Real Graphical OS for MSX

Grapical OS'es have never been very populair on MSX .. I didn't like Windows3.11, and 95 didn't really run smoothly and elegant on my 486 back then .. and now I'm talking computers that are way faster than an MSX

Would a group of 'us' be willing to put their hands together on this? I've always felt indeed that DOS2 could use a nice graphical shell. I know there are a few out there, but none of them have managed to set-up a programming environment that invites people to make 3rd party apps.

I'm thinking a nice Windows-like shell that can perhaps accomodate a few applications running 'at the same time'. Not multitasking, but at least something in which you can type a text in 'notepad' and then perhaps launch the calculator just to check if a calculation you made is actually correct. I know Ease does most of this in quite a good attempt, but it's not DOS2 compatible.

Perhaps if a few people work on this, one could do math/kernel routines, another could do Disk I/O, another could do the GUI, etc... Just a thought, although I know it would be hard to find programmers willing/interrested to do this. I would probably make a nice launch-pad for all the harddisk owners out there. I think more than a few people would end up using it...

Who would use it ?
Actually, if the GUI matures enough, anyone with a harddisk. They would end up using it, eventually.

If I want to start mbwave, then what's the point in first starting some GUI thing, then click some mbwave icon, rather than just type 'm' in dos2 itself (which runs an m.bat file starting mbwave)....?
Well, that's the same flawed logic that we saw when the first GUI's appeared. Yet you're using Windows, and so am I. Ofcourse _now_ this is because most software is made for Windows, but it wasn't always like that. Windows got as popular as it is, back in the time when it was nothing more than a shell for DOS, because people prefer the point & click interface to having to type commands all the time. It's the natural evolution of the human-computer-interface that will end up with speech recognition for most commands. Though not for MSX I'm afraid And no, I am not suggesting you will use a GUI just to start MBWAVE. You will eventually end up using it for other things though, and my hope would be that eventually people will start making programs for such a GUI.

And I *never* had the feeling I should be doing multiple tasks at the same time on an MSX ..
And I *never* said this. Actually, the first thing I said is that it would *not* be multitastking. This doesn't mean though, that you should limit the amount of applications open to just one. If you have free memory, why close one application in order to start another. On my PC I am constantly using several applications simultaneously with using them _at the same time_. I am perhaps typing a text, then need to calculate a number, swith back to the text and type it. It seems illogical to save my text file, close the application, start the calculator, calculate the number, close the calculator, start the text editor, open the text file, and write the number. Why not eliminate all that saving, loading and closing if we can?

I've the feeling that making such an a GUI/OS is more like 'proving' that it's possible on an old 8bitter, rather than that it's really useful. How many ppl actually *seriously* used stuff like Ease, Easy, Hybrid, WiOS etc. ? And if ppl actually used it in the mid-80's, then I ask: who uses it today?
Well, part of it may be just _having_ it. Another part is that they can actually be darn handy at times. The only thing MSX has never had is an environment in which other people can actually _make_ their applications work under that GUI. Most of the GUIs we've seen are just empty shells that only work as launch pads. I must say I've used Easy quite a bit in its time though...

small note: don't let me stop anyone tho, I'm just giving my 2 cts/opinion
Don't worry, your opinion isn't gonna stop anyone. Lack of interest from other programmers is

I'm with stupi... eh Wolf on this one. I've said it before and will again: It gives absolutally no add to the existing MSX enviroment.

It's stupid, pointless and a waste of good time. "Yeah, but now we got this cool looking graphical user interface. Ok, it's slow.. ok, it takes a whole lotta craptime to load.. ok, it can only run 1 program and not even in the same space (has to boot up seperatally)... ok, returning from programs resulting in mainly booting the whole gui again... but HELL we got this cool gui!!"

That's just plain stupid. Face it ppl: MSX was not cut out to handle any GUI. Be honest, is ANY-ONE using one of the earlier mentioned GUIs ?? (maybe multimente, but that's basically a text based disk editor) have you EVER booted up HYBRIT (sony) MAN!! what a drag, took aaaaages to load and what you end up with? .. well it's clear I myself (imo!) think itsa waste of time even spending a discussion on!
cheers.

(who was that poor sap who came up with that win.2k look alike shell? whooahah.. sorry)

@Ro: Sorry ro, but I don't see why a GUI would have to be slow or would have to take ages to load. There's no reason for either. Apart from that, a GUI could load fast from floppy, which it's not meant for, but would load BLAZINGLY FAST from harddisk. Say you were to load 256kB of raw data, that would take less than a second on any odd harddisk setup an MSX user might have. I'll bet you what the heck ever that an MSX _can_ do a GUI.

But hey, I guess it is indeed not worth the hassle if most MSX users feel like this. Let's just see what kind of reactions we get, but if most of 'em are like this, there is indeed no point...