From Wiki96
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
* The code was not well optimized and it was impossible to due so due to the inefficient source code structure. | * The code was not well optimized and it was impossible to due so due to the inefficient source code structure. | ||
* It became spaghetti code due to all the OS logic being fitted into one file. | * It became spaghetti code due to all the OS logic being fitted into one file. | ||
* | * Since all code was fitted into one file, it was near impossible to make the code modular and the effort would be better spent rewriting the OS from scratch. | ||
* Windows 96 v1 had a synchronous design all round, which meant that any async operations would not fit in well and make the spaghetti code situation even worse. | * Windows 96 v1 had a synchronous design all round, which meant that any async operations would not fit in well and make the spaghetti code situation even worse. | ||
* WebFS's mixed asynchronous model still imposed annoying file limits often reached by regular users, and also generally made the experience feel much slower. | * WebFS's mixed asynchronous model still imposed annoying file limits often reached by regular users, and also generally made the experience feel much slower. | ||
Revision as of 03:32, 17 January 2022
Windows 96 v2 is an older version of Windows 96 and was completely rewritten from scratch. Therefore, it only bears visual similarity to its predecessor.
You can visit this release at https://rel2.windows96.net.
Why the rewrite?
- The code was not well optimized and it was impossible to due so due to the inefficient source code structure.
- It became spaghetti code due to all the OS logic being fitted into one file.
- Since all code was fitted into one file, it was near impossible to make the code modular and the effort would be better spent rewriting the OS from scratch.
- Windows 96 v1 had a synchronous design all round, which meant that any async operations would not fit in well and make the spaghetti code situation even worse.
- WebFS's mixed asynchronous model still imposed annoying file limits often reached by regular users, and also generally made the experience feel much slower.
- Cross browser support was not 1:1 due to the lack of CSS normalization/use of browser specific functionality. This meant that Windows 96 would not have a consistent look across browsers.
- A more efficient OS architecture was proposed, where the pros of rewriting the OS eventually outweighed the cons of not rewriting it.
- To allow more than 1 developer to work on the source code without losing their mind.
Version Highlights
- Too many to count (TODO)
Trivia
- The rewrite took around 6 months to be somewhat useable. During this time, the original Windows 96 community died out completely and many fans left without a trace.
- The COVID-19 pandemic also made it a pain to stay motivated to keep developing Windows 96.
- The project reached an extent were more than 1 developer was needed.
