OS-tan Collections

OS-tan discussions => OS-tan Talk => Topic started by: Chocofreak13 on January 02, 2012, 12:39:37 am

Title: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 02, 2012, 12:39:37 am
(take 2)
another year, another chance for this! welcome back to the OS-tan theory thread! (you all ready for the wall of text to come? >:3)
as before, the purpose of this thread is to discuss theories surrounding OS-tan, including the OS-tan world, the Evolution of Os-tan and other -tans, and the Familial Relationships of OS-tan. (NOTE: i HIGHLY reccomend you take breaks while reading this. it's too long to be read in one sitting.)

to keep us current, i will be reposting the information. Stand by for the wave.................
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 02, 2012, 12:40:08 am
os-tan family trees
Quote from: chocoeverytime we talk about older OSes, they always relate to RL releases of OSes. basically, 1 came first then 2 (which was a better version of 1) and even though 98 and SE are widely considered twins, 98 came first and SE about a year later.

this makes about as much sense as me going to church.

so i decided to take an anime approach: (DISCLAIMER: THIS IS NOT ARTISTIC, JUST -slightly- INFORMATIVE.)
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i98/Chocofreak13/ostanlineage10-1.jpg

1. DOS, the black cat, guardian of the windows family.
2. Windows 1.0, the oldest known windows ancestor. Helped create the windows family.*
3. Windows 2.0, daughter of 1.0, keeper of the family record, current caretaker of 1.0.*
4. Windows 3.1, daughter of 2.0, link from main family to elder generations, current keeper of DOS. **
5. Yamada, daughter of 3.1 windows 98 first generation, current wherabouts unknown.(*)
  5.a. Windows 98, daughter of Yamada, twin sister of SE
  5.b. Windows 98 SE, daughter of Yamada, twin sister of 98
6. Windows 95, daughter of 3.1, family warrior.
  6.a. Windows ME, possible daughter of 95, ward of 2000, 1 of 3 OSTAN mascot
7. NT, daughter of 3.1, caretaker of Inu-T.
  7.a. Windows 2000, daughter of NT, guardian/caretaker of ME 1 of 3 OSTAN mascot
    7.a.a. Pizza, adopted daughter of 2000, professional public nusiance
    7.a.b. Windows Server 2000, possible daughter of 2000, Server representative
  7.b. Inu-T, daughter of NT, ward of NT
  7.c Windows XP (Saseko and Homeko), daughters of NT, twin sisters, 1 of 3 OSTAN mascot
  7.d. Windows Server 2003 (SABA), daughter of NT, current server mascot, server represntative
8. Unknown (**)
  8.a Windows Longhorn Server (SABA LONGHORN), unknown origin, server representative
  8.b Windows Vista (Vistan), Unknown origin, multiple forms
9. Norton Anti-virus, Family Doctor, pervert

*This OS, while a part of the Windows Family, does not reside within the main branch of the Windows Family.
(*)This OS is currently missing.
**Due to a time paradox at the end of the cold war, 3.1 remains younger than her children.
(**) The entire Vista branch's lineage, while inexplicibly tied to the Windows Family, cannot be traced back. Origins thus remain unknown.
aurora, i agree with most of your points. i will work them into a version 2 chart. (thanx for the compliment btw, but they're just doodles. i'm also getting a good art program and a tablet soon hopefully, so perhaps i will improve. :3 )

as for yamada tan, though, i've read around, she IS 98, but was criticized for being too plain. i still count her (she's just forgotten, like many non-mainstream tans), and besides, i've always pictured her (from an anime standpoint, not an os standpoint) as 98 and SE's mother, she looks the part, and seems to be the only OS who can actually hold down a job. but since she's not mentioned much, or pictured with any OSes, i peg her as currently "missing".

thanx for the info though. it's going into my next report.
btw, next year i hope to be part of an online animation class, if i make the cut please expect lots of OS-tan related flash clips! xD

also, next time, could you include a link to some pics of these tans? i'll go to wiki for now, but...

oh, and a suggestion for future site updates: a gallery search feature would be nice. :3
thanx both, got em. going through the wiki anyway to see if there are any i missed.

also looking on actual os releases on wiki, why don't we use their codenames more often? janus and chicago and asteroid sound nice, i think. :3 not that there's anything bad about the names now, i just think janus sounds pretty. :3
hmm, damn, i was picturing (anime standpoint) a big sis that 3.1 remembers fondly, but died when she was very small....

at any rate, i'm gonna split, okie? i'm getting antsy (pc and ps2 running upstairs) and i'm already freaking out that itunes had dissapeared. 0_0;
aurora, yours makes mine fail!!! ;_;
at any rate:

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i98/Chocofreak13/windowsfamilytree2o.jpg

oh also i was sure there was a comic with saba longhorn it it!!! but i can't find it.....
so i'll give you this instead. ♥
http://iiichan.net/stuff/homeo/index.php?file=37

pizza is sou kawaii, rite?
ooooo do the mac tree in a mafia style!! xD there's a photo in the gallery like that, i love it! xD

at any rate, version 3 is done, just need to colour and upload.
btw, i got my tablet in the mail yesterday, perhaps we'll be seeing prettyful things coming from me now!! =D
i like it, never seen the early MACs before! (earliest i saw was Lisa and OS2.)

i should try to make an OS-kun tree, and upload the ver. 3 windows tree. O__O;

btw, got tablet and CG program! <D

aurora-san, you left out Lisa, os-2 (the blonde one) and OS9's name! (sonata)
AUGH, i'm gonna stick with windows on second thought, mac be too confusing.


except Kyourou-kyun. sou kawaii, Kyourou and Emuii 4eva!!!


lulz chatspeak xD
come to think of it, openVMS is the mother of NT-tan, who is the mother of half of the win-tans, and step-mother to the rest, which makes openVMS grandma to windows, which means we should put her in the tree too.....who was openVMS related to? can't find her in the wiki.
Quote from: auroraVMS-tan's mother is RSX-11-tan, whose adoptive mother is DOS-11-tan, though RSX-11-tan's true ancestry is unknown. They're listed in the wiki.

VMS-tan's younger sister is VAXELN-tan. RT-11-tan and RSTS-tan are step-relatives to them, those two being stepsisters to VMS's and VAXELN's mother.

TOPS-10-tan and TOPS-20-tan were also in the same faction as them (The DEC), and are some sort of step-relatives, but I don't know what their relation is exactly.


@bella: now i want a picture of mac os 8 shaking her head in shame at some retarded/mutated os 7 clones. xD

i think we should try our hand at a linux family tree. sure, if we overthink it it'll end up bigger than the TREE O' LIFE, but since bella said that pretty much everyone in the linux family decended from those three heirs, it might not be too complex. especially if we take it step-by-step. :3

btw, when all is said and done, and i upload all the pics i've gathered, i'll post the family tree pics i've found. :3

i'd consider SAGE 7090's sister, and have CTSS be their half-sister.

and this is good that we've revived this thread; i was preparing to port it over to a new thread (i still might, since there's about a page and a half of topicless-style babbling).

I've always wondered what happened to get 1.0 and 2.0 exiled. ik people have said that it was because they couldn't keep up during the OS wars, but with that mentality every OS prior to the newest would be exiled. :\ (for that matter, why wasn't 3.1 exiled at the time too?)

i wonder how the mac's views would fall in that timeframe. 7.5 was leading the family by that point, right? wonder how the rest of the family felt, and what 8 and Sonata would have to say. :\




Quote from: auroraThat's a pretty good chart. I like your artwork and I'm glad you remembered Windows 1.0-tan and 2.0-tan! :D

However...

2.0-tan is the oldest sister to 3.1-tan, 3.2-tan, 95-tan, the 95 OSR 2-tans, the 98-tans and possibly ME-tan. (the DOS-based branch of Windows-tans are all daughters to Windows 1.0-tan) I say possibly related to ME-tan because IIRC, Windows ME is largely DOS-based but also has some NT-based elements.

NT-tan and her descendants are not related by blood to the DOS-based Windows-tans (NT is based off of Digital Equipment Corporation's VMS operating system) and are actually stepsisters to them but none of the main Windows-tans know that. You are correct that NT-tan is the mother to Inu-T, 2K-tan, XP-tan, and Saba-tan. Vistan and Windows 7-tan are also NT-tan's daughters.

98-tan and 98SE-tan are sisters to the DOS-based Windows branch. Yamada isn't an OS-tan, she's just an OS-tan wannabe like WE-tan and Pizza-ko.

There is also a Windows 3.2-tan who is 3.1-tan's twin sister but because of 3.2-tan's distant upbringing (and living as a wanderer for her whole life), most of the other Windows-tans are unaware of her existence.

And then there are 95 OSR 2.1-tan and 95 OSR 2.5-tan but they don't reside with the rest of the Windows Family. They live as wanderers.
Another of Windows 3.x's codenames is... SPARTA!!

The Classic Mac OS also has some awesome codenames though the only one that most people know are Mac OS 9's first codename of "Sonata" and Macintosh System 7's first codenames of "Blue" and "Big Bang".
Windows 3.0-tan is the same character as 3.1-tan, just when she was very young.
3.1-tan does have a very sappy backstory in the OS-tan Annex Project:

She was born during the era of MS-IBM cooperation and she lived with Windows 1.0-tan, 2.0-tan, MS-DOS-tan, PC-DOS-tan, OS/2-tan and possibly Xenix-tan (she was said to have retired around the time 3.0-tan was born).

This was for a very short time, as later in 1990, the MS-IBM Family broke up. And then during the OS Wars, Windows 1.0-tan and 2.0-tan were exiled and 3.1-tan is not allowed to speak of them (if she can remember them at all)

Here's my try at a Windows family tree. It's a collage but I like how you went that extra mile and drew everything in yours!

(EDIT: OOPS! I forgot to add in CE-tan! >__< )

http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/albums/userpics/10307/windowshistorychart-rev1.png
Quote from: hicamajigIts missing server 2008, though has anyone even created a server 08 tan?

Oops! I forgot her too! >__<

There is a Server 2008-tan. She's a mackerel girl like 2003 Server-tan but 2008 Server-tan has curly blonde hair, a tiara and her mackerel body is gold-colored.
Quote from: Chocofreak13i came up with the idea last week, icerain. nice to meet you btw, haven't seen you before. :]

but aurora, i like yours better, on some points. i might borrow some of your format for version 3. :3

Thanks! I'm glad you like my version too but mine's not as original as yours -_-

I still need to revise my version of the Windows family tree (add in CE-tan and Server 2008-tan) and I'm also working on the Mac-tan family tree (I'm warning you all now, it's going to be weird!).
Here's the first revision of the Mac-tan family tree!

http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/albums/userpics/10307/machistorychart_rev1.jpg
And I thought that System 3.4-tan and 5-tan would be enough to make anyone go "WTF?!"

Since I added in the codenames for the Mac OSX-tan, I was wondering if I should also add in some of the codenames for the Classic Mac OSes too.
Lisa-tan and Apple II-tan (that's the other blonde girl older than the Mac-tans) are not directly related to either branch of the Macintosh line but if I decide to extend the family tree to include all the Apple-tans I'll include them in. Though I certainly should add in Lisa-tan since the Mac OS was heavily influenced by the Lisa OS.

I'll add in the Classic Mac codenames too in the next revision.
You're right but are getting some things mixed up here.

The Lisa is hardware but there is also the Lisa OS (Lisa-tan represents both). And once again you've gotten Apple II-tan (the blonde girl with braided pigtails) confused with another. Apple II-tan is a catch-all character representing the Apple II series hardware and its OSes. Mac System 2-tan is one of the Mac OS-tans, of course!

The thing is a lot of the vintage OS-tans mainly represent the hardware but assumed to also represent its OSes or version of BASIC it runs. These vintage-tans tend to blur the line between OS-tans and hardware-tans!
Quote from: iamnothere900About early Macintosh version numbers...

In the beginning there were three separate pieces of software in a Mac: the Finder, System Suitcase (sometimes called just System), and ROM. The ROM stored code in a chip so it could be kept out of RAM, which was very expensive. The Finder was like Windows Explorer: it was the program that you used to launch other programs. The System Suitcase was everything else. The ROM chips were part of the motherboard and rarely upgraded. That leaves the Finder and System Suitcase.

Thanks for clearing all of that that up! ;019 I didn't know how to explain all of that myself!

Quote
At first each had their own version number, but that got confusing very fast. At some point certain Finder + System Suitcase combinations where discussed as "System Software x.y" were x and y had nothing to do with the System Suitcase or Finder version number. System Software 5.1 had System Suitcase 4.3, Finder 6.0 and MultiFinder 1.0 !

I'm still baffled by those strange version numbers (who isn't?!), especially System 3.4 which doesn't even have a System Software version number!

Quote
To fix this, System Software 6 brought all the version numbers together. Also called just "System 6", it was the best yet and lasted much longer than anything previous.

System 6 brought the version numbers ALMOST completely together but it was close enough and a lot less confusing. :)

Quote
System 7 was a complete rewrite, and had many new features. Apple agreed to let other computer makers sell their computers (clones) with "System 7" for a fee.

That probably explains why many apps work with System 6 (and older) but not System 7! I thought that System 7 was good (except for System 7.5) though its advancements did have a few major trade-offs.

Quote
Mac OS 7.6 was more trademarkable than System and allowed Apple to shutdown illegal cloners more effectively. Mac OS 8 was not part of the contract with clone makers; 8.0 was the end of legal Macintosh clones.

That's right! But IIRC, most of those clones at the time were legal. Apple was losing a lot of money to the clones (legal or otherwise) and wanted to shut them all down.

Quote
Hey, are there any OS-tans for A/UX ?

Yes there is! Here's her article at the OSC Wiki: (http://ostan-collections.net/wiki/A/UX)
Yeah, drawing a Linux family tree or even a Unix family tree would be way too difficult and huge! x__x
Not necessarily. Linux IS based off of Unix and made to operate just like Unix would but Linux is not derived from its code at all.

However, Linux-tan is sort of like the daughter Unix-sama wished she had! Unix-sama's actual daughters are mostly bratty, fight against each other and she can barely trust most of them at all due to all the infighting since the Unix Wars.
There aren't any human male Linux characters. The only male Linux character is that creepy penguin with three packages if you know what I mean. o_o

*shudder*

Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 02, 2012, 12:40:56 am
Quote from: smokeyWell, as far as i know... Vista (wich was then called longhorn) was developed to replace the XP line, so basically they should be in that line... How Longhorn relates to Vista, i don't know, because Longhorn was the codename for Vista and basically all i ever saw from Longhorn were betas...
Well, that's mac for ya...weird... ^_^
Wow, different, but not much more complicated than the windows tree... ^_^
Sure, why not...Makes it more complete... and indeed MacOS 3.4 is indeed a bit strange... ^_^
But aren't Lisa and Mac System II hardware?
Ah, so the older the system, the more confusing it gets... ^_^
Wow, Linux is a family, but they're all bastard childs of Unixes...

Quote from: NejDigital family life has nevar been this complex.
Quote from: CaptBrendenYou know guys.. Longhorn is sever 2008.. much like a couple other tans there is more then one version of her. Ive seen a few pictures (tho i dont remember where) of a Saba with horns, and that was suppose to be server 2008

Well, not really, actually - it's true Saba 2008 has horns, but the original longhorn-tan is someone different - since Vista was in prototype status and known to the public for quite a time and under this time known as longhorn, there was a separate -tan made during that period. Longhorn thus represents the prototype releases before it was named Vista. Server 2008 is a separate, finished product.
And the Linux family tree...

hm.
Is there a possibility to do something like different -tans for different kernels? or is that unnecessary?
So...the Linuces are UNIX-sama's adoptive children.

Good riddance?
And what was Odyssey now again...something to do with 2k as well, if I remember things right.

Quote from: iamnothere900About early Macintosh version numbers...

In the beginning there were three separate pieces of software in a Mac: the Finder, System Suitcase (sometimes called just System), and ROM. The ROM stored code in a chip so it could be kept out of RAM, which was very expensive. The Finder was like Windows Explorer: it was the program that you used to launch other programs. The System Suitcase was everything else. The ROM chips were part of the motherboard and rarely upgraded. That leaves the Finder and System Suitcase.

At first each had their own version number, but that got confusing very fast. At some point certain Finder + System Suitcase combinations where discussed as "System Software x.y" were x and y had nothing to do with the System Suitcase or Finder version number. System Software 5.1 had System Suitcase 4.3, Finder 6.0 and MultiFinder 1.0 !

To fix this, System Software 6 brought all the version numbers together. Also called just "System 6", it was the best yet and lasted much longer than anything previous.

System 7 was a complete rewrite, and had many new features. Apple agreed to let other computer makers sell their computers (clones) with "System 7" for a fee.

Mac OS 7.6 was more trademarkable than System and allowed Apple to shutdown illegal cloners more effectively. Mac OS 8 was not part of the contract with clone makers; 8.0 was the end of legal Macintosh clones.

Apple continued making large and small updates to Mac OS until 9.2, when they dropped the old line completely for Mac OS X.

More info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_history

Hey, are there any OS-tans for A/UX ?

Quote from: OS FreakAwesome. Never saw a complete three of Windows. It's kinda missing CE, Server 2008, Home Server, OS2 Warp as well as minor variations to be mentioned like XP 64 bit, Tablet PC, Fundamentals for Legacy PC's and Neptune which is real just not released to the public, only the workers.
Wonder why microsoft didn't just call 98SE windows 99 and 95 OSR2.5 as windows 96. Yeah I know those name exist already. 96 is a beta released update for 95 supposedly and is called windows Nashville and 97 tan is the prebeta of 98 called Memphis. 99 is the beta of 2000 called NT 5.0.  ;018 wt... if so what is Neptune then? Windows 2001? based on XP released XP is NT 5.1 or Windows 2001. Confusive but makes sense. Just intertwined which derails the actual sense into not making sense. This thing needs to be studied or debated. ;138
Yes Ive heard ME being has she is carries a great piece of history over her. She was the first tan ever created. To tell you the truth I like ME. I have it in virtual pc 2007 and she hardly ever crashes. Randomly on random days at random times she crashes the virtual machine service. Says: Vmsrvc - the application vmsrvc.exe has caused a problem in vmsrvc. The application will now close. It closes and nothing happens. So I think I have a pretty stable and loved ME version.

As an OS collector I also have Neptune and it's pretty much like an advanced 2K but a very stable one. Sometimes drivers mess her up. I've gotten that problem were at the end I manage to revive her and bring her to life. "Neptune, I'm so glad to see you safe, welcome back girl - Ohh master thank you for your loyalty and kindness" When she restarts you wish she'd say that. What she says is a box with System Failure : This machine has recovered from a fatal internal error. Would you like to provide comments about this problem so it can be fixed?

Obviously the Neptune team does not exist so you cannot report anything since to microsoft Neptune does not exist as it was abandoned/scrapped. The windows update service also fails on her and many programs requiring 2K SP 1, 2, 3, 4, RU will not install. Since she's an NTC or no service pack modified 2K. Ever tried SP4 on her? I did it says Neptune cannot be upgraded becaus the SP4 of 2K is for 2k SP3. lol Makes sense. Either way Neptune is a 2K engine so it's kinda messed also.

Quote from: redNeptune was going to be a home version of 2000, but it was pulled by Bill in favour of ME. I've played with the beta and it seems pretty solid, although a tad unstable when it has the latest DirectX...
Yeah, Neptune was a bitch to get running properly. She comes as standard with a crippled version of IE 5.5, which can't do anything. You update to IE 6 SP1 and it will crash a fair amound of times. It also comes with DirectX 7, so you try to update it to DirectX 9.0c and it hates you. I managed to get it work by copying some files from my ME partition.

Long story short: she's stable, but only as long as you're careful and have a copy of ME/2k to hand in case you need some files.

A Linux family tree is possible, but can get complicated because it has many more branches.

GNU/Linux is of course the mother or ancestor of all Linuces, but her oldest daughters have many descendants themselves. Most distros are derived from either: Red Hat, Debian, and Slackware; all of which are three of the oldest distros. Though there are some notable exceptions such as Yggdrasil being the oldest distro (or Linux's first daughter) but doesn't have any descendants of its own.

Both the Windows and Mac Family trees can get even more convoluted if you include the NT line's and the OSX line's biological ancestors into the mix, and MS-DOS's other biological relatives. @_@

Yeah... The relations between the Linuces gets awfully confusing quickly, but most of them are derived from three main distros.

As for the Mac clones, It's time for the Don't Explain the Joke trope!:

What is now Mac OS 8 was originally called Mac OS 7.7, but was renamed to exploit the loophole of the clones being licensed to run Mac OS 7.x in order to force the clones out of the market, since the clones were eating away at the Mac's market share.

Is this a possible conjecture: the Mac Clones?

I thought Mac OS8-tan would have killed them off, but apparently not since there are still hobbyists that use them. So would Mac OS8 just forced them to retire by fighting them into submission, when they weren't willing just because of some loophole...

