 Microsoft used to distribute stuff in the same format: "Distribution Media Format." In addition to larger cluster sizes letting them shrink the file table, there were some other tricks. Pretty cool stuff.

I seem to vaguely remember also some kind of compressed FAT filesystem thing too... I think there was an option on Win95 to compress the filesystem and something like that was available on floppies too@@Insightfill

And me with a 5.25” drive and diskettes still...

An assembler is just a compiler that operates on a very low level language. The distinction is not fundamental and is largely an accident of history.

You're confusing assemblers with linkers, which link multiple object files together into a final binary program. Assembly may just be glorified machine code with labels and macros but that still technically makes it the lowest level programming language possible outside of writing literal machine code. Really, the difference between an assembler and a compiler is that a compiler has to generate machine code functionally equivalent to the high level code you've written and in the process do things like register mapping while an assembler doesn't have to do those particular things because you've already written the exact sequence of instructions you want the CPU to execute and explicitly specified which registers to use when.

So is getting a whole ass floppy into a camera. 😂

Why is it surprising? Yes MSDOS can fit in a 2.5mb floppy disk... We called it the "boot disk"

A gui can be created by a bunch of geometrical functions that draw such shapes, you don't really need chunky graphical libraries and classes that contain graphical objects to display anything like that like we do nowadays with high level programming: it's all programmed in assembly so it is fairly possible.It's likely that the biggest file in the whole thing is the wallpaper 😁😁 I've tried the predecessor of this OS already 20 years ago (Menuet OS) and it's always been like this. I used to make stuff in BASIC as a kid and weighted nothing. If you look into yesteryear programming and formats you'll find amazing stuff. Like the HAM format which allowed me to make videos with VHS quality weighting maybe 500KB for Amiga computers. About 5 years ago I even made a website with such files, that could be downloaded on Amiga computers (late 80's / early 90's): my Amiga 1200, for example, had only a 14 mhz CPU, 2 megs of ram and up to 4096 colours graphics. Equipped with a network card and a browser, I could access my own website and download such video files directly, that would literally start IMMEDIATELY with no delay when clicked or run through command line, as the image frames and sound bits were thrown directly onto the hardware without any special processing or decoding. While the quality is nothing compared to nowadays formats and tech, it was amazing to see the snappiness of such system (the OS just boots in 1 second in there, and has software that was used in the 80's to make Sci-fi movies....). Imagine videos with audio and all, just a few KB's, so they'd also fit floppies if you'd wish so 😁😁 Essential and minimalist computing is possible and is fun.

PS: Smash the fash 😎😎 always!

aaa tyy!~

If I don't want to watch someone's stuff I just don't watch it. Speeding it up is weird... I never use it.

@@Zellonous That is the state of people's attention span in this day and age.

@@Gold171 more like "my free time is too valuable to waste it on watching something at regular speed, but i'm still interested enough to invest some amount of time into the vid". That's how i feel about most content. But sometimes there are things that are eorth the full 40 minutes or however long they take. Even though i'm so used to 2x or sometimes even 3x, that regular human speech feels weird now

Full gui, qnx was like magic

@@user-sd3ik9rt6d Yes it was! 😉

Yeah, every time i see stuff like this the reaction is "Oh, someone 'innovated' what QNX-Demo did in 1999".

I was surprised how far down I had to scroll to find this comment. The backwards floppy was the only reason I clicked on the video. 😂

@@bitsculptor clickbait thumbnails are quite common these days, I understand the struggle of keeping the algorithm happy just wish that authors would add a comment acknowledging what they did so that people wouldn't lose their minds over these gimmicks, adding the comment shouldn't hurt them since they already got the click

Everything should be assembly.