Extremely cool indeed!

I'm actually not entirely convinced that a standard MSX is going to be capable of duplicating this. For one, this is an 8KB mode, the smallest MSX has is a 16KB mode. But even then the graphics seems a bit quicker than I'd expect msx to be capable of. However, the most damaging is msx io. A standard msx blocks everything on disk io, making anything like the demo virtually impossible.
I'm guessing that for this to work, low level io drivers need to be written. And an adram mod might be nice as well.

I'm very curious about how the multitasking and memory management stuff is set up though. It looks very smooth!

It is simply unbelievable (though seeing is believing)! This will definitely put MSX on shame, won't it? How come we don't have such a great thing for our system?
It is fast, smooth, responsive with no dealy, like an ideal OS has to be.

I hope MSX professionals here will illuminate all of us with their opinions and prospects about porting this OS to our lovely system.

Indirect VRAM access makes this quite difficult. Anyway, do we really need to replay videos in our MSX in windowed mode?

I was pretty happy with the Turbo-R GT graphic shell. Too bad it is in Japanese!

The main problem regarding the development of any OS is not only the quality of the final product, but the support received by the developers. I do not want any OS if there are no applications for it. It is ok that the out-of-the-box distribution comes with different applications, but will be there any other?

That's why CP/M is so great.

Yep, mentioned that earlier also.. if there's no support in the form of used-made applications then it's a nice coder's showcase product, but nothing more than that.

The biggest competitor - in a way - is simple old DOS. If ppl are used to run a commandline application to play a tune, watch a vid, run an application/game or whatever, then there's no use making a GUI for it. (For that reason I never used Windows 3.11, which was more or less something like Ease on MSX .. nice that you can make icons for DOS applications but is it useful to start Win3.11 for that? )
There's however some use of a GUI: users can simply make apps they couldn't do otherwise, and the GUI usually takes up most of the developmenttime. Preferably by using some high-end language like Basic/Pascal, this way such an enviroment can appeal to a lot of ppl who can program a bit, but simply lack asm-skills..

60000 ^_^

Quote:

and the GUI usually takes up most of the developmenttime.and the GUI usually takes up most of the developmenttime.

Just like making custom buttons in an OS like Windows...

You'll be hearing this for a long time, mate

And there's nothing wrong with that when they're actually better. Or would you dare to say that the Windows GUI is ideal, perfect, finished etc. ? Theres so much to explore yet in terms of human interaction and optimizing.. a set o' simple widgets isn't up to the ideal way of working yet.. by far.

This is my prefered order:
1 design an app
2 decide what human-controls it needs and what they should do in the best case
3 make those controllers
4 make the app

rather than:
1 look which widgets we have
2 make an app with those

What about the elegance of a real graphical OS? Everything will be there in the environment, you don't have to quit a program in order to launch another, everything's handy and reachable in a few mouse clicks. You don't need to reset your system everytime you want to quit an application. Isn't that great?
Will the limitation of MSX (I/O stuff among other things which I don't have the least clue about them) compell us to stick with the DOS prompt? Isn't that sad?
I would love to see a clone of SymbOS on MSX, we don't know maybe it will be officially implemented in OCM?

Quote:

What about the elegance of a real graphical OS? Everything will be there in the environment, you don't have to quit a program in order to launch another, everything's handy and reachable in a few mouse clicks. You don't need to reset your system everytime you want to quit an application. Isn't that great?

It is, but that only works if the applications do not include stuff like "Tower of Gazzel" or "Penguin Adventure"

They can be run in a sandbox, right? Much like with NYYRIKKI's Z80 emulator for Z80... No-one would bother for that extra delay in XAK Gazzel, the game lags even without being run in a sandbox

What is the format for VID files ?
How do you get them ?
Wher can I find some tech info?

I'd say it's pretty much like 4m 1 byte per 4 pixels..

I'm really amazed with the videos. Will be the MSX able to do that without direct access to the VRAM?

I think that a working version of Symbos in our MSX systems will be one of the best msx news ever: it will push our systems to the limit, as it does under CPC systems. Also, as you know there is a IDE for Symbos called SymStudio, which is really great.

Yours,