Moved from the wiki thread:

Quote from: Bella
Relevant to this thread? (Now that I've found the right one) >>

(http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s320/BellasOS-tans/map.jpg)

This was drawn in mid-July, so, it's REALLY out of date. For instance:

-It's been established that SAGE-tan = AN/FSQ-7 computer and whatever software it ran
-Likewise, CTSS-tan represents the OS and the modified IBM 7094 hardware on which it ran
-PDP 1-tan is only the "mother"/genetic ancestor of the 18-bit PDP lineup (PDP-4, -7, -9 and -15) the other PDP-tans descended from LINC, PDP-8, -6, and -11
-I'm not sure what, if any, influence CP/CMS had on later generations of IBM-tans


Quote from: Aurora Borealis
Excellent! So true that Unix and Linux have too many descendants to count, and separate trees would be needed for them. DOS-11 stole RSX-tan from her biological mother?! Now I'm really curious about that! Please elaborate!

A few more I'd add if you plan on making an updated version:

-Altair influenced IMSAI 8080, though they're rivals.
-IMSAI 8080 was also the mentor to DR-DOS (CP/M)
-I don't see any mention of the Data Generals, but the Nova influenced Apple I.
-BESYS's life was sacrificed for Multics' creation, and UMES's life was sacrificed for MTS' creation.
-Apple III and Lisa influenced the Classic Mac OS.
-A/UX is a stepsister to the Classic Macs, and a presumably a cousin to the OSXs, highly influenced by the former.
-NeXTSTEP and Rhapsody are sisters.




Finally, something to discuss here again!

A/UX dates back to 1988 actually, versions 1 and 2 look just like (and can emulate) System 6, version 3 looks just like and can emulate System 7. Of her stepsisters, they're the two she has the most in common with.

She is a step-sister to all the Classic-tans and isn't related to them by blood, but shares cultural and intellectual ties with them (like how the older OSXs do too), and is distantly related to the OSXs. They're Unix-based but that's about it in terms of blood ties. She considers the Macs (Classic and OSX) plus Darwin OS, NeXTSTEP and the early Apples her main family, but will also show that she doesn't want to be a traitor to the Unices either.

Newton doesn't have blood ties to any of the Apple-tans, or really anybody, AFAIK. She is most often seen with A/UX-tan, and maybe also System 7-tan, and may have influenced iPhone-tan in some form, and is least seen as a spiritual predecessor.

I haven't gotten to writing these stories, though I'd really like to, but in their early years, A/UX-tan was also a mentor figure to System 6-tan (who after having her life saved, needed help adjusting to a new life). It also helps that A/UX-tan wasn't scared of her. :)

And while A/UX-tan was also a close friend to System 7-tan, A/UX wasn't able to help her in her time of need due to exile, and still feels really bad about that.  :(

A bit convoluted, but I do agree with the genetic engineering to some extent- mainly the reason why the OSXs except Rhapsody, DarwinOS, and Mac-tan/OSX-tan/OSX Public Beta... --whoever she is!!-- are catgirls.

Genetic engineering could also explain some of the height differences too. :P

And I could see how A/UX may have been engineered to meet the Apple Family's needs, but I'd say her upbringing would play a larger role- she was raised to be professional and helpful, with Mac-like behaviors, but still acknowledged as a Unix system as well. The reason she wasn't scared of System 6-tan though, is simpler. Even when System 6-tan had violent outbursts (this was before her improvements in stability), A/UX-tan had the strength and willingness to restrain her.

That sounds like a good idea too- Amiga-tan didn't take Commodore's downfall as hard as some of the others, Minuteman-tan, VIC-20-tan and C64-tan were the most devastated since they worked so hard to get the success they had. PET-tan would have still taken the fall hard, but by that point may have been more laid-back than she used to be.

It wasn't just that 1.0 and 2.0 couldn't keep up (that wasn't actually the main reason, as you said, so many more discontinued OS-tans would have otherwise been exiled), but also because they weren't very successful, and were seen as a liability more than an asset by that point. But the main reason was that they were conscientious objectors who outright opposed the imperialistic direction the Windows Family was taking. They didn't want to take part in scorched-earth tactics, and were seen as a threat from within.

As for DOS and 3.1, they both still had a considerable userbase, and although they didn't take part in scorched-earth tactics like 95 and NT, they were supportive of their endeavors.

None of the Mac/Apple-tans got exiled (Apple III-tan and System 3.4-tan ran away from home years before) since there family unity and honor were strongly valued, and because of Apple II-tan's influences. She'd never let any of her family get exiled.

First, a little bit of background info:

The Mac-tans in the first half of the 90's were really confident that they would never be involved in a large-scale war, and didn't see the Windows-tans as a threat (i.e: Apple doubted Windows 3.0's success). They were short-sighted, slow to change, and none of them were particularly good tacticians. (Apple had some 90's successes, but some huge blunders too.)

They never expected a full-blown OS Wars, let alone from the Windows-tans. Reality hit them hard. Very hard, and suffered the consequences. System 7-tan and 7.5-tan tried their own aggressive tactics, which backfired and led to desperation attacks, which the other Mac-tans didn't object to because they were trapped in a state of desperation themselves.

Could it have been possible that System 7.5-tan was actually exiled because she didn't try to atone for her mistakes (at least System 7 did afterwards)?

Mac OS8-tan was born during the worst of the OS Wars and would have initially been used to the desperation felt by her family, but would be disappointed now. She's still a bit upset over what happened and that she couldn't get very involved, and now she tries to keep the peace and motivate others to learn from past mistakes.

Same would go for OS9-tan, who was born during an unstable transitional phase, when the family was trying to rebuild what remained of their territory.

I have seen some pictures of 7.5-tan and OS9-tan getting along, so it looks like they were able to put the past behind them, at least somewhat... just as long as they don't talk about family politics.


Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 02, 2012, 12:41:26 am
Quote from: Krizonar
Quote from: Chocofreak13
NECROPOST~~~~~


how about we move to a different topic? i found some family tree pictures when i was pictrolling, so has any work been made on windows/mac family trees?

and anyone think we should make a linux family tree? or would that be too complex?

I've made a Mac family tree, and although it may not coinincide with everyone's ideas, some if its backstory got forwarded to the Annex project.

Linux family tree? How many thousands of branches? Xd

New theory, AU/X tan and System 7 are sisters. I'll have to update my family tree.
OSX and AU/X still aren't related though.
"...I learned AU/X has built in software to emulate System 7, much like Rhapsody has it to emulate System 8 (and had an exchange of features). I just didn't know that before I went out and read up on AU/X.

"-A/UX is a stepsister to the Classic Macs, and a presumably a cousin to the OSXs, highly influenced by the former. "
hm?
I went to check and yes, she is a step-sister (to system 7) but, I do disagree that she's related to the OSX's because they had very little in common and did not share a common ancestor. OSX is BSD based, AU/X is UNIX System V, they are actually complete opposites!
"System V was considered one of the two major "flavors" of UNIX, the other being Berkeley Unix (BSD)."


Next and Rhapsody being sisters (or at least, closely related) was already on my fanmade family chart ^^;

Oh yes, I had overlooked that version 1 and 2 of A/UX boots System 6, I connected them horizontally, (indicating "step-sisters", not by blood and since they're all related, that technically makes her an even looser "step-sister" to the rest of the classics, so it fits) on my tree. It should be quite accurate now. I also updated backstories.

I also added Newton to the tree and gave her some as well... trying to connect her to some other Mac OS failed, so I had to come up with something new.
Let's say that after Leopard saved Antares' life from the future, the Apple family... thought different!

Yes, and the current backstory theories I have definitely allow for these :) In my mind, A/UX is Apple's way of "thinking different" using the advanced technology that Leopard used to save Antares. They reverse engineered anything about genetics and technology they could find from it. So the reason A/UX is not scared of Antares is because they are similar! (although A/UX is not a cyborg and relied more on genetic engineering technology, she is also NOT the first Unix to have had such modifications done ;) http://ostan-collections.net/wiki/UNIX ). This also helps explain why System 7 was finally a healthy system, even at launch and why the more current OSX girls are cat girls while Rhapsody is not. Newton under this theory is genetically engineered to fill a niche (much like A/UX), which explains her completely non-standard height and body form (fairy) as well as how she doesn't relate to anyone. :)

interesting? makes plot? makes sense? I hope so, though tell me if it's not/doesn't.

My explanation may need simplifying :P

Quote from: Aurora BorealisMac-tan/OSX-tan/OSX Public Beta... --whoever she is!!-- are catgirls.

Kodiak :)

Hm, that it could, all the first Macs were short, then, all of a sudden, after Antares, most are quite a bit taller.

Yes, she was raised in such a way as to be very professional and such (A/UX's security is so strong that it cannot even be emulated, A/UX recognized partitions, A/UX could scan over 4GB of Hardrive space, etc) , although from what I see, she had a silly side. She was conditioned very strongly, however, so definitely agreed that her upbringing played a very large role.

Well, there's that too, A/UX was one heck of a System :P
but the big question is... did A/UX ever have to restrain Antares? a lot happened in 1988 and I cannot find an exact release date of A/UX to check against System 6.0.2 (the patch that cured Antares) to see if my theory works of A/UX being... "made" of Antares. Though one thing is for sure, System 6 was released before A/UX.

All I can find useful is "Apple came out with their own version of POSIX compliant Unix, A/UX, in late 1988" which would put A/UX at coming out AFTER System 6.0.2, meaning Antares was fixed before A/UX came out, which would make my theory plausible. :)

@Choco: -step usually implies a divorce.
You can, you can! We can always shift topics.



Quote from: Stew
I once did a preliminary family tree of some 50's and 60's Mainframes/OS's.... it is horribly out dated now.


Quote from: bells
Protip: when it comes to Linux-tan's family tree, DO NOT THINK IN TERMS OF HUMAN FAMILIES. Or even other OS-tan families, besides the Unixen maybe (who have a similarly muddled family structure). Her "code" has been spread throughout hell and creation and modified at every step of the way -- severely blurring the line between children, grandchildren, clones, etc.

Crazy random (conspiracy?) theory: IBM 7090-kun is the brother/counsin of SAGE and CTSS (and, I guess, PDP-1-chan by association). Using this simple formula:


If SAGE = IBM AN/FSQ-7, and IBM 7090 = a solid-state AN/FSQ-7, then 7090-kun = SAGE-sama's sibling... or cousin... or something.


Not to mention the fact that CTSS-sama = both CTSS and the IBM 7094 computer on which it ran; and the 7094 = a modified 7090.

Well, I'd consider SAGE and CTSS 7090-kun's full sisters (since they all share a common hardware base) while PDP-1-chan would be his half-sister (since SAGE and CTSS are related to original!Whirlwind, while PDP-1-chan is related to TX-0 Project!Whirlwind).

Personally, I don't think A/UX and System 7 or Rhapsody and System 8 are related.... not even vaguely. A/UX is a Unix, Sys. 7-tan is a Mac Classic.... emulation =/= relation. Just, no.

But.

I would suggest they be intellectually-related - that is to say, step-siblings - of totally different bloodlines, but a part of the same family. This has already been established, of course....

Likewise, I don't think A/UX and the OSXes are related either; while they share a common Unix heritage, A/UX didn't influence OSX enough to be considered an ancestor...

I did a second relationship map, this time focusing solely on parent - child, sibling and conceptual lineages.

(http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s320/BellasOS-tans/mapmk2.jpg) 

Straight line = blood relationship

Broken line = conceptual relationship

Lines deriving from a single parent that SHARE a single root = a common genetic heritage separate from the parent (See: important point #1, below)

Lines deriving from a single parent but NOT sharing a single root = siblings

Two important conclusions can be drawn if you believe this map:


1. I am going to use a specific example to explain the first important point. Note how SAGE, CTSS and IBM 7090-kun all derive from a single root. Whirlwind-hime is the mother of SAGE-sama. CTSS-tan and IBM 7090-kun are SAGE's siblings, but NOT necessarily Whirlwind's children. How is this possible? Because SAGE (the AN/FSQ-7 computer) inspired the creation of the IBM 7090 (a solid-state AN/FSQ-7), and the IBM 7090 inspired the creation of the IBM 7094 (which, as you will recall, is the computer on which CTSS ran). This means SAGE-sama's creation is directly responsible for the creation of 7090-kun and CTSS-tan (who represents the OS and 7094 hardware), and that 7090 and CTSS are more closely related to SAGE-sama than Whirlwind-hime. 

A different person might interpret this relationship as being that of a parent and child, or cloning*, but going by the backstory we've established for those characters, their being brother and sister makes the most sense. It would also explain why SAGE, 7090 and CTSS share common traits (for example, brownish hair, average height, physically-mature) while PDP-1-chan - their sister - is radically different (small, child-like, blonde). Blue eyes is a trait found on both sides of the family, and can be attributed to their mother, Whirlwind.

*An example of cloning can be found on Plan 9-tan's family tree; note how Plan B and Octopus are rooted from the same stem as Plan 9 herself. In this case, Plan B and Octopus are NOT Plan 9-tan's children, but artificially-created siblings. 

2. In the earliest days of OS-tans, hardwares and OS-tans could be related. Today there is a clear distinction between a hardware-tan and OS-tan, and they are typically NOT related (exceptions include microcomputer-tans, who are both hardware and software). In the beginning there were only "computer-tans" and the distinction between software and hardware was blurred. Whirlwind, for example, was both hardware and software. She "produced" four children, some of whom were hardware and some of whom were hardware and software. One of these "hybrid"-tans, CTSS, produced an entirely OS-tan child, Multics, the descendants of whom are entirely OS-tan in nature.

Which brings me to the conclusion that hybrid (part hardware, part software or OS) computer-tans can have hardware or software children; and that hardware-tans running rudimentary software can produce OS-tan children (this is how the first early OSes were made). But an OS-tan or software-tan can never produce a hardware-tan offspring.

Quote from: Aurora BorealisBtw, do you know who the mother of the System/360-tans are?

I didn't know that Plan B and Octopus would be considered cloned -siblings- to Plan 9!


If i recall correctly the System/360-tans were created from scratch.

Plan B-tan is Plan 9-tan's clone - making her Plan 9-tan's genetic twin. Octopus-tan is Plan B's clone, which also means she's Plan 9-tan's sister. (Cause a copy of a copy is the same as a copy...)

Quote from: Chocofreak13i like point 2. point 1 is slightly confusing, but 2 is crisp and clear and easy to understand. :3 good theory bells, it makes sense. -w-


It's pretty simple to follow, if you stop thinking in terms of human families (since, we've established that human family structures sort of don't exist among OS-tans). I'm basically saying that, within OS-tan families, siblings can be created from one another.

(from the archives:) One interesting link between Homeko and DOS/Batch 11-tan (because one could theorize DOS/Batch 11 is perhaps the oldest known ancestor of XP) would be some of the attitude. As I said before, I see DOS/Batch 11-tan as being difficult and grating, maybe even a little crazed at times...perhaps some of her attitude was passed down to her great-great-granddaughter Homeko (which, as we all know, is canonized as having a difficult, crazy, albeit perverse, demeanor...though she's nice to me XD)

Another link I see is directly between NT-san and VMS-san, both being excellent swordswomen.

As for other character ideas, I see RT-11-tan as physically being around the age range of an older teenager, on the short side (because RT-11 is described as being "small"; I've no idea what "small" means, though). Attitude-wise, being a little more lighthearted than her other siblings; she enjoys gaming (or I should say very old games) a lot, and loves to challenge people to matches
If we can define what gaming is to an OS-tan...XD

RSX 11-san I think would look similar to VMS-san, except with light gray or silver hair; Her attitude would be on the somber side (growing up with DOS/batch 11-tan as a mother/mentor couldn't have been fun XD); she gave her daughter, VMS-san, all her knowledge of fighting, bravery, and a substantial amount of her unhappy nature (because I think VMS-san had a somewhat quiet attitude in youth...when she discovered her clone, NT-tan, I think that would have driven her to her current fringe, slightly psychotic state)

we had gotten prototypes of the windows and mac family trees done. :3
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 02, 2012, 12:42:21 am
evolution, hybrids, hardware, and other species/classes
Quote from: Bella
...Also, I had a thought (all this talk of OS/hardware/software relationships gave me the idea)-- d'ye suppose that hardware, software and OS-tans are distinctly different species? I mean, they're all alike in that they're humanoid, but that they're essentially unrelated?

-(Computer) hardware-tans would almost always be mortal and age. Not nearly as quickly as humans, but they wouldn't be ageless like OS-tans either (since hardware is physical and prone to physical damage). Hardware-tans would have the most affinity with OS-tans (since hardware and OS directly communicate) and very rarely work with software-tans.

They were the first of the three groups to be created by humans, and have an existence spanning many decades (although earliest ancestors may have been created hundreds-- even thousands-- of years ago, depending on what you consider "computer hardware" to be).

-OS-tans can be mortal or immortal and are almost always ageless. As a species, they're more conducive to magic (sourcery if you will) because software tends to be more mailable than hardware (existing only as data-- information-- instead of being physical like hardware*). Equally cooperative with hardware and software.

They were created after hardware-tans, to do things (maybe that aforementioned magic?) that hardwares are incapable of.

-Software-tans are related to OS-tans, but still distant enough to be their own species. The same comments regarding mortality, aging and magic-conductivity that apply to OS-tans apply to software-tans. Typically regarded as a lower caste in the computer-tan universe, software-tans are generally dependent upon OS-tans for employment, companionship and ultimately survival (since you can't use a program w/o an OS to run it on). They have very little contact with hardware-tans.

The last species, Firmware-tans, would be something akin to a cross of hardware and program-tan or OS-tan; they'd probably be the lowest class, but one of the largest, since firmware is used in almost EVERYTHING electronic. They usually play a support role for or intermediary between hardware and OS-tan.

I also imagine that only members of a certain species would be able to have children-- meaning that two OS-tans could, in theory, beget a lil' OS-tan, but that a software and OS-tan couldn't. (For instance, there have been rare cases when two OSes have been merged to create a third OS-- but since software, hardware and OS are so different, you could never cross any of the three and make a new product). Then again, there are some instances (typically historical) of hardware and OS being so closely connected that the result is a hybrid of the two-- but these were more likely the result of human creation than natural crossbreeding between species.

I've thoroughly read through all this and will comment in-depth, but I'd like to add something: I decided to split these -tans into different groups exactly so I COULD avoid the problem of the evolution of OS-tans. Aside from evolution in social customs and outward appearances (clothing, etc), I'd rather not think about hardware/software/OS-tans evolving because I've always assumed that they were created by humans and are not some sort of natural phenomena within the OS-tan universe.

As for OS-tan deaths, death is usually caused by a diminished userbase-- OSes with the largest userbases are the healthiest, while those with very small or nonexistent userbases are dead. There are exceptions to this rule, of course-- Multics and SAGE-sama, for instance, should by all means be dead, but are considered alive for story purposes. Xenix-tan, on the other hand, could arguably be considered alive (since Xenix can be, and is, emulated) but she's dead for the sake of story purposes.

Also, when I speak of hardware-tans, I don't mean drones of nameless, random pieces of computer hardware-- I mean one -tan for each distinct computer system. Like there would be a first-gen iMac-tan (or -kun), an IBM PC-kun, a PDP-10-kun-- not a character for every single computer ever made, because that would result in bedlam rather quickly.

@ Aurora: microcomputer-tans would be what I described as "hybrids" of OS/software and hardware-tan. Since the OS/BASIC interpreter and hardware are SO closely connected (at least from a user viewpoint) to be almost inseparable. This will also come up a lot with very old OSes and computer-tans, from the days when there was only a thin line of distinction between the hardware and the software controlling the hardware.

If you want to look at it from an evolution POV, I see them as the transitional species between hardware and OS-tan. The difference from being that evolution implies a transformation from simpler to more complex lifeforms, I don't think hardware-tans are less developed than OS-tans-- they look and act alike and have the same intelligence, it's just that OS-tans can manipulate "energy" or "magic" in ways that hardwares can't.

@ Choco: the evolution of Unix to Linux is more like a... bloodline... if you ask me. It's like talking about the evolution of yourself from your great-grandmother. (BTW, the Unix-tans and Linux-tans are supposed to be related; they're supposed to be roughly from the same "race" or culture, sort of like two people sharing the same country and customs being considered related).

I wouldn't dismiss armies of random hardware-tan masses for storyline purposes, but then again, there's not a lot I would dismiss for storyline purposes. It's not my place to tell people what they can and can't do for a story, just because it doesn't precisely match up with my vision of the OS-tan universe-- short of someone inventing new characters to replace existing ones, or radically re-writing established backgrounds for the characters, that is.

I like the Mac "mafia" idea, as for the Linuxes being like Commies... I actually think that they'd be quite the opposite. Sure, they ARE strongly socialistic, but they're also a very open, transparent culture and attach a lot of stigma to secrecy and shady dealings. If anything, the old school Unices would have have been more Communistic, not really philosophically but politically-- at least in their rapid takeover of vast amounts of "territory" through rather... underhanded... means. >.>

Sorry for that TL;DR: but I've always loved inventing new species and races and stuff. This was fun. ^^
Quote from: AuroraBTW, I edited my post and went more in-depth about it, but I agree, Bella.

