Theoretical Question

General discussion and chat (archived)
Locked
User avatar
GildedKinesis
New to the forum
New to the forum
Posts: 1
Joined: 2019-01-09, 17:41

Theoretical Question

Post by GildedKinesis » 2019-01-09, 18:58

(Hi im new here)
So basically lets just say someone was to create a whole new operating system
Could someone use palemoon as the built-in web browser akin to Internet Explorer albeit with branding removed

sorry if this is breaking any rules

yami_
Astronaut
Astronaut
Posts: 506
Joined: 2018-04-26, 11:05

Re: Theoretical Question

Post by yami_ » 2019-01-09, 20:12

In theory it would be possible.
cat came back from Berkeley waving flags -- rob pike

User avatar
Moonraker
Board Warrior
Board Warrior
Posts: 1694
Joined: 2015-09-30, 23:02
Location: uk.

Re: Theoretical Question

Post by Moonraker » 2019-01-09, 22:59

A whole new operating system in this era would have to be quite extraordinary and microsoft and linux or BSD for that matter pretty much have all the bases covered so a new os is probably not warranted or needed.
Xenial puppy linux 32-bit.

Pale moon 29.0.0.

vannilla
Board Warrior
Board Warrior
Posts: 1479
Joined: 2018-05-05, 13:29

Re: Theoretical Question

Post by vannilla » 2019-01-09, 23:18

Moonraker wrote:A whole new operating system in this era would have to be quite extraordinary and microsoft and linux or BSD for that matter pretty much have all the bases covered so a new os is probably not warranted or needed.
More than not being needed or not being extraordinary (which are both subjective qualifications), actually being able to comply to firmware and hardware standards and conventions is practically impossible unless you have the same amount of people working on the already existing systems.
Which means that if you are just one person your system will barely work inside a virtualization software.

User avatar
loxodont
Astronaut
Astronaut
Posts: 652
Joined: 2014-07-26, 23:03
Location: Mare Serenitatis

Re: Theoretical Question

Post by loxodont » 2019-01-10, 01:54

Theoretically many things are possible, more at least than "reality" seems to offer, but in regard of Pale Moon/UXP being developed to run on existing OSes, it tends to be more of a fantasy question. Also we're still living in a cruel world of laws and rights and a simple read of the terms of use would show, that using Pale Moon and just removing the brand (for what?) wouldn't be possible without dealing with the owners/developers.
So much I would like to see Pale Moon as part of a whole new OS (I cannot create), not based on technology of the sixties (or even earlier), I don't see anyone to make this step, may be Linux could be a base, at least from their ideas. So, ... perhaps in a hundred years.

Thehandyman1957

Re: Theoretical Question

Post by Thehandyman1957 » 2019-01-10, 02:38

Original comment removed by me due to misunderstanding. :oops:
Last edited by Thehandyman1957 on 2019-01-10, 05:04, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
loxodont
Astronaut
Astronaut
Posts: 652
Joined: 2014-07-26, 23:03
Location: Mare Serenitatis

Re: Theoretical Question

Post by loxodont » 2019-01-10, 04:36

lol, "cruel world" ... I should have marked it with some smiley (but I didn't find any for my half-humour on that).
Calm down. I was just referring to the OPs idealism that someone could just use Pale Moon, unbrand it and use it as whatever OS's default browser. In other words: OPs idea is a no-go.
I am in absolutely no disagreement with Moonchild Productions and the terms of use as they stand and I very much respect and appreciate the work that people put in it. I guess you read that the wrong way or it's my not so perfect writing.
Also I don't want to make any "legal rules"...(what are you talking about?)
Now, please care about your completely unnecessary stomach sickness. :wave:

*edit: @OP: I don't see the point of this post/"theoretical question" anyway (??)

Thehandyman1957

Re: Theoretical Question

Post by Thehandyman1957 » 2019-01-10, 05:02

loxodont wrote:lol, "cruel world" ... I should have marked it with some smiley (but I didn't find any for my half-humour on that).
Calm down. I was just referring to the OPs idealism that someone could just use Pale Moon, unbrand it and use it as whatever OS's default browser. In other words: OPs idea is a no-go.
I am in absolutely no disagreement with Moonchild Productions and the terms of use as they stand and I very much respect and appreciate the work that people put in it. I guess you read that the wrong way or it's my not so perfect writing.
Also I don't want to make any "legal rules"...(what are you talking about?)
Now, please care about your completely unnecessary stomach sickness. :wave:
Ahh, ok. I'm sorry then. It just came across wrong I guess. The idea on the "legal rules" is
folks that think the world is owed to them without any work from themselves when in power
will take from those who labor to give to those who don't by law.

Thanks for clearing that up, it just sounded like you were advocating the idea that it
should be ok to just take what Moonchild and team had made and give it to anybody
without any type of credit to them. ;)

User avatar
loxodont
Astronaut
Astronaut
Posts: 652
Joined: 2014-07-26, 23:03
Location: Mare Serenitatis

Re: Theoretical Question

Post by loxodont » 2019-01-10, 05:51

Thehandyman1957 wrote: Thanks for clearing that up, it just sounded like you were advocating the idea that it
should be ok to just take what Moonchild and team had made and give it to anybody
without any type of credit to them. ;)
No, absolutely not. I rather advocate the idea that people who work should benefit from that efforts and have a good life. And it's most obvious that a project like this depends on money and legal terms to keep it running and let people at least pay their bills.
Off-topic:
Thehandyman1957 wrote: Ahh, ok. I'm sorry then. It just came across wrong I guess. The idea on the "legal rules" is
folks that think the world is owed to them without any work from themselves when in power
will take from those who labor to give to those who don't by law.
No problem, you were probably not completely wrong. But in my view you rather describe the conditions as we have them in our society. ;)

User avatar
Moonraker
Board Warrior
Board Warrior
Posts: 1694
Joined: 2015-09-30, 23:02
Location: uk.

Re: Theoretical Question

Post by Moonraker » 2019-01-10, 09:24

I must add that the google OS if i have understood the technical details correctly is nothing new either..from what i see its their browser placed on top of gentoo linux which incidentally could be created for free on a second hand laptop and yet people are buying these in their thousands..tactical move by google perhaps but in my view its misleading to advertise your own OS when in theory it has always been here.
Xenial puppy linux 32-bit.

Pale moon 29.0.0.

User avatar
Moonchild
Pale Moon guru
Pale Moon guru
Posts: 29311
Joined: 2011-08-28, 17:27
Location: Tranås, SE
Contact:

Re: Theoretical Question

Post by Moonchild » 2019-01-10, 09:58

Theoretically: absolutely.

How difficult it's going to be depends on how different the brand new operating system is going to be from established ones. The more diversion, the more difficult it will be.
e.g. if the operating system uses a compatible binary format to Windows or Linux, then standard compilers could be used to generate binaries for it. If the driver and hardware interface layer is compatible (or abstracted to be compatible) with existing operating systems, then that would also make things easier.

Code changes to target the new operating system would probably be needed, which means contributing patches to the UXP repo to target the brand new platform.

So, aside from how feasible it's going to be to create such an O.S. (which wasn't really the question by the OP), making Pale Moon its default browser is absolutely possible, in theory.
"Son, in life you do not fight battles because you expect to win, you fight them merely because they need to be fought." -- Snagglepuss
Image

Locked