Hmm.. are there any applications for Future OS? And can i really add any device and it will be recommended by the system without any device driver? Unbelievable!! and much better than SymbOS then, isn't it?
What's about respecting some rules?
As this is not Wikipedia but our own scene CPCWiki, I wouldn't like to force the articles to follow strict rules, but at least the following two rules should be respected by everyone:
- no advertisment-like phrases
- no false information
The following parts in this article should be removed and replaced in a section like "possible plans for the future":
- IDE support (mentioned several times, and first I mixed v8 with v9, but as it should only be a possible part of v9 [and now even v8 isn't released], it will not be implemented before 2007 or later, right?)
- CPC Booster support (you can't call an entry in the port monitor "support")
- Multi tasking (I couldn't find any references)
If I am wrong, and these features are already implemented in FutureOS and ready for download, please provide us a link.
Some other parts should also be removed:
- One-drive restriction of other OSs (nearly every OS can do this, even Amsdos allows drive letters in a path)
- Advertisment-like phrases (e.g. "FutureOS is for programmers who want to use the CPC at its limits" and other ones; these should be better placed on a homepage but not in a Wiki)
-- Prodatron 00:05, 9 August 2006 (CEST)
- I sense a scene fight coming on, I'm afraid... I do not wish to take any part in it, especially since I do not know anything about the common history of projects, but I hope it stays off the wiki!
I'll have to agree with some of Prodatron's remarks. The article needs heavy editing (I have altered several points myself, more is needed) so as to not appear as a commercial for FutureOS but more like an objective article. Also, at points it becomes more of a manual than an article on the OS itself.
That said, even in Symbiface there was the phrase: It provides nearly everything you need to change your CPC into a powerful work station! which is more of the same :)
To get back to Prodatron's remarks, if his points are valid the article should be corrected. If system .9, as it is called in the article, indeed refers to FutureOS v9 then I also think that it should be re-written, especially since not even v8 has been released (really looking forward to it!).
In general, I would urge ALL contributors who are also developers, to try and keep their usual enthusiasm (read: ego ;) ) at a low, since we are trying to do an objective work and not promote one or the other product... Thanks! Gryzor 09:47, 9 August 2006 (CEST)