Still wanting to know about the Mac 'mafia', I don't think the Mac-tans are in it by choice, and they have to follow orders, or at least the OSX-tans do, since the 'protection' doesn't apply as much --or at all-- to the Classic Mac-tans. Speaking of which, I think the Classic Mac-tans have stayed in the House of Mac out of loyalty for the OSX-tans, and the OSX-tans are grateful but have not experienced any other upbringing aside from the 'protection' they live under so they have to comply with executive orders.


I read your edited post and would have to agree with you on all points. :)

At least when I envision this Mac Mafia scenario, it's not exactly like the typical idea of organized crime-- not even criminal at all, of course. But I imagine the Macs are a group that have a VERY high regard for family, honour and tradition, and have a lot of gratitude and reverence for their leader-- don, so to speak-- Jobs. ^^'

They know they can never seize political power and regain their lost territory (the home computer market) but this doesn't faze them very much because they're comfortable in their own niche market-- or racket, if you will. They're generally good-willed and friendly, too, but they can go a bit overboard when it comes to proving a point to their competition.
Quote from: Chocofreak13
are we considering the vintage OSes their own species or just a class of OS?


Depends of the Vintage-tan in question. Some are purely hardware, some are OS-tan, others (like the micros) are hybrid of the two.
(hybrid) It's a fusion of two (or possibly more?) different species... just like a mule isn't considered its own species, but a cross of horse and donkey. So they're both hardware and OS-tan or program-tan.

But I guess you could say it's its own species for the sake of organisation...

I suppose file type should be a kind of -tan. Hardwares, of course, could be split us further into different sub-categories: actual computers, peripherals, storage devices, etc. but I'd rather not do that now.
We're overthinking things, guys! :V

As least in the case of hardware, software and OSes and class system, that's a fluid thing. At the dawn of computer-tans, all that existed were hardware-tans. Somewhere along the line, softwarish/OS elements were incorporated into hardwares, but it wasn't until the 1950s that OS-tans split away from hardwares and a separate species and not until the late 50s/early 60s that they jumped slightly ahead of hardwares on the social class scale. Software/App-tans are a bit difficult to judge: they're vital to OS-tans in support roles and some become just as powerful and popular (and even richer) than some of their OS-tan counterparts (Photoshop-tan, for example) but they still have a lot of strange customs that prevent them from full participation in the computer community (like being restricted to certain OS social circles... in the case of a Mac only or Windows only program).

And also, like Aurora pointed out, social status does not necessarily equal economic status. There are plenty of OS-tans who are poor and software and hardware-tans who are wildly rich: the difference being, namely, how they interact with each other (in other words, no amount of riches could buy a Linux-only app-tan the power to socialize with Windows OS-tans).

I also agree that hybrid OS-and-hardware-two-in-one -tans should be considered on par with OS-tans.

As for processors being their own -tans, I don't wanna trample on anyone elses' designs or views of the OS-tan universe (and I have seen some nice processor/HDD/etc -tans), but in the computer hardware-tan designs I create it'll be assumed that those are a part of the computer-tan himself/herself. (IE, the processor is the brain, the HDD is the memory centre, the mobo is the spine/centre of the nervous system... and so on and so forth).
And just how the hell are we supposed to do this?

EDIT: Also, bear in mind that I don't want to freak people out by telling them "this is the way things are". Everyone seems to have his or her own vision on the OS-tan universe (seeing as the fandom is "fanon" and not "canon"), and I don't want to be intolerant of other ideas...
Mac
Linux
Unix
Windows
DOS

I'm not exactly feeling the vintage class, since it's so broad... it could refer to anything from a mainframe to a micro. I'd further the divisions to include various non-Unix:
-Minicomputer OSes (the DEC-tans and DG-tans for example)
-Microcomputers (OS/hardware hybrids like the Commodores, Ataris, early Apples)
-Mainframe-tans (the IBM-tans, CDC-tans, Multics, etc)
-Others

As for the Hardware-tans, it would seem Wikipedia has already laid out different classifications for us.
Also agreeing with Nej on the lineage v. family thing-- two people can be of the same tribe, culture, family, even if they don't have the same bloodline.
Quote from: NejinOniwaImma go out on a limb and say you people who want categorization of programs for STORYLINE purposes, go ahead and do whatever you want with that. It does seem quite unnecessary to categorize them as a central effort, however, since it goes without saying that programs are one of the more obscure classes...aside from a VERY select few.

...

As for the subcategorization itself - I see it as counterproductive and a quite useless effort. Looking at the OS side for example, what categorization we have of them is in affiliation - which the apps don't have nearly as much of - and to some extent, heritage - which apps usually don't go by with, seeing as they normally evolve from themselves and merely version-up, or otherwise. A very good exception from this is the entire Mozilla family; their Gecko engine is derived off later Netscape (i think?), and FX, TB and Seamonkey all stem from Mozilla Suite; they also have distinct version changes, which could be used for certain storyline purposes.
The fact, however, is that this sort of easymode family tree is VERY uncommon from what I know in the apps cloud, and thus the easiest thing would be to skip the lesser classification altogether in cases where the family/heritage categorization can't be made - all in all, I say that's the sort of categorization system we should stick to over most classes.


This.

The entire reason I even got to thinking about hardware-tan/OS-tan/software-tan classification was for my own story purposes... it's good to have some organisation, but let's not get bogged down in semantics so to speak. <.<
Slightly OT, but I've been trying to figure out how hardware/OS-tan relationships work in conjunction with OS-to-certain architecture relationships.

The Unices and Linuxes, for example, would probably be very democratic and open toward computer-tans of all varieties, since *nixes are very portable and used on tons of different processor architectures.

Whereas the DEC OS-tans (for example) might be more "xenophobic" toward hardware-tans outside of their own cultures... since DEC OSes could only run on DEC computers. Same goes for the Mac-tans, and any of the old-school OS-tans. (Since portability is a relatively modern idea.)

[/randomthoughts]
@Aurora: the OSXen can now socialise with non-Apple hardware-tans, but it would probably still be against social mandates to do so.

Perhaps, but hardware or software the Mainframe-tans are still very powerful and would probably respect each other (at least to a point. ^^').

@Stew: If SCOPE ain't happy ain't nobody happy, huh? d:

@Kari: Yep, the Windows-tans are definitely sociable when it comes to hardware-tans (yet another Unix/Windows parallel... portability, portability, portability). The OSX-tans COULD venture outside of their Apple-centric society, but would have to do so in the utmost secrecy... just because it's possible, doesn't mean they'd necessarily WANT to do it.

This is something I've realised all along, since OSes work directly with hardware. I think it would vary depending on the character in question... some hardware-tan/OS-tan pairings would constitute friends, business partners and couples. But they definitely wouldn't be relatives of any sort... remember, hardwares and OSes are completely different species. While they look and act alike, they're biologically unrelated and incompatible and derive from completely different ancestries.

QuoteThe hard part of this "virtuality" is that it doesn't weave well into many of the story works so far (mine in particular, since it explicitly depicts i.e. Ruka waking up inside the mountain that's thought to house the Perimeter facility etc). The -tans are also tightly knit together with their "faction leaders", that is, corporate/development/ideology head (Steve Jobs, Bill Gates/Steve Ballmer, rms, etc)


This, this this this. I know the "virtual world" theory is rather popular, but I find the inspirations in the "real world" so much richer to draw upon. And attaching the -tans actual places, people and events makes it more tangible for the reader -- and can even include a good (albeit warped) dose of computer history if done correctly.

QuoteThe base view I use is that OS-tans are built from code; it may be completely new, or based upon an earlier OS' release. In the case of subsequent kernel versions etc, I'd imagine some sort of "mothering" going on, but nothing like the human process due to the fact that OS-tans, while possibly immature in other ways, ARE made to be "ready to go" from day one. The first runnable/compiled release marks the first incarnation of an OS; after that, betas may spawn off in various directions before they conclude in a final thread as the finished OS. Like some sort of eerie robot, one turns it on, works its works and adds parts to it. Ofc, not by mechanics, but by code - we'll get back on that when I have time, but atm it's full holoday madness and I've got work to go to in a bit, so meh.


This, again. Where code = something like the genes of OS-tan (since isn't that what it essentially is to a OS/program? The instruction set that gives a software its identity and maps its behaviour). I've always imagined that, excluding the odd androidic OS-tan, they'd have replicated human bodies -- right down to the same biological processes (eating and reproduction just to make an example) -- but that they'd be, on a genetic level, completely unlike and incompatible with humans, and the other -tan class -- hardware -- neither of which carry this "source" as their genetic material.

I also imagined that OS-tans would, in general, reach physical maturity much quicker than a human, and that once the reached maturity, they would not age. Of course this maturity could be anything from an apparent age of seven to forty depending on the -tan in question. And although I suppose they have reproductive systems they wouldn't use that to continue their species; instead opting for... um... I dunno what to call it. Pod-babies? O.o

QuoteThe Code itself is something of great importance to most -tans - it is what they're made of, after all, and some even take to a sort of religious-like view of it, comparable to the worship of ancestors and so on. While relations to their human creators may vary, I imagine it's all good as long as support is provided in some manner; some others, however, may have cut ties with their old "faction" or even started their own (for all purposes, Unix is a good example of this).


Yes, yes, yes again. Of course this Code-ancestor worship would vary by -tan; the Unixes and Unix-likes would be VERY into this practise (since Unix-and-*Nix-like users usually relish the "old" status of their OS and advertise this fact) while others -- such as Windows-tans -- wouldn't venerate their ancestry as much (when was the last time you heard a Windows user brag about their OS's DOS/OS2/VMS ancestry?)

Some OS-tans are attached to their companies and others are essentially free, as you said, Unix is a great example of the latter. She became SO powerful and her reach so widespread that she outgrew the need for one. Linux might be another example.

QuoteWhen it comes to program-tans and so on I've used multiple approaches so far in stories, but IMO it depends a lot on how "separate" the program and host system is, alongside how powerful the program can be; Git, for example, while a program, is also a great system of its own, as well as someone who's responsible for handling the entire Linux kernel repository, and more - thus, I determined she was good to characterize. Finder (Mac) however, is more of a shell or part of the system, and very integrated into it; I worked this into it being a spell usable by the various Mac-tans.


Right-o. To make another example, Vi is considered a part of Unix but is important enough to warrant his own -tan; conversely, Time Machine is viewed as an object in literal OS-tan terms -- as Snow/Leopard's, well, time machine.

QuoteOverall that's my main issue with program-tans; as they're at the same time entities of their own, they are also the base of all Sorcery (as Sorcery is essentially the extended magic ability of -tans via code) used by OS-tans. It comes down to a question of who goes where.

Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 02, 2012, 12:42:58 am
Quote from: bellsSomething that also bothered me. (Especially when it comes to very "primal" programs, like Daemons and the like). Maybe program-tans GIVE their OS-tans a portion of their Sorcery powers?

QuoteI don't think it would be wise to disregard the Sorcery concept for program-tans, as it's the base for much parts of several -tans (Linux and other Open -tans, for example) - it'll be hard to come with the end verdict, but that's that.


This too. Some program-tans have become powerful enough to almost be considered completely free entities; while all programs depend on OS-tans for survival, some are unattached enough (or attached to SO MANY OSes) that they can get by completely on their own (Emacs-kun is this way).


I would argue that virtualization is no different from running an OS on its original hardware; after all, it's the same code (let's say Windows 1.0 for this argument) running on a physical machine (an iMac), it just happens to have a virtulization software acting as intermediary (VirtualBox).

NOW: I would make an exception for emulated systems that are gone and have been "rebuilt from scratch" so to speak -- say, an ENIAC or Univac emulator (both of which exist), but I'm increasingly considering that there's no such thing as death -- at least as we know it -- for OS-tans, since they exist as code and as long as that code exists, they can be brought back from the dead.

Make sense? D:


Quote from: Aurora Borealis
Those ideas all sounds very good, even the part about the Mac-tans being forbidden from interacting with non-Apple hardware-tans.

But many of the vintage home computer-tans blur the line between hardware and software, representing not just the computer but the OS/BASIC it runs. So would they be considered both at the same time? Though I think they'd be more in line with the OS-tans, since these characters would also be cooperative with the software-tans.

Hope that doesn't interfere with that the Mac-tans (especially the Classic ones) are known to visit the vintage-tans from time to time! ^^;

I agree that hardware-tans would have widely varying lifespans, with time not just taking a physical toll but also an emotional toll for those old hardware-tans that were touted as the NEXT BIG THING when they were new.

But I don't see the Mac-tans as supremacists themselves, in fact they're very friendly with most others and have friends from different factions, but it's the security enforced by the executives that is, and forces them to be shut-ins for the most part.

When you're referring to the Classic-tans, are you referring to them being less (or not) 'protected' by the security --and giving them the freedom to be with others, though at the cost of protection from danger-- or the rest of the family, since I see the Mac-tans being a close-knit family despite major generation gaps. (This referencing the considerably large userbase of vintage Mac hobbyists who use both the Classic Mac OS and OSX in the present day)

I can certainly see Tiger-tan and Leopard-tan being the rebellious types though, and interact with 'unapproved' outsiders to challenge the the security guards.

As for OSes that can run on multiple architectures, I see it as an OS-tan being multi-lingual.

I like the forbidden love idea between ME-tan and Mac OS9-kun. While the more laid-back Mac-tans and Windows-tans may approve, there'd be fierce opposition from 95-tan and OSX-tan.

The Windows Family is laid back, with the younger Windows-tans having grown up in peace and prosperity their whole lives. They'd be accepting towards various software-tans --though too accepting at times, to the point of risking their own safety--, but there a lot of secrets are being kept from them.

Their security, enforced by their executives are historical revisionists who have erased records of the family history before the OS Wars, so the Windows-tans know nothing of 1.0-tan, 2.0-tan, PC-DOS-tan, Xenix-tan, and OS/2-tan being a part of the family instead of an enemy. Poor MS DOS-tan, who is still part of the Windows Family, and remembers all of the family's history but is not allowed to speak of it!

I'm still iffy on the idea of the Mac-tan mafia since almost all of them are way too friendly for that (an exception maybe being the gun-toting System 7.5-tan), but do you think may be that way against their will?

The Linux-tans vary a lot. Some of them affiliate with the hard-lined 'elite' Unices, while others are eager to interact with anyone and don't care for stealth tactics, and some of them live as hermits and wanderers. The Unices as a whole are similarly diverse. But there are conflicts between the more elite, and more free Linux-tans.

I think the Vintage-tans would be in a class of their own, but as equals to the OS-tans.

The lifespan for an OS-tan is characterized by the OS's popularity when it was current, how much it continues to be used (if at all), and how well remembered it is.

In the case of Apple I-tan, she represents a fairly well-known computer that had an extremely limited run, but lives on in emulators and Apple I replicas being made currently.

Another case is Xenix-tan, an obscure Unix version from Microsoft. Wasn't widely used or remembered. She died in obscurity.

Even though the Commodore 64 is long-discontinued, C64-tan will live for a long time with all the emulators out there, including a fully licensed one for the iPhone!

However, some life/death cases aren't so clear-cut, or decided for story reasons. Like with Apple III-tan, representing a system that sold very poorly with a high percentage of defective units 30 years ago, and she's still alive!


EDIT: On the OS-tan wiki front page, I created a section for OS-tan theories and conjectures, and will add the evolutions and species theories. :)

I see the each of them as distinct but equally important species, with the vintage computer-tans being in a class of their own. Many of them had not just their own proprietary hardware, but also their own OS/BASIC, file formats, and ROM/firmware in one package.

There was some of that divergence in the 80's, with the DOS-tans and the Mac OS-tans, but it wasn't until the 90's that this became the norm and not the exception.

It was mainly due to MS DOS and the different Windows versions running on various hardware brands. The other major competitor was of course the Mac OS and its distinct hardware. This sacrifice of hardware+OS integration has the advantage of flexibility and adaptability, mainly for OSes that run on x86 architecture.

Sure, the Mac OS has always been confined to Apple hardware, but not just one particular model.

BTW, I edited my post and went more in-depth about it, but I agree, Bella.

Still wanting to know about the Mac 'mafia', I don't think the Mac-tans are in it by choice, and they have to follow orders, or at least the OSX-tans do, since the 'protection' doesn't apply as much --or at all-- to the Classic Mac-tans. Speaking of which, I think the Classic Mac-tans have stayed in the House of Mac out of loyalty for the OSX-tans (even though most of the Classic-tans would actually be better suited as Vintage Federation members), and the OSX-tans are grateful but have not experienced any other upbringing aside from the 'protection' they live under so they have to comply with executive orders. :(
Each 'class' of OS-tan should still be the same species, just of different cultures. Still support the idea of calculator-tans as mercenaries.
I think the hybrids should still be equals to the OSes, at least for storyline purposes.
Economic status can vary a lot between the OS-tans too. Windows 1.0-tan and 2.0-tan are OS-tans, but as part of the Vintage Federation, they're by no means wealthy.

And there's the OS-tans of the Anti$oft Coalition, with their constant financial problems!
Don't forget the Unixes and the mainframes.

The vintage class has some overlap with Mac and Windows. And Yggdrasil might count as a vintage Linux OS.

The DOSes are listed as their own class in the wiki and Annex Project.
I agree with the classes, and the family vs. lineage thing, but it's a little stranger than that...

The Windows Family and the Mac House both have two united lineages.

With the whole extended Apple Family, make that at least three lineages with the Classic Apple-tans (Apple I/II/IIGS/III), or four with the iPod-tans. Or five if Newton-tan is considered a lineage of her own.

While those are families (and their own factions) of united lineages, the Unix lineage is divided into different families and factions!
The OS Wars arc involving the Windows and Macs reminded me of the Montagues and Capulets respectively in the anime adaptation "Romeo x Juliet". :)
I agree with the classes.
if OS-tans can die, programs probably can too.
That all sounds good. Likewise Windows and DOS would be open to many different brands of hardware, if not different architectures.

OSX Tiger, Leopard and Snow Leopard would be rule-breakers though among the Mac-tans, being able to run on other x86 hardware. Still can be done, although Apple has been cracking down on that with the newer Snow Leopard releases.

However, among the mainframes are some characters who represent OSes (i.e: SCOPE, NOS, MACE, etc.), plus some that represent only hardware (i.e: Harvard Mark Series, ENIAC, etc.), or those that represent both but mainly the hardware (i.e: Cray-1). I wonder if that would make for some interesting debates among the Mainframe Guild members.

@Krizonar: Nobody else here has really given the hardware much thought since we see them as separate from the OS, but your ideas have their merits, and bring up the point that OSes can't operate without their hardware!

I had thought of the architectures as being languages, but you bring up a really good point there! I consider the architectures to represent different things in different contexts, such as languages (i.e: NT-tan recognizes many architectures and is multi-lingual) or philosophies (the "Harvard Architecture" of the Harvard Mark-tans), or literally styles of architecture (i.e: QNX-tan builds a lot of stuff, mainly mechanical, and that's an OS ported to many platforms), but I also like the idea of 'brain style' too.

My theories have some similarities with bella's and Nej's, while I believe the OS-tan setting is in cyberspace and takes place in OS countries, I also see the settings as Cyberpunk+Fantasy Counterpart Cultures to each OSes hometown/region, with lots of inspiration from the real world.

I fully agree with the 'ancestor worship' concept, and idea of all OS-tans having sorcery powers to run programs and code, while depending on special programs to give them their powers. Would there be different styles of sorcery?

Obviously, some OS families use more of it outside of just carrying out code than others, i.e: Multics, the DECs with geomancy powers, the Unices...

Some software are represented as other characters (i.e: the antivirus-tans, browser-tans), but others may represent items (i.e: Leopard-tan's Time Machine).

Some apps, such as art programs could be represented either as separate characters or simply art tools an OS-tan wields, depending on the artist and/or storywriter's preferences.

Your explanations are pure win, Nejin! :D

With your explanations on life force and code sharing, does emulation count, and help keep an otherwise dying/sick/insane OS-tan alive, healthy and sane? I imagine that it would, with emulators granting emulated OSes a special kind of code that would allow those OSes to run on hardware they otherwise wouldn't, and for the host hardware to accept the emulated OS.

And what about OS-tans that are deceased but can still be emulated?

I agree that deceased OS-tans aren't completely dead if they can be emulated (I see them as ghosts that normally can't be seen or heard until called upon, and barely have any power of their own), but would this take away from some of the potential drama in OS-tan stories, such as bringing a long-dead relative back for a brief family reunion if the deceased could be seen again more than just one time?


Great explanations! if I get to writing or rewriting the wiki article on deceased OS-tans, I will include that info.

It seems that most of the deceased-tans are in either stages 1 or 2, but some of the 40's and 50's mainframes are gone from existence.

The idea about being able to connect to relatives' code pools/life forces could also explain why some OS-tans that seem like they should be deceased are still alive (i.e: C65-tan, Mac System 3.4-tan, Lisa-tan?), and others died so prematurely because they were 'left to die' and shut off from other connections (i.e: Apple I-sama, presumably also Multics and CTSS when they died).

If you mean in-story, there are still people who know of and remember them, including historians and former colleagues. But there are pictures of some of the ancient OS-tans.

Okay. In -most- cases, a discontinued system can still be considered alive if it still has a userbase.

GENIAC is one of those exceptions, apparently although there's no real userbase left, there are still working GENIAC units out there! It's such a simple computer that it's not that prone to hardware failure!

Systems such as Xenix, Apple I, ARX, and CTSS are 'dead', and are deceased OS-tans even though they live on through emulation. As I said, some deaths are for storyline purposes. But then again, emulation generally isn't practical and I don't expect anyone to use an emulated system for anything more than casual, hobbyist use. So there's no full-time, dedicated userbase for these.

If a deceased system has emulation available, it's not -completely- dead, and those characters live as ghosts. There's only one or two deceased OS-tans that completely came back from the dead.

Some systems are completely dead, with no emulators, the system dismantled, etc. This was the fate of many early computer-tans.

There are some borderline cases, such as C65-tan and System 3.4-tan (both extremely obscure, short-lived systems with no known emulators or viable userbase), but I consider them alive. Incidentally, both of them have cheated death many times in-story!

Another borderline case is SAGE-tan, since the SAGE OS is lost forever, and its hardware was shut down in '83, but much of the hardware is still in existence, including an intact computer in a museum. She didn't die when the last SAGE computer was shut down, but she went blind and lost much of her sanity.

The definition for death needs to be a bit more lenient:

*An OS-tan is (in most cases) deceased if there's not enough of a userbase using just original, unemulated hardware and software to keep the system alive.
*If emulation is available, the OS-tan still lives as a ghost in a dead-alive limbo state.
*OS-tans are completely dead if there's nothing of their system (hardware or software, and there's no emulation available) left in existence.




Quote from: Nejin Oniwa
If there's one thing one needs when producing any sort of material, it's order. Chaos plays a big role as well, but things need sorting out a lot more than they need shuffling around.

The hardware mortality is a good idea - especially since in the day of the now, not only do they suffer physical damage and degradation but all the more they become outdated. Thus recent hardware-tans will have to exist in extreme abundance, while very select few have actually aged well and remained "alive" and in use - although the hardware itself might not physically age very quickly, they mature and become obsolete very fast, and don't tend to live very long and/or break down at a young age. Easy fodder for TRAGEDY TRAGEDY TRAGEDY, the transience of hardware is.

OS-tans are wide in kind and number, and differ alot from each other - as natured by the difference in their code and usage of file systems, file types, etc. While software-tans are way more abundant, they always have to order themselves by family of end-user OSes; the caste system idea is a good idea indeed, and I would also like to lobby for conflicts over license usage (GPL vs closed source etc) among the families themselves. The Mac-tans as a supremacist familia of somewhat shut-in ladies and gents protected by Tiger SPs is an idea I endorse here, and only select families of software AND hardware -tans allowed to visit "the mansion"; the classics would most likely be less protected or even uncared for in the older cases, and the younger sisters may be rebellious from case to case - I don't know the Macs that well, though, so maybe leaving it to Aurora/Bella is a good idea in this case.

As for Firmware-tans, I don't know if they are entirely necessary - that'd mean that a classic iPod, for example, would have two -tans: the Hardware part, and the Firmware/OS part (which is the same, afaik) - and the same goes for your everyday gfx card as well. This seems highly redundant to me.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 02, 2012, 12:43:23 am
Quote from: NejinThe Vintage-tans are a special case, both in -tan "biology" and capability - they were, after all, the origins, the Homo Erectus of computers, if you will - and and thus they are several of the things at once. It's not blurring the lines, since the lines were pretty much not invented at that time. Their evolution WAS the drawing of lines, so to speak. So rather than the HW-tans being "created" after the OS-tans, they would rather have been distinguished as of a different class than the OS-tans somewhere in the middle of the Vintage-tan evolution from computer-tan to multiple species, and since diverged further.

Some interesting events make for crossroading questions. For example, OS architecture porting (OpenVMS VAX to Alpha and Alpha to Itanium, for example) poses an interesting question. How is this to be considered in the element of the evolution of the OS itself? What is the difference, if any, between XP Pro and XP x64, or Mac OSX PPC and Intel? Is it constant among the differently platformed OSes?


As I'm writing this TL;DR, I realize I should REALLY start working on some OS-Tan fiction as soon as I get my stuff done and ready. Hope for a thread to be revived/rebooted somewhere during the summer, if all goes well. WRITERS READY UP~

Data does not age (kinda). Thus the only two deaths OS-tans (and vintages as well) are susceptible to would be death by complete extinction of all copies, OR the death of all supporting HW-tans (although emulation adds in an idea of possible OS NECROMANCY in this case).

Emulator-tans...now THAT'S a SW-tan class with some pretty big power, there. Necromancers/Spirit mediums much? -w-

Standardization and clarification is needed much here -w-;

At least, if one is aiming for some sort of canon continuity. Some might not. -w-

I meant, if OUR canon is to have some sort of continuity within itself, and not just be a strange assortment of buttcheeks and waffle iron.

Internal Apple Familia oppression...I CAN SMELL THE PLOT. Z:3

Linux-commie idea seems a bit meh to me as well. If for nothing else then the fact that Linux/Torvalds TEH CREATOR is from Finland, one of the few countries in the area to actually manage escaping Sovietification back in the day (and well managing to kick quite a heap of ruski ass in the Winter War), I'd say it'd make for a good attitude against that sort of stuff.

Vintage class of its own is pretty much what I've been thinking but more on that later as this demon has SHITLOADS OF WERK.

Also it'd be more appropriate to continue the OS-volution etc discussion and stuff not related to this IBM topic in Aurora's new thread:[/size]
http://ostan-collections.net/viewtopic.php?t=1238

Hybrid isn't exactly a species. It's a class composed of those with elements of multiple other species. Or what?
File types is one thing I'm hesitant to - it just seems like one thing to many in the bottle...
Well, I don't know about you guys - but my experience as a writer is that generalizing tends to be the better option instead of specifying (and that's despite me doing a LOT of specifying in my works) at most times. I'm just doubting whether it'll come to use at all if we do branch it off; then again, we're multiple writers so one might use what another might not...gah, so annoying. -_-;
Quote from: Chocofreak13that's the benefit of having multiple writers, one person = one species or the like.

i'm a comic artist. and from my experience, details can make all the difference. i try not to generalize (except for crowd scenes, like the barfight i drew the other day), so that each thing sparkles in its own right. sure, it takes a little while, but the results are worth it.

I suppose that's very true for comics; The reverse rules for literature, since you just can't take it all in in one glance like you do with an image.
What was the stance on vintages, by the way? Classification in the basics may not be the best with the ways we've used them storyline-wise, so just "unclassified" or "Vintage Class" might be to prefer.
Vintage is partly a subclass, since OSes can be both Vintage and another class - the old OLD Apple OSes and the like.
Family trees are one of the most hellish things ever to construct, as a matter of fact. -_-

As for DOS/NT they're both the same class of OS-tan - just different lineage (what with the NTs being diverged off VMS to NT and onward whilst the DOSes are descended from MS-DOS and whatever came before that) to base things off. No class diff, same thing with the macs. Unless you start talking about classes as actual lineage, which would make things overly complicated and start dividing things for no reason, that is. I suggest we simply link "class" with affiliation for the sake of ezmodo.
Quote
Also agreeing with Nej on the lineage v. family thing-- two people can be of the same tribe, culture, family, even if they don't have the same bloodline.

The Clan does, however, only accept new members through the old-fashioned ways of marriage, birth and superior awesomeness, so we won't be getting our first new official member for a while until next year...
Ufufufufufufufu. -∀-

OS Classes seem fine. And speaking of the Windows family, it's an awful lot like what happened to the Swedish royal family back in the 1800's...what with the Vasas dying out and the Bernadottes taking their place, and such. Good riddance. -w-;
The obvious question:
WHO ARE THE CAPULETS, AND WHO ARE THE MONTAGUES?
An OS is software in that it's not hardware - it's code, data, information stored on some sort of hardware medium. Thus, it is software.

Not to say that I refer to OSes as software anywhere else than in technical references - I'm well off with either, although "software" is a smoother term, despite the wider spectrum.
Think like this: OSes are humans, and Apps/Programs are zoo animals. Both kinds are animals, but the zoo animals can't survive all that well without the humans' services (well, I dunno, but probably not all of them, at least) to promote their way of life. In turn, the humans are provided various services (entertainment and in some cases knowledge from studies, in this example) from the animals.
The same trip goes for OSes vs Apps/Programs. Both are software, but one is rather dependent on the other for an environment they can survive in as well as provide their services to the other.

METAPHORS YAY.
Imma go out on a limb and say you people who want categorization of programs for STORYLINE purposes, go ahead and do whatever you want with that. It does seem quite unnecessary to categorize them as a central effort, however, since it goes without saying that programs are one of the more obscure classes...aside from a VERY select few.

As for your question, choco, Websites are content displayed by an engine (software) run by a server OS; whereas the other three are merely possible subcategories of programs/apps/software/mcguffin, and thus go there anyway, subcategorization or not.

As for the subcategorization itself - I see it as counterproductive and a quite useless effort. Looking at the OS side for example, what categorization we have of them is in affiliation - which the apps don't have nearly as much of - and to some extent, heritage - which apps usually don't go by with, seeing as they normally evolve from themselves and merely version-up, or otherwise. A very good exception from this is the entire Mozilla family; their Gecko engine is derived off later Netscape (i think?), and FX, TB and Seamonkey all stem from Mozilla Suite; they also have distinct version changes, which could be used for certain storyline purposes.
The fact, however, is that this sort of easymode family tree is VERY uncommon from what I know in the apps cloud, and thus the easiest thing would be to skip the lesser classification altogether in cases where the family/heritage categorization can't be made - all in all, I say that's the sort of categorization system we should stick to over most classes.

The base view I use is that OS-tans are built from code; it may be completely new, or based upon an earlier OS' release. In the case of subsequent kernel versions etc, I'd imagine some sort of "mothering" going on, but nothing like the human process due to the fact that OS-tans, while possibly immature in other ways, ARE made to be "ready to go" from day one. The first runnable/compiled release marks the first incarnation of an OS; after that, betas may spawn off in various directions before they conclude in a final thread as the finished OS. Like some sort of eerie robot, one turns it on, works its works and adds parts to it. Ofc, not by mechanics, but by code - we'll get back on that when I have time, but atm it's full holoday madness and I've got work to go to in a bit, so meh.

The Code itself is something of great importance to most -tans - it is what they're made of, after all, and some even take to a sort of religious-like view of it, comparable to the worship of ancestors and so on. While relations to their human creators may vary, I imagine it's all good as long as support is provided in some manner; some others, however, may have cut ties with their old "faction" or even started their own (for all purposes, Unix is a good example of this).

When it comes to program-tans and so on I've used multiple approaches so far in stories, but IMO it depends a lot on how "separate" the program and host system is, alongside how powerful the program can be; Git, for example, while a program, is also a great system of its own, as well as someone who's responsible for handling the entire Linux kernel repository, and more - thus, I determined she was good to characterize. Finder (Mac) however, is more of a shell or part of the system, and very integrated into it; I worked this into it being a spell usable by the various Mac-tans.

Overall that's my main issue with program-tans; as they're at the same time entities of their own, they are also the base of all Sorcery (as Sorcery is essentially the extended magic ability of -tans via code) used by OS-tans. It comes down to a question of who goes where.

I don't think it would be wise to disregard the Sorcery concept for program-tans, as it's the base for much parts of several -tans (Linux and other Open -tans, for example) - it'll be hard to come with the end verdict, but that's that.

Also Hardware-tans have the same level (though not the same kind) of rudimentary grasp of Code as humans - only in more extreme cases can they manage to access any Closed space unaided, and their presence can normally cause disturbances on quite high levels within the field. I am in a bit of a bind in this spot, however, as it deals with the matter of the source of Code and power among OS-tans.

Viewpoint 1: A piece of hardware is the material focal point for any and all execution of code by any OS-tan. The amount of magic/code/whatever power accessible by one single OS-tan should thus in the defining norm be roughly equivalent to the amount of hardware under his/her control - that is, computers with the OS in question installed, and the raw processing power they can provide. For example, while the various Windows versions have dominated the desktop market for just about two decades now, their actual code strength is limited by the hardware used in these lightweight machines. Linux, while not very widespread on the desktop side, controls a huge chunk of server farm through her distributions; as they are direct iterations, code relatives AND direct subordinates of hers, this supplies her with an enormous amount of raw processing power. And while the Unix empire may not be as glorious as it one was, the rise of the OSXen and the persistence of Mainframes running various Unix versions ensures her a good deal of raw strength as well.
This also gives a good way of handling the rise and fall of various -tans; as the amount of hardware under their control diminishes, so does their power, with eventual lapses of sanity or physical ability to follow depending on the scope of their fall, with an eventual death possible as a result of having no hardware or direct descendants/subordinates to draw power from at all. As an example, OpenVMS will keep going even if her own hardware base ceases to exist, as long as NT-based Windows-tans are present and in possession of enough power to keep her alive; at the moment the prevalence of NT-based Windowses gives her the ability to tap into their enormous code power pool, resulting in her being a great deal more powerful than one would expect from a wanderer of her state. NT herself will likely never gain much power as a result of her being a rather inconspicuous character in the shadow of various Windows versions (XP, Vista, 7 and so on), leaving her almost in a subordinate state of the hierarchy despite being higher in the chain of Code; in addition, as she is the link binding OpenVMS to the Windows power pool, and since she is not in the top of that hierarchy (she is a direct descendant of OpenVMS, not an original piece of code - compare Linux and Unix, with the former being semi-related but not directly related in code and such, thus granting no power sharing) what power she can draw herself is only a small branch on the trunk supplied to OpenVMS through her own channel.

The main problem I see with this is with -tans who don't follow this pattern of power-in-accordance or have other kinds of powers; I dunno the amount of these, however, but I think they are sort of few in number atm. Keep in mind that this "power level" scale only pays mind to actual usage of code/magic - 95-tan, for example, while not being as powerful in spell usage as she was during the height of the 90's OS wars, she still keeps her physical prowess and swordsmanship; as this is a natural ability that she has by "birthright" so to speak, one that was hardcoded into her very matter as she was created, and not a spell.

WALL OF TEXT. What say you, /osc/?

It's just that, I don't see too much conflict with this "over-detailed" system with any of the works produced here, or even the old originals from Futaba. Might as well define everything that's being used, no? SCIENCE likes it that way.

And Emulation is the equivalent of necromancy; it provides a -tan, deceased or not, with code/life force from another entity. Thus, an OSXen in Windows Bootcamp supplies power to the Windows power pool; while an emulation of old, deceased OSes provide them with temporary life force. Depending on the scope of emulation (actual installation on a virtual space VS plain ISO-booting and whatnot) she may be able to keep some of that power and keep running in a low state even when emulation is not in progress; or be forced into a "standby" mode. The former alternative also gives for healthier-looking corpses.

True revival, however, needs the complete reconstruction of the original hardware or somehow else giving a -tan a code pool all of her own.

In my view of OS-tan death, there are 4 stages.
1: Operation death - there are no longer any pieces of hardware running the OS. This gives the -tan a few moments to say some last words (length dependent on the size of the final code pool and the maintenance/power level needed to sustain her equipment), whereafter she goes into a "dormant state" resembling a coma. This of course under the condition that any external power supplies have also kicked the bucket; a -tan with still-operative direct descendants, subordinates or a sizeable code pool available through other means (in possession of a family company, for example, that is willing to supply the -tan with power) will not cease operation until these link(s) are gone.

2: Hardware death - there are no longer any hardware in good enough condition to run the OS. This marks a deepening of the "dormant state", where only porting can give the -tan a true return to life.

3: Software death - there are no longer any pieces of the original installation mediums left, and the -tan starts to effectively decay into bits of code.

4: Code death - the final stage of the deceased, when all vital pieces of code (source or not) is gone from existence. This is effectively the final death of a -tan.

Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 02, 2012, 12:44:02 am
Quote from: Iwow, i actually had to take notes on this. oh lawls.

let's see...

--the apple forbidden from mating with other -tans lends itself a romeo x juliet air in the case of emuii-tan and kyourou-kun, due to the fact that from fandom (and the comic i transcribed myself) has kyourou hopelessly in love with emuii-tan, and emuii returning his feelings to some extent. this makes for a very interesting story, no? :3 (although the only one i would think would be truely angry in the windows sect would be 95-tan; as for the mac side i figure the only ones NOT angry with this pairing would be sonata, apple II, apple I (may she rest in peace), and maybe system1-tan.)

--hardware morality makes sense. it also lends itself to that idea i had about the IBM army--lots of strapping young hardware-kuns charging off to battle with the other hardware types, thus ending their lifespan, leading to only a few straggling survivors in their old age.
-tragedy may be a good motif for this, although WE'D have to make up the parings, as there aren't exactly alot of canon hardware-tans/kuns.
-technically they are the oldest, as TECHNICALLY the first computer was created by ada lovelace, which was pure hardware. we could consider them "the original race", or something. they should at least garner some respect.
-i was going to consider firmware part of the limited "magics" held by the hardware species, but i like your idea MUCH better.

--the os-tans may be the most complex of the species to plan, as most of it is already planned out for us. this SEEMS simpler, but in reality this actually binds us to the set given.
-nej, i like your idea about the mac "famigilia". this (http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/displayimage.php?album=7&pos=28) is pretty much how i've thought of the macs, so only "elite" software seems to fit this image. i also like the idea of the youngsters being "rebellious", though OSX-tan would probably be a little more traditional than OSX-kun or the OS9 set. (the italian flair also goes with the romeo/juliet thing i mentioned earlier ;D )
-i am wondering what sort of "magics" you meant, considering the software are a class in themselves. explain?
-the windows seem like they would be more laid-back, as with the usual setting for the windows houses, relaxed, japanese, and cozy. they would welcome even unlicenced software with open arms, though vista would ask permission first. xD
-the linux, considering they are rather scattered, seem like they'd be more like an underground group, having secret meetings, like communists in the 1950's. xD they would probably cater to mainly open-source/unlicenced software, and be a bit more stealthy in their dealings. they probably would not get along with other clans, if they got along with themselves.
-OSes are not immortal, if i remember right. i once read that apple 1 died, as did a few others. they might have impressive longevity, maybe even not able to succumb to natural causes (what IS "natural" for an OS??), but they CAN die.

--i like the idea of firmware-tans. i have an art book that reminds me of something that bella said about them:
Quote from: BellaITS CRAZY :V WE SHOULD HAVE A PICNIC AT LAKE WINNIPESAUKEE SOMETIME OR SOMETHING. :V

no, not that, though we should. xD
Quote from: Bellathey'd probably be the lowest class, but one of the largest, since firmware is used in almost EVERYTHING electronic.

the art book is called "Manga Matrix" (i reccomend it, $25), one of it's purposes is to help people plan stories. one of the samples i really took a shine to (actually helped inspire a potential comic of mine) and i think it would fit here.
the pages are here (http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i98/Chocofreak13/boundarysky1.jpg), here (http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i98/Chocofreak13/boundarysky2.jpg), and here (http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i98/Chocofreak13/boundarysky3.jpg) (the third one is just the unreadable text on #2.). I think the stateless people from the story would describe the firmware-tans quite well. (on another note, like the statless people, they are connected with the upper-class whether they like it or not [in this case the hardware-tans].)

--software-tans would most likely be of a lower class than the rest (but not as low as firmware). They are dependent upon OSes for work and purpose, for without OSes, they (technically) do not exist (though with disk-burning, this is subject to speculation). There would likely be 3 classes: Licenced, Unlicenced, and Freeware. (i suppose piracy could come into play as a 4th class, but me thinks they would fall under "unlicenced".) I'm thinking that Certian OSes would only hire certian Software; i'm thinking Mac would mainly hire Licenced (and very few at that), Windows would be equal-oppertunity, and Linux would cater mostly to Freeware.
-Software reminds me of a sort of assistant to OSes, like a boss and secratary (in certian cases).
-Applications and gadgets should fall under this catagory.
-Would malware fall under this catagory?

--I like the evolution theory for Vintage-tans, although this is slightly degrading in addition to being true; if we compare them to evolution, then as the "modern" OSes represent the evolutionary stage of today, Vintage would be farther down on the chain, as early homo sapiens, or perhaps even closer to our primate cousins.

--I vote we start a seperate species for Filetypes, as they are not software, not OS, and not anything else. i can't figure out where to place them, unless we start counting them as the "cells" of the OS, as they make up the OS itself.

also, i made a prototype hierarchy chart based on the one in the book.
(http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i98/Chocofreak13/oshierarchy.jpg)

hmm, i think i'm done with my arguements.

very cool, thanks aurora-sama. ^^

given that the mac familt sports lisa, OSX, AND 7.5-tan, not to mention a brigade of overprotective catboys and close-minded office execs, the mafioso idea doesn't seem TOO far off.....

considering the vintages are OSes, they would probablyfall under that catagory. but there needs to be some explanations...
1. time warp
2. immortality
3. evolutionary
4. clones
5. suspended animation
6. ????
7. profit

bella: i suppose you're right about the hardware-tans, although for certian computers (and storyline purposes) having an army of clone-puters would be pretty cool.
as for os-volution, there must be SOME hints of it, whether it's a family line or OSes coming from other computers. unix to linux could be considered an os-volution.
i wonder if, for storyline purposes, viruses and malware could "kill" an OS-tan.
(ps. dost thou live in plymouth? :3)

nej: since when is this canon? WE keep the -tans alive now. which means WE make the canon stuff now.

hmm, indeed, there has to be SOME organization. i think that may be what sparked this philosophical conversation of philosophy and os-tan
(or "On the OS-tan of Species").

yes, orginization is needed. but first we need to agree on what is being organized. we have os-tans, software, and hardware as separate species; we all agree on that it seems. i like the idea of firmware and filetypes as separate species as well. does everyone agree? and what to do about vintage-tans?

after that, there's the OS-volution debate. then we could probably start some organizing, cause then we'll know what we're dealing with.

the "hybrids" from long ago could result from a time when OSes were not limited to whom they could reproduce with. An OS could have mated with a Hardware, producing the hybrid. as time moved on, it was considered "forbidden" to mate an OS and a piece of hardware. hybrids should also perhaps (for storyline purposes) be a different class, or maybe treated as outcasts in certian ways, since they are a fusion of what should (by modern standards) not be fused.
so, people, on the creation of species, i was going to move for the creation of certian catagories, but i need a question answered first:
are we considering the vintage OSes their own species or just a class of OS?
ok, so the species are still OS, Hardware, Software, Firmware, Hybrid, and Filetype? (no one has disputed me on filetypes so i'm putting it in).

i move for the creation of the following categories of species:
Hardware
Software
Firmware
Operating System
Hybrids
Filetypes

seconded?
all in favor?
i think (hybrid) deserves it's own species, since it can't fall into either "hardware" or "os".
@Nejin: logically, firmware could fall under the same assumption. but it adds an interesting element to the storyline, and to be honest, if you could find a species for them to fall under, be my guest, cause i just can't. =\

@Bella: i was proposing that we set down the basic species now, then we can start working on genus, phyus, ect.
this is more about species than -tan types.

that's like making Mac-tans and Windows-tans seperate species. they're both OSes.

this is a rare moment when i'm speaking not of the fandom.
because the OS-tans are a double-edged sword: in addition to the technical aspect, we also have the storyline to think about.

firmware is both hardware and software. this means it could fall under the hybrid category, but for STORYLINE purposes, it makes it interesting to have firmware as a category.

it feels too generalized to have it just be hardware, software, and OS as the species.

we could expand it further, but by my count, we currently have:
Hardware
Software
Firmware
OS
Hybrid
Filetype

if this still bothers you, we COULD move firmware to the hybrid folder, and just have them be a lower class than the rest (or something).
i made a small chart, but it's mainly for class purposes....

(http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i98/Chocofreak13/osspecies.jpg)

threw this together. up for debate since we haven't taken a vote yet.

and The Hobbit had plenty of detail. What's your excuse?
Quote from: Aurora BorealisI think the hybrids should still be equals to the OSes, at least for storyline purposes.

With class, are you referring to purely a social/caste one, or a social/economic one?

social/caste, however this tends to effect economic status as well.

i was a little iffy on the hybrids, i figure that's better left to a case-by-case basis.
Quote from: Aurora BorealisEconomic status can vary a lot between the OS-tans too. Windows 1.0-tan and 2.0-tan are OS-tans, but as part of the Vintage Federation, they're by no means wealthy.

And there's the OS-tans of the Anti$oft Coalition, with their constant financial problems!

not to mention the variation of the wander sect and the linuxes. :3


anyway, we're a little OT i think.

now people, before we let our ideas loose, we need somewhre fr them to go. nej is right that we need a little organization or else we end up with little moar than random assortment of buttcheeks and waffle iron.

who's cool with the species?
=\

nice? it's a little confusing since i thought we agreed that applications were falling under the same catagory as software. drivers, technically, might as well, or maybe under filetypes.

all of the hardware related stuff (processors, chips, ect.) would probably fall under hardware as a catch-all.
stew: well, you're a contributing member of society, i don't see why you shouldn't have a say.

kiso: we are moving for the basic creation of the catagories i mentioned earlier, not evolution.

in case anyone forgot, they were:
hardware
software
firmware
OS
hybrid
filetype


so far that's 5 yays, 0 nays. aurora has yet to vote.
i believe we clarified that vintage will be a catagory of OS (or hybrid, depending on the circumstance).

alright. so we've established that the following species exist:
Hardware
Software
Firmware
OS
Hybrid
Filetype


shall we move on to classes? :3
alrighty. so for OSes, we have:

Mac
Windows
Vintage
Linux
Other

any others?
good, good. ^^
i'm liking bella's sub-species of OSes, any other OS types anyone would like to add in? (of course we could debate for years over the numerous OSes in existance and whether or not to put them in.)

i'd like to add "others" to the OS list to cover any loose ends. :\ anyone opposed?
that's pretty much what i was getting at; "class" actually being "family house", so we have macs, windows, ect.

and yeah, family trees are better left to later; right now everything is strewn all over like a 4-yr-old had a tantrum in our office.
alright. :3 anyone have anything else to say on OS classes? or are we good with:
Windows
Mac
Linux
Unix
DOS
Others

?
:3
Quote from: BellaAgreed.

Also agreeing with Nej on the lineage v. family thing-- two people can be of the same tribe, culture, family, even if they don't have the same bloodline.

like adoption, or blood brothers. :3
are people cool w/ the following catagories for OS classes?
Windows
Mac
Linux
Unix
DOS
Others


ps. if there was ever an OS romeo x juliet it would be kyourou x emuii. ^^
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 02, 2012, 12:44:37 am
Quote from: meIT IS DONE.

OS-CLASSES ARE AS FOLLOWS:
WINDOWS
MAC
DOS
LINUX
UNIX
OTHERS

MOVING ON, NEXT TOPIC:
SOFTWARE CLASSES.

Application
Website
Program
Antivirus (could fall under program, so this one's up for debate)
Other (sidebar gadgets, ect)
i feel that's getting ttoo specific too quickly. i use "software" as the term because 1. it matches ^^ and 2. it's an umbrella term so we cover anything we might have missed.

the reason i am so general is so that we can gradually get more and more specific.

and i don't believe OS falls under software, due to the fact that it can run on it's own. software cannot run w/o an OS.
Quote from: NejinOniwaAn OS is software in that it's not hardware - it's code, data, information stored on some sort of hardware medium. Thus, it is software.

Not to say that I refer to OSes as software anywhere else than in technical references - I'm well off with either, although "software" is a smoother term, despite the wider spectrum.

but in this case they are their own catagory. they can survive without software; not too well, but they can, but software cannot technically "exist" without an OS to run it.
i prefer software so cover all. so we don't miss any and end up with OVER 9000 catagories.
i don't like the "applications/programs" title because it raises the question, where do websites, malware, antiviruses, sidebar apps, ect.fall?

meh. i respect your input but i don't agree with it personally. giving specific types of programs (creative, office, ect) their own catagories defeats the purpose of having a "programs" catagory. too fluffy for my taste. and having the title tailor made to application snd programs kind of throws out having websites in there, since they fall under neither description.

is any one else going to debate on this?
god, i miss a lot when i'm lazy for days on end.
let's see,

OF COURSE this was for storyline purposes. if it wasn't, it wouldn't make a lick o sense ;____;

i was going to throw sites, programs, ect into their own catagory then start breaking it down after, like domain - kingdom - phylum - class - ect ect.
(sorry if my thoughts seem a little less-than-coherent. need to get my head back to ostan...)
exactly. but if, let's say "virtual" was the domain/kingdom/whatever, we can't seem to agree on the next tier. (we've got the "OS" catagory so far, but we're stuck on "software" now, because we can't seem to agree on just what the hell that is.)
i like the "xenophobic" idea on hardware-specific computers (which means windows most certianly does NOT fit in this catagory. ^^) this would also mean that the more recent macs would be some of the first to venture outside of the family line, since it is recently discovered that mac can indeed be installed on a windows computer (monopoly no more!)

the hardware-software relationship between older OSes can really be played upon, i just realized. business partners? married couple? twins? sounds interesting :3
firmware is an essential part of the computing process--! don't treat it like a lower-class component--!


i'd like to combine the ideas of the "virtual" and "real" world for the os-tan, so that everything they do is in virtual space, but reflects the real world (basically a virtual mirror of earth), so that while they are not physically "real", they can still do the daily things they do in our world, interact with us, etc.

     -there's a comik that speaks to this quite well (kimmie66, if you'd  like to pick up a copy). in this comik, it's about 2200 on earth, and virtual reality has gotten a MASSIVE upgrade, being put into these things called lairs (comparable  to today's MMOs), in which it envelops all the senses, transporting the person to a virtual world. as the book goes on, it shows that while this process is "one step removed", theyb have found a way to remove that step, thereby virtualizing the person, turning them into data so that they may roam the internet, the lairs, computers, etc.
maybe this could be worked in somehow; perhaps the os-tan are comparable to those lairs, only in reverse: instead of the human going in, the os girls come out. (holograms?)

as for the code and programming languages, etc, i still like the idea of keeping them as seperate languages that an os-tan can learn (just like you download a new language pack for your OS). it's likely that they'd know a lot, but not all, just like when you don't have the appropriate language pack, the characters show up as "â-¯". this can lead to comedic situations, such as 95-tan not being able to understand a newer programming language (and having to ask one of her sisters for help) or ME-tan forgets to download the appropriate language pack and ends up talking to her foreign counterparts with "â-¯â-¯â-¯â-¯â-¯ ME-tan! ^^".

as for programs, it could be a case-by-case basis, which might fit, but as i see it, it could be along the lines that they have a physical form, but in terms of using them like sourcery they would disintegrate into pure code, allowing the OS-tan to manipulate them into the form/shape/spell they desire.

i still don't see the program-tan being able to exist w/o an OS.....except for DOS, which is simultaneously a program AND an OS.

i also like the idea of ancestor worship among the OS-tans, though i agree that certain houses are more likely to observe this than others (i have the feeling that the Macs might practice some form of this).

i think one of the reasons that we haven't really discussed hardware-tans/kuns in details is due to the fact that it's hard to draw the line between a certain company, model, or just -tan every single computer in existance.

one of the reasons i don't agree with your take on software, krizo, is that they've been represented in the original japanese fandom:
http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/displayimage.php?pos=-7897
http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/displayimage.php?album=35&pos=17 (vocaloid counts as software)
http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/displayimage.php?pos=-4527
http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/displayimage.php?album=35&pos=49
http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/displayimage.php?pos=-1377
http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/displayimage.php?album=35&pos=152


oh, and i lawl'd when i found this:
http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/displayimage.php?pos=-1205
apparantly they beat us to the OSvolution theory. xD

*dies*

*1up*

you've made excellent points nej. however:

1. you're getting too detail-specific. when i made this thread i had everyone in mind; meaning their stories and viewpoints, which means that while this system may work for you, it might not for someone else.

2. you're over-thinking it. this was a problem in the old OSvolution thread as well, since it's so easy to make everything super rich and detailed. it feels better because you're being more specific. but since this was to apply to EVERYONE, we want plain vanilla ice cream, not a banana split sundae with the works. it's best to provide the basics and let everyone else fill in what they choose. (like a tabletop RPG! ^^)

3. i thought we were discussing the OS-tan World first? ;___;

i completely agree with this.


but i say this is too specific because it conflicts with 'my' stories....which means that it might conflict with other people's stories too. i'd prefer to keep it super-basic, since someone (like myself) might have a different view on the OS-tans and they way they function. while the "code magic" thing is interesting, and a very good theory, that's not the way i laid it out in my comik, which leads me to worry that i or other artists in the future will have their work called "wrong" (as in, "you're doing it wrong!!") because they didn't follow the format we're laying out here.

oh, and, I THOUGHT WE WERE STARTING WITH OS-WORLD FIRST?? ;___;

makes sense. and aurora, the article can't be written and rewritten at the same time, lol. xD

is there any record of the 40's/50's -tans? maybe like a picture in the BR or something?
(sorry, but it feels like i have nothing to contribute at this point).

i should mention that i found a pic of XP, ME, and 2000 weeping over the grave of an outdated version of IE. (didn't edit the article, since i figured i'd better leave it to you to decide whether that's worth a mention).

btw, certain things on wikipedia are collected into series (such as the "series on capital punishment" i was reading earlier today). is there any way we could gather various pages into a series? if we could, we could separate the different theories discussed here into their respective pages and link them in a series.

also, while we're on the topic, i think that in order for an os-tan/-kun (or any sort of -tan/kun, including hardware and programs) to be declared officially "dead", it must fufill one of these two conditions:
1. there must be no userbase, whether it be in person or through emulation.
2. it was NEVER open-source, and is no longer in use (this would apply more to mainframe computers that blurred the line between hardware and software, and never made it to the net; this would render -tans like Hollerith and GENIAC dead).

if they were not to fulfill one of these, they could be considered "alive"--but just barely, depending on user base. (for instance, a REEEEALY obscure OS might survive as a zombie, a ghost, or on the brink of death).

little morbid, but i think we should have slightly stricter guidelines for 'dead' and 'alive'. :\

EDIT: ps. thanks for reviving this thread. :3
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 02, 2012, 12:45:18 am
Quote from: krizAnother thing with the talk of software, hardware and OS, I don't believe in hardware tans or software tans. The hardware is the body, the OS is the 'soul', the software is the household tools, so to speak. Like, with say, Pixelmator, your OS tan gets a paintbrush they can use :)

As for architectures like PPC and Intel for example, that's just a way of thinking. Just like how people are right brained, OS Tans can be born "Intel Brained" or "Power PC Brained". I don't like the idea of it being other languages, because then they can't understand each other. This way, they can communicate just fine, just if they switch bodies, their brains (souls?) are just confused on how to function.



Quote from: kisoHmm... I read through the whole first page... and the post above. I clearly understand that you people are trying to define clear categories for '-tans. So I have the following question to make:

Why is "firmware" set apart from anything?

To me (and judging by the Wikipedia article)... it would just be the software form of hardware. So it would fall under "OS" or "Software".

Hmmm... this got me thinking too much and brought me right into taxonomy. But yeah, you can use basic taxonomy to separate most of the species and evolutions through the different taxonomic ranks/categories. At least that will allow for Firmware to exist somewhere... or not... lol
If anything... I have done both and can agree with both. But then... hybrids of anything can exist and firm ware can just be it's own kingdom in between hardware and software... at least there it could better represent itself.

Hmm... I think I feel the need to create an evolution tree to represent what I have thought up so far.
I made an evolution tree!! Might explain what I was thinking later though... I have a headache that forces me to not think too much.

@Chocofreak13: f by making basic species you mean an evolution tree, I guess we will all differ in views.... just the way it is. But I guess I can vote "yes" if that means that we are going to agree on what is what. Then again, it may never be like that... unless we're talking about hardware. But when it comes to zeroes and ones... we're pretty much stuck.

I call "software" anything that's not physically tangible (OSes, Apps, Filetypes, Firmware, etc.) that is directly related to computer hardware... and you refer to software when you speak of apps/programs. Bella said that she views the different hardware parts as parts of a computer-tan's body. I share Bella's view, however, I also can view them as separate entities themselves... mainly because I've seen the illustrations on each hardware part already.

I don't know if it's just me, but if we want to move forwards with this. We actually need to agree on the really basic stuff. Then again... we could all end up arguing and just go back to drawing. I'd kinda' feel bad if something like the latter happened though.

EDIT: @stewartsage: You can vote if you want... you just need to know what we're talking about. You should also contribute... the more people that do, the more fun and random this might end up being. :D
@Chocofreak: Uhm... yeah... I forgot that I needed to write the alternative to all that I wrote there... which basically amounts to... "yes". lol

Anyways... all of those categories do exist... I still view them differently, but yes... they exist already.

@Nejin: Ditto on what Aurora said.
Well... for further expansion we'd have to look into the roots of all OSes, since many are simply versions of what currently exists. That would take reaaaally long though, and likely it will be too much of a job for few people to handle. Well... at least not without dedication.

Anyways... under Windows, should there be sub-classes for DOS and NT or not? The same could be said about the Mac-tans.

Man... this is actually the time to start making relationship/family trees... it would only make jobs easier.
Quote from: Chocofreak13alright. :3 anyone have anything else to say on OS classes? or are we good with:
Windows
Mac
Linux
Unix
DOS
Others

?
:3

If by "Other" you mean "we'll add more classes as they come up"... then yes.
We need to be looking out a few steps ahead into the road to make sure everyone comes ready to voice their opinion.

Am I right or am I wrong on this suggestion? *is only following where OP leads... but doesn't know where to...*
Instead of using "Software" as the group class... I'd suggest using "Applications/Programs". Why? Well... "software" is too redundant for it's general group word and may as well include OSes and all that. On the other hand, "application" and/or "program" are a bit more specific in that it basically asks "what does it do?"

Anyways, the above suggestion aside... I propose the following classes:

Web - More general for both browsers (Firefox, Safari, IE, etc.), engines (Trident, WebKit, Gecko, etc.) and actual pages and their internal widgets (since these are viewed/used through the browsers). ((Programs that can access or require a web connection, but do not actually browse/render the web, should probably not be in here.))

Office - We all know this one should include stuff like MS Office, OpenOffice.org and stuff related to them.

Security - This is for malware security suites such as Norton, AVG, Security Essentials and the like.

Creative/Design - Any suite/app that allows you to create/edit images, websites, magazines, and other stuff in 2D, 3D and audio. Adobe Creative Suite, Autodesk Maya and Vocaloid (yay MikuLuka!) would be great examples of this section.

Messaging/Chat - This is where all of those programs should be, you don't view the web through them you just communicate with other people. I guess this should include both text, audio and video.

Performance/Optimization - Tools that help a computer stay in tip-top shape.

Multimedia - Media consumption applications that allow you to just view, watch and/or listen to your stuff. Windows Media Player, iTunes, Winamp, Zune player, Windows Media Center (not the actual OS, mind you), Preview (that's from Mac OS), etc.)

Hmm... I guess that should about cover all of the things that are in my folder.
Wow... I managed to forget about something... the things that I least use by the way. I guess...

Data Management - For burning disc images or creating backups. Nero would fall under this. And I guess Daemon Tools would fall under here as well since it's able to read disc images and you can emulate drives and stuff. Drive encryption also falls under this category, as well as data recovery tools. So yeah...
Quote from: Chocofreak13EXACTLY WHAT I WAS SAYING.

and i prefer software so cover all. so we don't miss any and end up with OVER 9000 catagories.


Uuuhh... but software is just the definition of all non-tangible assets in the technology/computer sector. I'm not going to say "change eeet nao!!11!1!!", but I did want to make the point known that using "application/programs" was more of a valid term to define these new groups (if only for a mere technicality). But like I said, I won't force change on something like that based on my personal scientific thoughts.

Now... let's carry on with the topic. And by the way, you forgot to agree/disagree with my proposed classes for the "software" group. Well... that, or I missed something on your part. ^^;


Quote from: ExaI support Kiso's version, as it provides a more diverse classification of programs. I wonder what group would contain stuff like cd burning software, Daemon Tools and similar, as they don't seem to fit anywhere on the list. Otherwise, I like this concept.
With this new addition, I believe your classification feels complete. And considering the massive number of programs, it's not hard to miss a few by accident, and mistakes like that can be corrected. ^^
Actually, I have a different opinion about this question. I can see your problem with having too many categories. On the other hand, I do believe that even the more diverse list doesn't have uncontrollably high amount of classes. I feel that having too few categories can be just as problematic, as there would be a chance that we would end up with classes clogged up with way too many elements, which makes it harder to check through it.

Quote from: StewWhen it comes to the CDCs at least, it's more of a matter whether SCOPE-sama likes you. Hardware or OS.

Since the interaction between hardware and OS-tans would have to be pretty close I can't imagine that outside of cultural differences (DEC, CDC, IBM, etc.), there would be much tension between the Guild members. Though some of the older members might resent the upstart "Operating Systems".

Quote from: KrausLooks confusing and hard to understand at first glance. (read about everything on page 1) I would agree that OS-tan's are immortal and that hardware isn't but were douse programs fit in? Do they die or no?



if i remember right, we got as far as this on os-tan species and social classes:
Species:
Hardware
Software
Firmware
OS
Hybrid
Filetype

OS classes:
WINDOWS
MAC
DOS
LINUX
UNIX
OTHERS

we were moving on to software classes. :\
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 02, 2012, 12:48:22 am
the os-tan world

Quote from: auroraSomething I wondered about is the location of the OS-tan world, I've never thought of it taking place in the 'real world', but rather cyberspace, to explain things like how several of the LUC members live together though they're mainly from opposite sides of the US, etc. Maybe this could be another conjecture article, like with the OS-tan species thing?

Relating to this, I'd imagine Linux-tan as being born in an isolated, rural area going with that hypothesis.

The real world theory especially confuses me because of the Binteeji Renmei, which has OS-tans from all over the US and UK, where would their faction be located? I had imagined there'd be a Windows Empire, Mac Kingdom, The Binteeji Renmei located somewhere presumably in a neutral territory, the Unix Nation (not sure if they'd be an empire anymore), etc.

I had thought of the Windows and Mac territories being neighboring... countries?

With the setting for the Windows Family, a large house with a yard seems just right, the most common depictions being a large traditional Japanese-style house.

Quote@Aurora: batshit as it sounds, I always considered the BR to sort of.... transcend the bounds of the physical world. (Which may or may not go in hand with my theory that the BR is an OS-tan stand-in for an afterlife, not to mention the BR's semi-inspiration Haibane Renmei). Either that or it's in California, which may contain the largest collection(s) of vintage computers on the planet. -w-


Never considered that! With your first interpretation, how would others enter/leave, since the BR has its share of visitors, including the Classic Macs who are semi-retired, which fits them (especially the pre-System 6 OSes) because they're still alive and known by Mac enthusiasts (therefore still loyal to the Mac House), though the earliest versions are barely used on original hardware.

Similar analogy works for SAGE, though a wanderer, is a visitor, and is against so many odds still alive.

I'd also imagine that many deceased OS-tans, if they were to be resurrected, would settle there. Well, there's Multics. And wasn't CTSS open-sourced too?

Speaking of which, if a 'deceased' system can still be emulated, that character isn't really Deader Than Dead, are they? (i.e: Apple I and Xenix, both deceased for story purposes but the system can still be emulated)

I thought of there being countries, with a population of files, apps and the userbase, and with the OS-tans of their countries living in their capital cities. In conflicts, the Unix Wars and the OS Wars, the OS-tans would be the generals of their respective armies, though OSes would sometimes duel. (i.e: Windows 95 vs. Mac System 7)

The Binteeji Renmei would be a neutral, micro-country that might not even have a militia. Attacking them would be regarded as a crime against humanity.

The wanderer OS-tans live across the lands, mainly in the outskirts. Regardless, they would still be of higher status than file-tans, etc... That is if they don't fade into obscurity! Similar thing for the CIOST, but they are a confederation of territories owned by individual members.

But to keep things simpler, I imagine each of these countries as being small. This virtual world would be much smaller than the real world.

My theories have some similarities with bella's and Nej's, while I believe the OS-tan setting is in cyberspace and takes place in OS countries, I also see the settings as Cyberpunk+Fantasy Counterpart Cultures to each OSes hometown/region, with lots of inspiration from the real world.

I partially support the real world-based ideas, since even in my previous ideas I agreed with the cultures and settings being based on the real world, but with fantasy and cyberpunk twists. (make that 4.5/6 people who support the real world ideas?)

It being entirely based on the real world still irks me a bit, because how would the CIOST meet up when they need to in emergency, and Wanderers finding each other, and banding together or joining other factions, wherever those may be. x_x

If the current fanon is anything to go by, either way we have some sort of alternate universe full of Schizo Tech and anachronisms.

i.e: 60's OS-tans mainly dressed in Victorian fashion and followed Victorianesque ideals, many 80's OS-tans were dressed late 19th-early 20th century fashions but still used tapes and floppies as their technology, yet some also used phonographs. Some OS-tans dressed in Medieval, Byzantine, or even Roman attire combined with other fashions for the pre-60's OS-tans. Even in the 'ancient' OS-tan world, cybernetic enchancements were possible (i.e: Whirlwind being transistorized in the late 50's)


I think we don't have to agree exactly, but some agreed 'standards' to follow would be good, i.e: established characterizations. They don't need to be followed right down to the letter, otherwise that would stifle freedom for interpretations.

For the OS-tanverse, it seems the consensus is that it is an alternate, super tech-savvy, cyberpunk universe which is -at least partially- based on the real world.

It wasn't until very recently (when I started reading stewartsage's SAGE fanfics) I had given any thought to 'regular people' in the OS-tanverse, and had only imagined it being populated entirely with computer-tans, app-tans and file-tans, with the 'ancient' computer-tans being depicted as very old-fashioned to reflect how much 'simpler' and primitive those past eras of computing were. But even with the real world-based ideas, those anachronisms from older fanon are still compatible and can be explained away somehow, as Bella previously described.


Quote from: bellsI always imagined the OS-tan universe taking place in the "real world", albeit a very technologically advanced (bordering on magical) one. The LUC, for example, I imagine would have headquarters on the east and west coasts of the US, with other holdings all around the world -- while the Macs would, naturally, live in Cupertino, the Windows-tans in Redmond, etc -- the thing that sets Linux-tan, for example, so far apart is that she doesn't really have a hometown. By this reasoning she was born in Helsinki, but doesn't have a corporate HQ that she's attached to.

Sounds like a good topic for a Theory article though -- do you suppose we should sort the different theories by their "creators" or just have each one in its own section? IE, have one section call the Cyperspace Theory of OS-tans, another the Real World Geography Theory, etc...

Screw the future generations. >>;;;;

My thoughts are Nej's thoughts, almost to the letter. I support the theory that OS-tans are physical beings in the real world, in a parallel-universe sort of place where all of history is basically identical to ours... except for, you know, the anthropomorphic computers part.

For examples of said universe(s), see any of my, Nejin's or Stewart-san's stories.

Quote from: Aurora BorealisIt being entirely based on the real world still irks me a bit, because how would the CIOST meet up when they need to in emergency, and Wanderers finding each other, and banding together or joining other factions, wherever those may be. x_x


How do large groups of people congregate in the real world? How do people of similar interest run across one another? I don't think OS-tans necessarily travel by completely human means or that the OS-tanverse travel infrastructure is like our own (far more advanced I imagine), but nothing you've described is impossible.

QuoteIf the current fanon is anything to go by, either way we have some sort of alternate universe full of Schizo Tech and anachronisms.


Yes. Yes it is.

Quotei.e: 60's OS-tans mainly dressed in Victorian fashion and followed Victorianesque ideals, many 80's OS-tans were dressed late 19th-early 20th century fashions but still used tapes and floppies as their technology, yet some also used phonographs. Some OS-tans dressed in Medieval, Byzantine, or even Roman attire combined with other fashions for the pre-60's OS-tans. Even in the 'ancient' OS-tan world, cybernetic enchancements were possible (i.e: Whirlwind being transistorized in the late 50's)


The key suffix being -esque; I don't imagine that's how the rest of the world (human or OS-tan) dressed, as much as a matter of their creators fashion preferences (and of course you can draw a a parallel between the complexity of a system and the complexity of a -tan's design. Multics is very complex, therefor she wears complected gowns; while some less complex-yet-older systems wear less complected and more modern fashion).

And Whirlwind wasn't actually cybernetically enhanced - at least I don't think - I always imagined her modifications were purely biological.

My last piece of advice, when it comes to chronological matters in the OS-tan world (and all worlds really) is think nonlinearly.  And don't overthink, either. =v=

Quote from: Aurora-samaAhh... Now I see, and our seemingly conflicting ideas are starting to work together better. I didn't think about the anachronisms too much until like just now, probably because now there are so many 'ancient' characters with fashions of such varying time periods! ^^;


Yes, don't sweat the small stuff like fashion, I consider that a creator's prerogative and not a reflection of the technology or advancement of an OS-tan (or era) in question.

Quote from: Chozo-sanJust putting it into perspective, I'd say that to them, the virtual world is the 'real' world. They are software more or less, not matter, so that works.


This seems to be a popular theory, but it doesn't explain how or where hardware-tans or humans come into play.

(Incidentally, this was also my viewpoint on OS-tans initially; at first I considered it to be a population of OSes and software with little or no human interaction)

QuoteThe alternate universe is believable to me as well as my own theory simultaneously, since there's bound to be an alternate universe that fit those criteria.


As someone who's written alt-universe OS-tan stories, I support this; alt universes are fun, cause they allow more creative freedom.

QuoteI just don't really agree with the other theories and made my own because I felt the need to rationalize it for our world. Plus I'm not a fantasy fan and therefor not a fan of magic.


I respect your theories and the right of every artist to formulate their own visions of the OS-tan universe; it would be dull if everyone had the exact same notions. And yes, no matter what consensus the majority reaches, I'll pretty much stick to my theories when I write -- as long as there's no major changes to the established characters, I really don't mind how anybody views the OS-tan universe.

Quote from: Aurora-samaIt wasn't until very recently (when I started reading stewartsage's SAGE fanfics) I had given any thought to 'regular people' in the OS-tanverse, and had only imagined it being populated entirely with computer-tans, app-tans and file-tans, with the 'ancient' computer-tans being depicted as very old-fashioned to reflect how much 'simpler' and primitive those past eras of computing were. But even with the real world-based ideas, those anachronisms from older fanon are still compatible and can be explained away somehow, as Bella previously described.


That's what I thought for a long time too; when I did my comic series, I included real-world humans involved in the computer industry too (see: cameos by Bill Joy, Ken Olsen and dmr and ken) 'mostly cause - at least to me - it makes more sense to have humans in the OS-tan universe than not, since it solves the who-created-the-OS-tans problem quite nicely.


I imagine Hardwares wouldn't be able to access this closed "Code Space" either, because, like humans, they exist solely as material beings. Your theory also explains how OS-tans can travel and congregate so easily.


Quote from: chocoin my os-tan comiket, the world isn't really discussed (of course i only have 1 issue for right now) but maybe a sort of parallel-japan? all i know is that the main house was on a large compound (large house w/ yard). the macs lived nearby (walking distance) and i imagined the NT branch of the windows house wasn't too far either (Inu-t was at the main house, but i imagined she'd live with NT-tan.)
there was also a market nearby.

@Aurora: i agree with bella about BR, but i would expand it to cover the entire OS-tan world, since the only setting we've seen for them is either unknown/unspecified or in toshiaki's house, which would be japan. :\

any sort of consensus on this? i like the idea of it being not in the physical world, cause if it was that'd just be weird. :\

i also prefer keeping the houses rather close; the houses aren't big enough to encompass entire countries so it feels weird to have them be in different countries, especially since they're fighting for the same thing. :\

now, if every faction was linux-sized, i'd agree with having them in different countries, but they're not.

maybe having the countries be almost the same as our world?
*sigh* lemme see, i like nej/bella and aurora's thoughts on the representation of the world, but i'd like them smooshed together. tastier as a sandwich people, then the condiments can blend. -w-

i still need to know everyone's thoughts on what the os-tan world IS, since we have yet to reach a concensus.

it's easier to go with "it depends on the artist", but i'd prefer if we agreed on something, so that future generations/non-artists can grasp what it is.

i think parallel earth in virtual space. what does everyone else think?

@bells/krizo: the purpose of this thread is to create a -standardized- rendition of things within the os-tan world, including the world itself. but just with the os-tans, there will always be variations:
http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/displayimage.php?album=35&pos=180
http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/displayimage.php?album=30&pos=3

for those that remember the osvolution thread, we were trying only to decide on groundwork for what existed. of course, with the advent of creative license, all this can get thrown out the window. the same applies here: we are merely trying to agree on a basic standard with the knowledge that it may vary from story to story. the standard will help when discussing new additions to the os-taniverse, as well as provide a base for potential work.

also: bella, i have barely any idea who the hell you're talking about. for my sake, use the nicknames from HERE, not DA. ;v;
with the "real" people in the os-world, i think it depends on the story.

for example, with my comik, it's free standing (as in the user is never involved, this is a private saga within the os community). but with stew's story Eastern Standard Time, the interaction of "real" people is necessary.

same goes for the "cyberpunk/tech-savvy" angle. my comik is almost dated so far, given than the only reference to them being computers is their names and a brief mention of "filesharing". most actions have been on the housing complex, which resembles an older-style japanese house (quite large, several courtyards, possible 2nd house on property), and the only other actions have taken place at the market. :\ even the 4-koma series i was planning follows this format. :\

i agree with you on the general consensus, aurora, minus the cyberpunk angle (given that we're using it as an umbrella term right now).

2/6. all in favour?

"...different stories call for different aspect/interaction. trading main characters in moby dick and catcher in the rye doesn't work because their particular stories call for those particular characters (i wouldn't expect capitan ahab to complain about his roommate whistling "Song of India").
it was referencing that while it's POSSIBLE to have "real" people in an os-tan story, it's not REQUIRED.

if you'd like to add humans into your stories, that's your business and i have no objection. usually when i view the OS-tan world, it's an independent rendition of what goes through the computer's eyes. the humans created the OS, but not the OS's experiences.


Quote from: krizFirst I'll start off with where I think the world is set.
I've always believed it was sort of like KITT from Knight Rider, the OS Tan is indeed in the computer and they are aware of their surroundings, but, since a Computer is obviously not a Transformer, most things that take place will of course be virtual.
Perhaps think of the OS-tan as an AI with an avatar.
The world with the Mac house and Windows somethingsomethingorsomefin is virtual as well. Most, if not ALL computers have some sort of data output or are able to transfer items. Heck, my Macintosh SE, if configured right, can go on the internet wirelessly. With system 6. The capability for that is there.
So we've established that the world is virtual, what now?

Well, currently my OS Tan is sitting at a coffee table with a (likely) UNIX server representative as they discuss things. That's how I'm typing this message. Servers are like businesses IMO. The OS tan requests information and they just generally talk. This can be over the phone or anything else.
Travel in this world is quite fast as it's virtual, this allows you to have huge countries filled with OS tans and they are still able to be traveled to rather quickly. (depending on how well the OS tan is connected, that is).

Quote from: Chocofreak13hmm, ok. which means i think the same way as you only with the os-tans one step removed.


though with more thought and consideration, i think i probably agree. :\

so we have 4/6 people on board for the alternate-universe-physical-os-girls theory. :\ anything to add, aurora/krizo? :3

Just putting it into perspective, I'd say that to them, the virtual world is the 'real' world. They are software more or less, not matter, so that works.

The alternate universe is believable to me as well as my own theory simultaneously, since there's bound to be an alternate universe that fit those criteria.

I just don't really agree with the other theories and made my own because I felt the need to rationalize it for our world. Plus I'm not a fantasy fan and therefor not a fan of magic.

Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 02, 2012, 12:49:09 am
Quote from: NejUsing the relevant scene from Mertvaya Ruka as example, space exists in two "modes": Open and Closed. For example, while navigating through the streets of Boston, Helsinki or some other human area we have typical Open space; whilst when inside Unix-sama's base where Leopard time-warps in, it's a Closed space, impossible to enter without possessing the correct lines of code (password, if you'd like). Since most ordinary humans aren't even aware of that aspect of code in the first place, they won't even be aware of the entrance - whilst OS-tans without the code in question in their possession won't be able to get through.

This sort of "code bubble" makes it possible for OS-tans, or factions thereof, to make private areas which only a select few can access; such as the Mac House or Windows Family mansion (or Unix' secret base). While the "magical" aspect of code usage (sorcery) can be involved in different levels depending on the story, this makes most of the workings possible within a single theory's scope (which saves us the hassle of explaining things later on).
THUS: Public space and human-populated areas are Open space regardless of human security levels, unless someone used code to force it otherwise; areas accessible only by OS-tans are locked by code of various levels and thus within Closed space (lolol heisakuukan). This can be anything from a private faction enclosure to a simple meeting spot for -tans (such as the "market" used in canon works, where -tans from many factions can meet) of all kinds and factions. I believe this solves most, if not all, of our problems, no?


Quote from: C-chanI myself compromise between both your propositions, and do picture the OS-tans living in some surreal cybernetic world which at the same time parallels our own real world.  The Windows-tans and Mac-tans live in their company-provided housing (in the Mac's case, a living breathing house), whereas most of the other OS-tans live scattered throughout the world.  In some cases they band together into their own cooperatives, such as the Vintage girls at the Binteji Renmei

You also forgot to mention that you're technically creating a comic as well, and need some sort of halfway-coherent universe in which to stick your characters in else they lose half their charm as OS personifications.  I originally loved OS-tans, not necessarily because of how they looked, but also because of all the witty technical references employed (e.g., ME-tan emptying out a recycling bin, or fragmenting a defragging job by 2K-tan, or opening a love letter to unleash worms, etc.).
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 02, 2012, 12:54:39 am
-open for discussion-
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on January 02, 2012, 01:07:04 am
Good job digging through all of those old threads and reposting all of that stuff! There's so much stuff to discuss, I don't know where to start!

The first thing I'd probably want to discuss is going into more detail about each current and historical OS-tan faction; such as their social policies (I saw some stuff to that regard) and their history. Most of them have articles up in the wiki, but a lot of those are largely incomplete. :-/
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 02, 2012, 01:12:04 am
any particular one you'd like to start with? i'm familiar with windows and mac, so for the wanderer class, BR, and others you might have to wait till bella's awake. xD
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on January 02, 2012, 01:55:49 am
The Windows Family and House of Mac articles are the most complete; I have sections listing the group members, link to the Annex bios, history, and misc. notes.

I was wondering about if their history sections could be further expanded, and would like to describe the culture each of these have.

As for their cultural practices and values, do you agree with these assessments?

Windows: They are generally depicted living in a large traditional Japanese-style manor, and tend to follow Japanese cultural practices because of the OS-tan phenonemon's origins. They are very sociable and open towards nearly all hardware and software-tans, but at the risk of security. They still have their pre-OS Wars revisionism (i.e: no references to 1.0-tan, 2.0-tan, Xenix and OS/2), but have otherwise become less authoritarian than they were in the 90's. There isn't a drastic generation gap between the 9x and NT Windows-tans, though a certain few still are still confused by the concept of diplomacy!

Mac: They live in a large western-style villa, like futuristic styles, and all of them are artists or writers in some form. There is a large generation gap between the Classic and OSX-tans; there is another gap within the OSX line. They were already fairly reclusive when not in the limelight, but in recent years, their property became more closed off, with a walled garden built. Ironically they, or rather their leaders, became authoritarian! Aside from Lion-tan and iOS-tan, the Macs don't like the walled garden, but merely tolerate it or hide their discontent. The Classics in particular feel alienated by the walled garden, and some of them semi-retired to the Binteeji Renmei, but because of family cohesiveness and honor being so important, they don't completely retire. As it's been said before, they're a like a mob family in terms of structure.

I also saw a mention of their walled garden also having security guards, but the guards only protect the OSX-tans (maybe then only the younger ones!). If the Classic-tans were to leave, they're on their own!
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Krizonar on January 02, 2012, 05:30:32 am
I had written a long post here, but it can be summarized to the 'walled garden' promotes Mac to Mac teamwork and family values, which is stuff they like. I don't see any reason any Mac would dislike a supposed walled garden as the concept fits their culture well.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on January 02, 2012, 12:48:34 pm
Quote from: Chocofreak13 on January 02, 2012, 01:12:04 am
any particular one you'd like to start with? i'm familiar with windows and mac, so for the wanderer class, BR, and others you might have to wait till bella's awake. xD


Actually, I would wager a guess that Aurora knows far more about the BR than I do. Though I do know it was founded by Amiga-tan with the funding of Unix-sama to serve as some sort of sanctuary for old OS-tans who would otherwise go useless or homeless.

There isn't much to say about the wander class - they're either unaffiliated OS-tans, OS-tans who have lost their faction/family and now live independent of others, or LITERAL travelers or vagrants.

My knowledge of OS-tan factions is limited mostly to the Linux Unix Consortium, the MIT-tan society and the DEC-tan society. Aurora knows more about the others, including the User Space Gang. Stew knows the most about the IBM-tans, CDC-tans, IAS machine family and any military computer-tans.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on January 02, 2012, 01:17:19 pm
@Krizo: I didn't think of it like that, apparently I was accentuating the negative. I was thinking of it from the perspective that Apple hardware as a whole is now more closed off than it was before, though I overlooked the fact that the Mac platform in the 80's was one of, if not the most closed-off system for its time with no hardware modding allowed for years. So if the Macs had a walled garden from the start wouldn't be out of place (though it would be Apple II-tan who would be alienated by it!). When I was typing up these conjectures, it was late in the night for me and I wasn't totally thinking things through! ^^;

I also overlooked that it's just the iOS devices that are completely closed off while Macs can still get apps from outside sources. When I was thinking of the 'walled garden', I was thinking of the iOS platform and its influence on Apple's policies over the past few years, which I thought would further restrict the Mac-tans' limited freedom to interact with others, and maybe I was thinking of how those policies could end up creating another large generation gap within the family.

So, the best way to actually describe this is that when an outsider wants to visit any of the Mac-tans, they must be approved of course, and they must be the ones to visit the Macs, not the other way around! This ends up giving off the image that the Macs are elitist and aloof, and even assumed to have poor social skills, but are actually a lot more sociable than they appear to be; they're just following the walled garden policies, which they might not totally agree with, but they do promote some good values which makes them worth keeping. Also for the longest time, despite their closed-off policies (which violate many of the old-school hacker ideals), the early Macs still managed to convey a counter-cultural image!

I'd also like to say that the walled garden policies hasn't destroyed most Macs' sense of adventure! The Classics visit the Binteeji Renmei often, or visit A/UX; Tiger, (Snow) Leopard and Lion have their own rebellious streak, daring to leave the house to meet unapproved hardware-tans!
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on January 02, 2012, 01:46:23 pm
Quote from: Aurora Borealis on January 02, 2012, 01:17:19 pm
I'd also like to say that the walled garden policies hasn't destroyed most Macs' sense of adventure! The Classics visit the Binteeji Renmei often, or visit A/UX; Tiger, (Snow) Leopard and Lion have their own rebellious streak, daring to leave the house to meet unapproved hardware-tans!


(Snow) Leopard-tan doesn't seem to give two fscks about company policy, and may or may not see herself more beholden to the Unices than the Mac family.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 02, 2012, 01:51:30 pm
i would imagine that the walled garden policy wouldn't extend that far. far, yes, but not THAT far.
for example, in the OS-tan Comiket, Sonata meets 2k at a grocery store. it's then mentioned that the two met for coffee a few times before Sonata went to the Windows house.
While i imagine that some of the Macs would enforce the walled garden policy as the word of god, but the majority of the Macs would probably be a bit more lax about it. (however, if one of the die-hards finds out, i wouldn't expect it to be pretty. :3)

also, in terms of the way the Windows and Mac houses are run, in my Comiket, both are run with a Japanese-style of the older members of the house controlling all affairs. However, given the peaceful nature of both 3.1 and NT, the Windows family has a more diplomatic approach. The Macs are run by Apple II, but often times she's away, leaving Capone to take charge.....leading to a more heavy-handed approach in dealing with other factions.
Also, i support the Mac mafia view. but since OS-tans originate from japan, it makes sense that they would be based more off the Yakuza. xD
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on January 02, 2012, 02:18:52 pm
I like that. Makes sense that some of the Macs would or wouldn't be so strict about the policy. Maybe a milder example of their policies when outside the house are needing to report to the family where they are every so often? Most of the Macs prefer to be more formal though, with the "we don't come to you, you come to us" ideal, but that's not completely set in stone.

The Macs who follow the policy the most strictly are OSX Cheetah, Puma, Jaguar and Panther; they just don't have that same sense of adventure that most of the other Macs do. Jaguar-tan might, but prefers to stay home to show solidarity with the other early OSXs. It may have been System 1-tan who started the whole walled garden policy out of her own paranoia, but she's gotten more relaxed about that in recent years. Being semi-retired and being affiliated with the BR part-time probably helps.

Apple II-tan lives at the Binteeji Renmei, but it's a safe bet to say that she's allowed to visit often, and the Macs greatly respect her. The Apple II platform is very open unlike the Macs, but maybe when Apple II is there, the walled garden policies are more relaxed?

I thought of Capone as being a wanderer who left the family out of shame due to the OS Wars, but maybe she's back with a vengeance in your story? :P Also makes me wonder why the older Macs would agree to Capone's leadership... Or maybe they don't because Capone's measures tend to be drastic, but don't want to cause trouble and threaten family stability?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 02, 2012, 06:44:28 pm
the reason is more the latter. and as for Capone's presence, i considered her such a fierce family fighter that she wouldn't abandon them till she was dead. despite being crazy, she does love them, even if she may have a slight personality disorder. :\

i didn't know that Apple II didn't live there. it's something to keep in mind, but i wanted to keep her the matriarch, so maybe she'll split her time between the BR and the Mac House.

i should also note that the Mac-kuns strike me as not caring nearly as much about their sisters' policies.

that said, the walled garden policy seems like the kind of thing that suits the macs (considering that you have to use mac-specific hardware as well as software). i'll have to come up with a way to include that in the comic (it's good, since most of what i have now is in storyboarding rather than full comic).

are you cool with the way the families are organized? what else do you want to disuss about them?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on January 02, 2012, 07:34:34 pm
There are a few other Mac-tans who are fierce fighters, but Capone is the most outspoken among them, and I'd say that in your interpretation, she ends up as the leader by default for that reason when Apple II is away. The other fierce fighters among the Mac-tans either avoid conflict (having mostly retired from fighting unless necessary, such as System 1-tan, and 7-tan) or -try- to avoid it in the case of the more boisterous Macs (such as System 6-tan, 8-tan and Tiger-tan)

Having Apple II splitting her time between both of the factions will work! While Apple II is away at the Mac House, GS/OS usually stays at the BR to continue where II left off with her work. :)

I agree with the family structures for each.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Krizonar on January 02, 2012, 08:24:07 pm
As the main Mac person here. I'm curious as to how 7.5 is in such a place of power, where a year ago, she didn't seem to be. Did I miss something?

I am worried about where 7.5 would fit in my version, as I would consider her the same character as 7 (much like how I consider 9 and 9.1 the same character). I suppose there were numerous changes and she might indeed warrant her own character in my universe, but it still confuses me as to why she has her own character.

I have no concern with her being the default battle leader as explained by your posts as that is sensible.

I would also like a list of the Macs that currently live (in a permanent state, mind you) at the home in your continuities/versions, as for my version, we have
Antares Tan
Pleiades Tan
Sonata Tan
Rhapsody Tan
Mac Tan
Cheetah Tan
Puma Tan
Jaguar Tan
Panther Tan
Tiger Tan
Leopard Tan
Lion Tan
iOS Tan (although I have never seen an official rendition of her)
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Penti-chan on January 02, 2012, 08:28:42 pm
Well, I have some feedback on something I did notice, looking through the first section. I saw mentioning of how Neptune is closely related to 2k, so I figured I might as well chime in on Neptune's role in the story I'm currently writing; since, at least from what I can see, my story is likely the only characterization Neptune-tan is likely to get.

In my story, Neptune is 2k's sister; the two spending a majority of their childhood together while in training. However, while 2k graduated from training and went on to become quite successful, Neptune was abandoned; left out on the streets to die, which is where her hate of the Windows family, especially 2k and ME (Her replacement), began.

She was eventually approached by a mysterious man, who gave her a second chance in the way of training her to become an assassin, sent to take out those deemed obsolete in the Windows homeland. Thus, she became the assassin simply known as "The Reaper"; lying in wait for when she's given the go-ahead to take out someone. While normally she's bound by contract to only kill those deemed obsolete within the Windows homeland, she does have permission to take out anyone who learns too much about her true identity; unfortunately earning Sonata a place on her most-wanted list.

That's what I have for her character thus far. I'm still writing the story, so any feedback on details to change with her character would be appreciated; since it does tie into one of the topics at hand.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on January 02, 2012, 08:54:04 pm
@Krizo: There are some alternate character and faction interpretations in play, all of which are equally valid. Think of it as we all agree on the general aspects of the Mac House, but the specifics are interpreted differently- most notably Capone's role or lack of, and if all Mac-tans are permanent members of the faction.

As for Capone/7.5-tan, she is interpreted as any of the following:
1. A wanderer who left the Mac House years ago (this is what I usually interpret her as)
2. A member of the Mac House (Choco's interpretation)
3. Not there at all (your interpretation, and how I used to interpret her)

Suggestions 1 and 2 aren't mutually exclusive.

With the Mac House membership, there are two suggestions:
1. C-Chan's original Annex Project- All the Mac-tans (that were created at the time) are permanent House of Mac members.
2. Some of the Macs are permanent members, others are semi-retired (this is what we both follow)


@Pentium: Sounds good! Her backstory has some parallels with OS/2-tan, and the two of them could have been friends, united in their hatred of the Windows Family, if it weren't for Neptune being a Windows-tan herself! Of course, if OS/2 doesn't know Neptune's true identity, they could get along. :)

The Windows-tans who would be the most scared of her are those who are wanderers (3.2, 97, 95 OSR 2.1, OSR 2.5, Odyssey) since they are unsupported and completely on their own. At least the Windows Family has strength in numbers.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Penti-chan on January 02, 2012, 09:19:03 pm
True on that, although OS/2-tan isn't in my story.

As for the factions, yeah; I could see the wanderers being afraid of her, although even the ones in the main Windows Family house fear her (2k's reaction to stumbling onto her EOL Notice at the end of Tales of Insanity, which serves as a lead-in for the story I'm writing now, sums that up well).
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Krizonar on January 02, 2012, 10:08:04 pm
Understood and I have no further concerns.
As for the operating systems I don't know anything about, I'll read, but not comment, as others probably know better.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 02, 2012, 10:29:04 pm
@kriz: any particular reason you want a list of the macs?

the ones i have in the comic so far are:
Apple I (though only in pictures)
Apple II
Lisa (only mentioned)
Sonata
Kyourou
Capone
System 7-kun
OSX-tan
Various Mac-kuns

i'm considering adding the version-specific OSX-tans, but that hasn't come up yet (i only have about 4-5 issues planned so far).

also, i consider Capone to be the representation for System 7.

(i also feel like saying that you should be open to discussion, since i'm hoping to keep this thread less about specific characters and more about non-character constructs, like the OS-tan world and relationships.)

@Pentium: that's kinda sad. i know neptune and odyssey are going to be a part of my comic, but i have yet to assign them a role (they'll likely recieve a bigger part in a later arc, like i had planned to do with 1.0-tan/kun and 2.0-tan/kun. it sounds like an interesting characterization, though, and given the images of her around, i think it suits her well. ^^

@Aurora: OS/2 hates the windows? you're gonna have to tell me more about that later, that could prove to be a key plot element in the comic. :3

since we're all in agreement on the way the windows and mac houses work, do you want to discuss any other factions?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Krizonar on January 02, 2012, 10:40:56 pm
Quote from: Chocofreak13 on January 02, 2012, 10:29:04 pm
@kriz: any particular reason you want a list of the macs?

the ones i have in the comic so far are:
Apple I (though only in pictures)
Apple II
Lisa (only mentioned)
Sonata
Kyourou
Capone
System 7-kun
OSX-tan
Various Mac-kuns

i'm considering adding the version-specific OSX-tans, but that hasn't come up yet (i only have about 4-5 issues planned so far).

also, i consider Capone to be the representation for System 7.

(i also feel like saying that you should be open to discussion, since i'm hoping to keep this thread less about specific characters and more about non-character constructs, like the OS-tan world and relationships.)



I'll definitely be open to discussion, just obviously not about other systems. I can't even tell you the Windows OS timeline (I had to be corrected that ME came after 2000), I shouldn't really be helping with anything there.

Nah, I just wondered if there was any solidified canon of what Macs are where, but that seems version specific too, so it doesn't really matter.
Your story also sounds interesting, because I do like Capone's character, I was just unsure where she came from. I'll have to read your story sometime, though you seem to not have System 6 in it. :(
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 02, 2012, 10:54:03 pm
the opposite problem comes into play here; i don't know enough about the macs to include all of them. ^^ maybe System 6 will play a role, but like all the random windows OSes, i don't expect it to be a big one. :\

i'll make sure to post it once it's done. [spoiler]spoiler alert: DOSkitty bitch-slaps someone! >:3[/spoiler]
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on January 09, 2012, 05:34:25 am
YOU GUYS DO WAY TOO MUCH WORK WHEN I'M OFFGRID. >_>

I will get on this once I've cleared out some more of my MASSIVE BACKLOG.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 09, 2012, 05:54:26 pm
good to know it's not (officially) dead. ^^;
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on January 09, 2012, 07:08:24 pm
Theory never dies with a physicist around, my good minion!
And I'll try and do some more work when my inspiration finds its way back into topical territory, so we have more debate stuff to work off. ^^
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 09, 2012, 07:32:25 pm
yeey~~~ ^^
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on January 13, 2012, 12:58:04 pm
I had a thought involving the nature of AI (artificial intelligence) software (and how they would differ from OS- and other Software-tans) involving AI's being pretty much raised and treated as humans, as opposed to OS- and Software-tans, who are treated as non-humans. But I'm really not sure if A) That would be the best way to represent AI's - they could just be super-intelligent software-tans, though supercomputers might fill that role too or B) That a theory like this even belongs here.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Krizonar on January 13, 2012, 01:30:57 pm
In my continuality, OS Tans are an artificial intelligence. Your thought is interesting and I'd had the same one before, hence my conclusion.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on January 13, 2012, 01:40:10 pm
Quote from: Krizonar on January 13, 2012, 01:30:57 pm
In my continuality, OS Tans are an artificial intelligence. Your thought is interesting and I'd had the same one before, hence my conclusion.


Well, I was speaking of the -tans made of actual artificial intelligence systems, like IBM's Watson or Deep Blue, and proposing how they might vary from run-of-the-mill software-tans.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 13, 2012, 04:48:08 pm
i imagine that AIs (since they're represented in various mediums, from real like to movies to comics) would have some inkling of being a computer, but most would be in denial of that fact, instead believing themselves to be human. any challenge to this would be met with various reactions depending on the -tan, and how self-aware that -tan is. for example, telling GlaDOS that she's a computer might result in a more apathetic response than telling HAL he's a computer.
it would probably range from laughing it off to bursting into tears, to feverish denial and even hostility. :\
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on January 13, 2012, 05:19:41 pm
@Choco: What about Skynet-tan? She would be self-aware and hate humans, seeing them as a threat that needs to be destroyed. So if she were to see herself as human, wouldn't she have to destroy herself, with the resistance simply using her logic against her, nuclear war being averted assuming she doesn't try and destroy everyone with her. Either way, the Terminator continuity would be much less confusing if Skynet were that simple. :P
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 13, 2012, 06:54:41 pm
it's likely a personality flaw on her part. she may see herself as 'better' than human, in the way the cybermen do in doctor who. she may also see the humans as an infestation she needs to EXTERMINATE----

that said, i imagine the reaction would be different for each AI-tan. they're a special breed of -tan, anyway. not quite human, not quite OS.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on February 02, 2012, 10:55:36 pm
REJOICE, I FINALLY HAVE SOMETHING TO POST HERE!

I motion we reinstate C-chan's bit-size-as-blood-type system for OS-, software- and hardware-tans.


Not much to explain here ... 8-bit hardwares/programs/OS-tans have a blood type of "8", 16-bit hardwares/programs/OS-tans have a blood type of "16", and so on and so forth. C-chan never proposed any storyline implications of having hardware/OS-tans having different blood types from one another (instead it was treated more as trivia/fun-fact), but you could make up your own ideas...
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on February 02, 2012, 11:44:50 pm
It sounds good, but...
I don't know if that should be ALL that bit size makes.
It's a kind of important thing, after all, which, among other things, dictates memory usage limits, the hardware composition of the -tan's nodes, and such. Blood type sounds like a good idea, but I think it should be a bit bigger than that.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on February 03, 2012, 01:11:40 pm
it could present compatibility issues between older OSes and newer OSes, which might be an interesting storyline concept. :\
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on March 25, 2012, 05:16:36 pm
Sounds interesting. I don't know what the bit size is for most systems, especially not the mainframe systems. I'd like to know that information to add in the list table, not just specifying that they're mainframes, but which type.

When going through the updated OS-tan list table (still in my wiki userpage sub-section), I'm still trying to make sense of some OS-tan lineages, where they start and where they end.

In particular, I remembered that BESYS-tan was Multics-tan's predecessor from a different lineage (BESYS being the half-sister of GMOS' daughters) though both at least partly originated from Bell Labs, and elements from BESYS were incorporated into Multics' creation, though Multics was created on a mainframe running CTSS. Dammit this is confusing! Did any of us ever decide what relation there was between BESYS and Multics? Whatever it'd be, they wouldn't have been very close at all, actually resentful on BESYS-tan's behalf since her life force started declining after Multics-tan was born, and Multics-tan got adopted by CTSS-tan and is considered of MIT lineage instead. @_@


Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on March 25, 2012, 05:25:55 pm
I'm not totally sue how Multics and BESYS are related either - I always thought they had some sort of social connection, but not necessarily a familial (and certainly not blood/genetic) relationship. It's also worth noting that CTSS' and Multics' exact relationship is subject to interpretation - while they're officially considered "adoptive" mother and daughter, there's plenty of evidence that they actually share a genetic connection.

No idea why CTSS-tan (or the MIT power structure) would have wanted to hide this fact, though.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on March 25, 2012, 05:37:54 pm
I'm still sure that BESYS would be Multics' predecessor, but the would have been step-sisters. With BESYS being years older, she could have been assigned to be Multics' first tutor (against her will, of course! Just like having part of her life force sacrificed!), but on the other hand, having a tutor who resents the student's existence quickly turned out to be a bad idea, and CTSS gained full custody of Multics. If we go with that, then just might be the first custody fight in OS-tan history! XD

Also if we go with that, BESYS wouldn't have been upset losing custody since all she wanted was to spend her last days in peace.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on March 25, 2012, 09:13:01 pm
Quote from: Aurora Borealis on March 25, 2012, 05:37:54 pm
I'm still sure that BESYS would be Multics' predecessor, but the would have been step-sisters.


I didn't even think of calling it a step-sister relationship before, but that sounds right to me. 

Quote from: Aurora Borealis on March 25, 2012, 05:37:54 pmWith BESYS being years older, she could have been assigned to be Multics' first tutor (against her will, of course! Just like having part of her life force sacrificed!), but on the other hand, having a tutor who resents the student's existence quickly turned out to be a bad idea, and CTSS gained full custody of Multics. If we go with that, then just might be the first custody fight in OS-tan history! XD


That's not a bad idea, though I'd have it play out a bit differently. Instead of having BESYS-tan be Multics' first teacher, I'd suggest that CTSS was Multics' first teacher, then Bell Labs stepped in at some point and assigned Multics to BESYS (presumably to broaden her worldview and help keep her from developing a strong allegiance to MIT). Neither Multics nor BESYS would have been happy with that arrangement and it quickly dissolved - with Multics going back into CTSS' tutelage/care.

Heck, you could even have all this coincide with Bell Labs' dropping out of the Multics project and say it was because of Multics petulant attitude toward BESYS-sama. (And her general poor health and instability.)

Quote from: Aurora Borealis on March 25, 2012, 05:37:54 pmAlso if we go with that, BESYS wouldn't have been upset losing custody since all she wanted was to spend her last days in peace.


That sounds about right.

In other news, I've had some recent ideas about the DEC-tans, Data General-tans and the relationship between their cultures.... but I'm too lazy to post them here atm. >>
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on March 25, 2012, 09:26:10 pm
Oooh! I like that, especially the thought of Multics being spoiled as a kid, causing as much trouble as her health would allow her to, but that thought then gets sad because BESYS at the time didn't know if Multics would survive (leaving her teaching efforts wasted), plus the fact she wasn't in good health either. :(

Does this all sounds good, and can be added to their articles?

Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on March 25, 2012, 10:14:31 pm
Go ahead. ^^
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on March 25, 2012, 11:44:58 pm
holy shit, this thread's active. *__*;;

that said, though i can't speak to vintage -tans, i like the way you guys went on this. one of the flaws in changeling is mentor's resentment, and it seems to me that Multics would have had that one had she stayed with BESYS! ^^;;

hope the thread stays alive ;v;
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on March 26, 2012, 12:30:23 am
Since the topic of OS-tan history has come up, some information surrounding the DEC-tans, PDP-8-tan and the Data General-tans (henceforth known as the DG-tans) that is relevant to the histories of all three.

1) PDP-8-tan accidentally caused the creation of the DG faction.
PDP-8-tan's creator/father was so disappointed at her perceived weaknesses that he attempted to muscle the DEC higher-ups into creating an improved successor to her ... DEC management wouldn't have any part of that plan, so he ended up leaving, founding his own faction (DG) and creating this successor - Nova (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_General_Nova)-tan.

Naturally, PDP-8-tan felt terribly about this. It caused her to harbor a small inferiority complex for a time - something she got over by asserting her usefulness through learning a (staggeringly wide) variety of skills and trades. On a much larger scale, the DG-tans became a rather persistent thorn in the DEC faction's side, which brings me to point #2.

2) The DG-tans are what drove the DEC-tans to adopt a military structure.
In 1968 the DG faction was founded, and from the beginning their main target was their rival DEC faction. While relatively powerless, the DG-tans were masters of propaganda and posturing -  this, coupled with their reputation for unstable and underhanded behavior (think of them as the North Korea of the minicomputer community), threw quite a bit of fear into the DEC-tans. So much so that the up-and-coming leaders of the DECs - PDP-10 and TOPS-10-tan - founded a military/militia organization within their faction to defend themselves if they were ever attacked/faced a direct confrontation with the DG-tans.

(On that note, i wouldn't be surprised if the DG-tans had some sort of military structure as well.)

This didn't really jive well with the majority of (typically peace-lovin') DEC-tans, but the growing threat of Unix-sama and her hordes pretty much solidified that way of life, and they continued to maintain a military organization until their faction's downfall in 1998.

Random human name notes:
-PDP-8-tan's human name is Kate De Castro. Unfortunately she shares this surname with her father/creator and a number of the DG-tans. The DEC-tans don't bring up this fact, like ever.
-LINC-tan's name is ... LINC. Dr. Lincoln, formally. 
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on April 01, 2012, 02:24:12 pm
NEW TEHORIES FOR THE OS-TAN UNIVERSE YOU CAN IGNORE THEM BUT THEY'RE TOO AWESOME TO IGNORE IMO:

-All BOY OS-kun characters will now be considered GIRLS! After all, all the *original* Japanese canon characters were girls with OS-kuns coming afterward, so we can see from that male characters were just silly additions to the original female cast.

-Because there are no more boy characters, EVERYONE IS YURI FOR ONE ANOTHER.

-But since yuri hentais are sooo boring and peenz are teh sexays, ALL THE GIRL CHARACTERS ARE NOW FUTAS.

-All non-moe characters are now moe! Look at the original OS-tans, they were all SO moe (desu). So now all of our boring non-moe characters will wear adorable outfits and do super kawaii things like be clumsy and have cute catchphrases!

-Every character comes from Japan and speaks Japanese. Since all the *canon* characters were Japanese, ours should be too - it would be baka of us to hijack the OS-tan concept and westernize it. Plus the Japanese language is sugoi!!!
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on April 01, 2012, 03:01:32 pm
@Bella: I like your DEC-tan and DG-tan conjectures! They do a good job explaining how the DEC faction became militarized, because the earliest DEC-tans weren't the militaristic type. I'd imagine that even PDP-1-tan agreed to the militarization for the survival of the lineage she founded.

Despite her inferiority complex, and perceived failings, she was still one of the most successful DEC-tans. What rank did she achieve?


========

Another involvement with the DG-tans I know of is that the Data General Nova running RDOS was used as a control and maintenance unit on the early Cray-1 supercomputers, so I'd imagine that the Cray-tans would be friendly towards the DG-tans, since Nova-tan and/or RDOS-tan helped Cray-1-tan become more self-sufficient.

The CDC-tans, I think would also be antagonistic towards the DG-tans. If the DG-tans have the same last name as one of the most well-known DEC-tans, then they might end up being mistaken for DECs, whom the CDCs were enemies with!

Nova-tan would also be Apple I-tan's and Altair-tan's role model. :)

========

Actually, part of me agrees with the OS-tans becoming less westernized, because the westernization of the OS-tans we've created clashes with the Japanese-based canon Windows-tans- put these two viewpoints together, and it just gets... confusing. But we did agree to the OS-tan universe being a fusion of eastern and western cultures while leaving the Windows-tans alone out of respect for their original creators, didn't we?

Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Penti-chan on April 01, 2012, 03:11:48 pm
New theory: 2k-tan is a legendary hero that will save us from the evil 8-tan
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on April 07, 2012, 05:32:59 pm
I hope you don't mind that I took so long to reply, Aurora, but since you said you're only posting on the weekend I thought I'd wait to post here on the weekend too.

Quote from: Aurora Borealis on April 01, 2012, 03:01:32 pm
@Bella: I like your DEC-tan and DG-tan conjectures! They do a good job explaining how the DEC faction became militarized, because the earliest DEC-tans weren't the militaristic type. I'd imagine that even PDP-1-tan agreed to the militarization for the survival of the lineage she founded.


Thanks, I'm glad you like them. And yes, I imagine pretty much everyone was on board with DEC taking precautions against outside threats.

Quote from: Aurora Borealis on April 01, 2012, 03:01:32 pmDespite her inferiority complex, and perceived failings, she was still one of the most successful DEC-tans. What rank did she achieve?


I'm not sure what rank PDP-8-tan achieved - Stew figured out the rank structure for the DEC OS-tans, maybe I'll ask him to help with the hardwares.

Quote from: Aurora Borealis on April 01, 2012, 03:01:32 pmAnother involvement with the DG-tans I know of is that the Data General Nova running RDOS was used as a control and maintenance unit on the early Cray-1 supercomputers, so I'd imagine that the Cray-tans would be friendly towards the DG-tans, since Nova-tan and/or RDOS-tan helped Cray-1-tan become more self-sufficient.


I remember reading about the Nova - Cray-1 connection on the wikipedia article for the Nova. So it makes sense that Nova and/or RDOS-tan and Cray-1-tan would be close friends.

Quote from: Aurora Borealis on April 01, 2012, 03:01:32 pmThe CDC-tans, I think would also be antagonistic towards the DG-tans. If the DG-tans have the same last name as one of the most well-known DEC-tans, then they might end up being mistaken for DECs, whom the CDCs were enemies with!

Nova-tan would also be Apple I-tan's and Altair-tan's role model. :)


I imagine the DG-tans would have persistent problems of getting mistaken for DEC-tans, at least by outside groups who aren't very familiar with minicomputer factions.

Sounds right, I recall reading that the Nova influenced the Altair and Apple I in some regards.

Quote from: Aurora Borealis on April 01, 2012, 03:01:32 pmActually, part of me agrees with the OS-tans becoming less westernized, because the westernization of the OS-tans we've created clashes with the Japanese-based canon Windows-tans- put these two viewpoints together, and it just gets... confusing. But we did agree to the OS-tan universe being a fusion of eastern and western cultures while leaving the Windows-tans alone out of respect for their original creators, didn't we?


I've never seen a clash between the westernized OS-tans and the Japanese canon OS-tans, but then again most of the OS-tans I've created have been far removed from the canon OS-tans due to running in entirely different social circles (IE, having few chances to interact with Windows-tans in-story) or existing in completely timeframes before the Windows-tans existed/became relevant.

But yes, the OS-tan universe is hinted at being a mix of Western and Eastern culture.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on April 22, 2012, 02:51:50 pm
I had several thoughts about the nature of OS-tan magical power. I was originally going to post these as WMGs in the Tropes thread, but I figured they might get more exposure over here. >>

Theory 1.1: The Unix Wars stripped Unix-sama of a lot of her powers.
It's been speculated that Unix derives her power/lifeforce from all her children. The Unix Wars were the political "splitting" of the Unix family, so why not assume that this breakup and all the subsequent Unix-on-Unix fighting/bloodshed it entailed also impacted Unix-sama's magical abilities?

Supported by the fact that Unix is rarely shown as using substantial amounts of magic in recent years.

Theory 1.2: Unix-sama stands a chance of regaining her lost powers/becoming even more powerful
...If she can unite the Unix family again. This could be why she's so supportive of the Linuxes (even at the risk of undermining parts of her own family), they're the last best chance of a unified Unix race.

Theory 2.1: Damage to an OS-tan's magical ability can effect their physical integrity.
Let's assume that some OS-tans are so heavily magical that their health and physical integrity are bound up with their magical ability. I'm not sure how common or rare this would be among OS-tans - I assume it would be fairly uncommon, just because it puts an OS-tan's life at great jeopardy unless they have a LOT of magic and can protect their powers from attack. TSS/360-tan and Multics would be two such OS-tans, and their lives were punctuated by frequent brushes with death from hitherto-unknown ailments. I propose that these ailments were a direct result of issues with their magical abilities - namely, those abilities not being developed enough to "stabilize" their physical bodies.

I've always thought the "Unix lost the use of her legs because of psychological trauma" story was a little weak, so I propose a new theory in conduction with Theory 1.1 - that losing all that magical energy in the midst of the Unix Wars is what caused her to become wheelchair-bound.

Theory 2.2: Damage to physical manifestations of magical energy can also impact magical integrity.
By physical manifestations of magical energy, I mean body parts that are rooted in the magical, not biological, nature of an OS-tan. This would primarily center on body parts relating to an OS-tan's "animal magic" - that is to say, animal features like ears, tails, wings, etc. Since those are the sort of physical focus-points of an OS-tan's magical nature, they'd pose a very, very alluring target for anyone wishing to do magical harm to a -tan.

(Which would explain why Unix-sama seemingly aimed for Multics' wings when she attacked her - she knew that it wrecking enough damage on them would disable Multics' abilities.)
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on April 23, 2012, 11:14:54 am
Quote from: Bella on April 01, 2012, 02:24:12 pm
-Every character comes from Japan and speaks Japanese. Since all the *canon* characters were Japanese, ours should be too - it would be baka of us to hijack the OS-tan concept and westernize it. Plus the Japanese language is sugoi!!!


not to steal your hipster energy, but i mentioned this sort of thing before it was cool. that japanese canon should ALWAYS be paramount, since the idea of the os-tans were born in japan. that makes them inherently japanese, regardless of where they were created. (NOT the computer, the -tan.)

@os-kuns: ......
*materializes behind bella*
*SLICE*
*disappears*
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on April 23, 2012, 01:09:48 pm
Please tell me you didn't look at the date of that post...
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on April 23, 2012, 01:27:47 pm
I'm going to go on the record as saying I frankly don't care about Japanese "canon".

I mean, I'm okay with the canon Windows-tans (and like the canon Macs even more) but for me the fun has always been in making my own OS-tans and making my own stories, unrelated to anything in the "canon".

It's sort of like my friends in the OC Geography-tan (states, provinces, cities, etc)  fandom - they were inspired by Hetalia and many love that series and the characters in varying degrees. At the same time, many of them create their OCs outside of the Hetalia universe, and try to be as un-Hetalia-like as possible when creating their characters. (For instance, instead of creating very pun-and-stereotype-based, humor-driven characters they actually spend days researching geographic regions, history and native culture, etc., and crafting a character who both accurately represents a place yet avoids being bogged down in injokes and references). That's how it's always felt, for me, creating OS-tans - I use the original canon a inspiration, but I never let it guide or dictate what I can and can't do with my own characters.

As awesome as it would be having my -tans be a cast of kawaiidesu☆genki-girls hailing from Japan, I have a personal moral obligation to put historical accuracy ahead of Japanese "canon". Stewart and Nej to feel the same way, if their stories (and lack of Japan-originating non-Japanese -tans) are any indication.

Quote from: NejinOniwa on April 23, 2012, 01:09:48 pm
Please tell me you didn't look at the date of that post...


I wondered the same thing. 'w'
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on April 23, 2012, 02:11:00 pm
joke or not, it was quite hurtful. the os-kuns are my cause célèbre here, and have been for several years, while most people couldn't care less about them. after all, i doubt that before i said this, no one besides me knew that there were not 3 but SIX XP-kuns.

as for the japan canon thing, that was also a bit of a stab, considering another thing i support is the paramount of japanese canon.

you gotta think of these things, man.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Krizonar on April 23, 2012, 02:42:55 pm
I like the kuns, they honestly don't get enough attention.


How does computer has ethnicity?
Does japanese Apple tans has smaller eyes?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on April 23, 2012, 03:09:31 pm
It wasn't meant to be a stab, nor was I trying to assert that one way of viewing the OS-tan universe ("canon"-centric vs. non-canon) is better than another, I was just telling you where my areas of interest lie.

Quote from: Krizonar on April 23, 2012, 02:42:55 pm
How does computer has ethnicity?


Hey, this topic came up between me and Stewart not long ago. I usually make my -tans the dominant ethnicity of whatever country their system is from. As for American OS-tans, I usually employ artistic license in making choices. For instance, CTSS-tan and GECOS-tan have always appeared Chinese and Japanese, respectively, in my mind, despite there being no real-world basis for these choices.

Similarly, DTSS-tan and Unix-tan have always seemed Russian to me, Multics-tan seems vaguely Spanish/Italian/Mediterranean, TSS/360-tan is Indian, MCP-tan and ENIAC-tan are most likely black and RSX-tan is right in the middle of ambiguously-Asian (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AmbiguouslyBrown) territory .... there's no reason for ANY of these choices, there's no reason for any OS-tans to have "race" in the traditional sense of the term (since they aren't human), it's just another one of those entirely random character details that pops into my mind.

(EDIT: If we wanted to get into headcanon territory, I've always viewed the old skool IBM-tans as mostly German [their German surnames reenforce this mental image], the CDC-tans seem largely Scandinavian [many of them are blonde-haired/light eyed, and they hail from a Scandinavian-dominated portion of the US], MTS-tan's always seemed vaguely Canadian and Germanic to me, and Linux-tan is an ethnic Swede despite being from Finland - though there's a real-world basis for this last one, and it's confirmed in Nej's stories.)
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on April 23, 2012, 09:44:51 pm
To be clear: Linux-tan is pretty much LT's daughter, and LT is a Fennoswede. As in, lives/comes from finland but is of swedish culture/language.

We have A LOT of different combinations on that theme...
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on April 23, 2012, 09:56:46 pm
Quote from: NejinOniwa on April 23, 2012, 09:44:51 pm
To be clear: Linux-tan is pretty much LT's daughter, and LT is a Fennoswede. As in, lives/comes from finland but is of swedish culture/language.

We have A LOT of different combinations on that theme...


So I had it backwards? I always assumed LT was a Finnish national of Swedish heritage. But Fennoswedes are Finnish people who retain Swedish culture and language, no?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on April 24, 2012, 08:50:43 am
Welp, something in that direction. Most have swedish heritage too, ofc, but there are some originally finnish families who have switched over, due to living in swedish-speaking provinces/cities.

I mean, Finland was part of Sweden for 600 years, so it's not really surprising...
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on April 24, 2012, 01:16:36 pm
Ahh, I gotcha now. Thanks for clarifying. ^^
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on April 26, 2012, 01:24:17 am
i wasn't implying ethnicity when i mentioned japanese canon, just for the record. after all, they DID bring us the OS-tan USA. >w>;
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on May 24, 2012, 11:32:47 pm
This should be obvious, but firing a bazooka or Rocket Propelled Grenade (I'm pretty sure both are under the same weapon class) is illegal in California (among many other places... Found this out on an episode of MythBusters!). So if you go by the real world theory setting, apparently, System 6-tan's weapon of choice is illegal! Or maybe as she uses it as a melee weapon when she doesn't have ammo?

Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on May 25, 2012, 12:07:23 am
I'm guessing that most of the OS-tans' weapons/powers would be illegal in a real-world setting ..... o__o
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on May 25, 2012, 03:54:45 am
Mac House is mafia, they're illegal anyway!
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Krizonar on May 25, 2012, 09:55:16 am
Quote from: NejinOniwa on May 25, 2012, 03:54:45 am
Mac House is mafia, they're illegal anyway!

Now and forever.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on May 25, 2012, 12:27:12 pm
macs are illegal. the world feels like a better place. -w-
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on May 25, 2012, 12:56:21 pm
@Aurora: Now you have me thinking about other OS-tans who would violate laws with their weapons or powers!

OpenVMS: Seeing as a lot of places have laws against carrying pocket knives and the like, she'd be in big trouble, since she carries like a dozen knives. Not to mention the sword thing.
Pretty much all of the DEC-tans: Carrying swords.
DTSS: Mind-reading ability probably violates privacy laws.
ITS: Concealed firearms (though maybe she has a license/permit to carry them?)
Unix: Arson? Torture?
Inferno: Probably can't go anywhere without accidentally vandalizing property.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on May 25, 2012, 11:26:06 pm
i get the feeling Pizza-tan would likely have more than one collar for assault. xD
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on May 26, 2012, 06:11:53 pm
Theory: Plan 9-tan is a hardcore geek

Space nerd..............................check
Science nerd............................check
Cosplays.................................check
Loves B movies........................check
Loves anime............................check
Touhou fan..............................double check (http://code.google.com/p/plan9front/wiki/Mascot)

Face it, Plan 9-tan probably had a special place in her closet for her various costumes, a small bookcase filled with comics and a shelf full of anime figurines..... ~w~
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on May 26, 2012, 06:26:10 pm
That's awesome, and now I want to draw Plan 9 and Cirno together! Or for a Team 9 OS-tan style picture, draw Mac OS9-tan, Plan 9-tan and Cirno! :P  I'd also say that she is the strongest space bunny, but Reisen would challenge that claim, and I don't know if Plan 9-tan stand a chance in a danmaku battle.


Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on May 26, 2012, 06:31:14 pm
Oooh, that would be awesome! I've wanted to draw Plan 9-tan cosplaying Cirno for awhile, lol. : p
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on May 26, 2012, 07:12:55 pm
I decided to draw the Team 9 OS-tan style idea, though I'd also like to see the Cirno cosplay! :P
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on May 26, 2012, 08:35:09 pm
why do i get the feeling Sonata wouldn't be there willingly? ^^;
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on June 08, 2012, 03:14:03 pm
I did get start drawing that idea, but I just need to finish it!

-----------

One of the most influential Mac models turns 25 this year: http://www.macworld.com/article/1167123/the_macintosh_ii_celebrates_its_25th_anniversary.html (http://www.macworld.com/article/1167123/the_macintosh_ii_celebrates_its_25th_anniversary.html)

Reading this led me to think more about the Macs' early history. Nowadays, the Mac-tans, both the Classic and OSX lines are a close-knit family that strongly value family ties and comradeship... but the Macs' early years had some dysfunction, and not just because of Lisa-tan being antagonistic towards them!

Notably, the Mac II, which shipped with System 4.0, was a radical departure from the original Mac's completely closed architecture, and is instead based on the design of the highly expandable Apple II. Relating to this, System 4-tan would have been a rebel in her youth, and would have been at odds against System 1-tan, who wondered where did she go wrong 'raising that ungrateful brat', thinking that System 4-tan is going to defect and side with the PCs...

Ironically, it's not that System 4-tan wanted to be like the PCs, no, she wanted to be like Apple II-tan, though System 1-tan didn't realize that as she's kind of a ditz, but their antagonism would flare up again when System 5-tan (assuming she was alive in the first place) and System 6-tan were born.

Also, with the Mac II line being very powerful for its time, even rivaling some workstations, System 4-tan and the later Mac OSes that can run on the Mac II line (up to System 7.5.5, IIRC), are naturally very strong and can use more advanced magic than their predecessors though System 4-tan and 7-tan downplay their strength, and System 6-tan needed life-saving stability improvements before being able to realize her full potential.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on June 08, 2012, 10:31:28 pm
Ganbare, Aurora-san!

In regards to the early Macs ... it sounds like there was more conflict than I imagined... : o

You say the Mac II line OS-tans were powerful enough to rival some workstations of the era ... I wonder if they ever had any run-ins with the Unices?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on June 08, 2012, 11:44:04 pm
Good question. It's possible, but I don't think the Unices would have taken them seriously since the early Mac OSes were single user-OSes with no command line and not much of a learning curve. Assuming that the Unices didn't follow the codes of chivalry that the consumer-level computers did, the Macs would have avoided conflict with them. Or to show that the Unices weren't total jerks, maybe they did follow the chivalry ideals around the Macs, but their underlying motive was because they didn't take the Macs seriously, and instead wanted to save their firepower for other Unices that get in the way!

On another note, one of the reasons why System 4-tan was able to reconcile with System 1-tan is that System 4 and later still ran on the B+W compact Macs; System 1-tan at the time struggled to comprehend the thought of Mac-tans running on easily expandable hardware!

Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on June 09, 2012, 02:22:38 pm
That makes sense. The Unices have always been a proud group (and were borderline-arrogant back in that time period) and probably wouldn't have considered the Macs worthy of fighting.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on June 09, 2012, 02:49:40 pm
At the time, the Unices were too busy destroying themselves!

The Macs, though, likely had no ill-will towards the Unices, since their own top priority was still competing against the MS-IBM Family, and they quickly accepted A/UX-tan when she was introduced into the Apple Family.

I also have some ideas on the nature of the Macs' and Unices' eventual alliance:

It was formed shortly after the end of the OS Wars, and their alliance helped make the existence of the OSX-tans possible, therefore allowing the Macs' faction to continue (since the Classics weren't able to continue their bloodline anymore for some reason; maybe it became too fragile?). However, over the years, an OSX descendant that met the Single Unix Specification and would willingly attend the meetings was demanded from the Unices, since they felt like they were getting the short end of the alliance, especially since NeXTSTEP-tan defected from the Unices shortly after the alliance was established!
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on June 09, 2012, 05:56:24 pm
That sounds about right. It could also be that Unix-sama bided her time, waiting for an OSX-tan of suitable power/magic to come along - since Unix-tan is generally doesn't have much will to go out and "recruit" Unices who she doesn't deem "useful" - and Leopard-tan just so happened to be that -tan.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on June 09, 2012, 07:54:07 pm
I'm guessing that she disregards the older OSXs, who likewise disregard the Unices, unless coerced into attending the meetings? As I see the older OSXs as knowing of their Unix ancestry, but seeing themselves as Macs first or only, with Leopard being the first to regard her biological and step-relatives equally. I might see Rhapsody also regarding both sides equally, but is too reclusive to attend the Unix family meetings.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on June 10, 2012, 10:48:35 am
i don't have much to contribute, but happy birthday system-4. :3

also system-5 was stillborn? ;^;
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on June 10, 2012, 11:46:53 am
@Choco: One interpretation of her is that she is either a poltergeist or an apparition, that is she never was human. The other is that she was human but died very young, but exactly when she died, if so wasn't specified. That she exists at all in the OS-tan world raises another question: OS-tans representing non-existent OSes?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on June 10, 2012, 02:09:45 pm
well, we had that concept already. GlaDOS-tan, for example?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on June 10, 2012, 04:16:42 pm
I think Aurora was asking how they'd fit into the wider OS-tan continuity, if at all?

THEORY: VMS-tan has powerful empathic skills
It strikes me as odd that the personification of an OS with exceptional networking features has always been portrayed as generally emotionally-cold and distant. I'd argue that VMS-tan is actually really attuned to the emotions of others, but that she frequently has to isolate herself / carefully choose her friends because she doesn't want to be dragged down by the bad energy of others.

THEORY: Multics, Unix and VMS-tan all had a chance to be THE most powerful OS-tan...
...but each was thwarted by some emotional flaw.
Multics-tan was over-ambitious and her powers were too great for her to emotionally and physically handle.
Unix-tan was faced with constant conflict, between the part of her personality that desired to be a free, hacker-like OS-tan, and the ambitious side of her personality which hoped to financially capitalize on her skills. Most of her kids inherited her neuroticism in this respect, which ended in disaster for her family and herself.
VMS-tan probably IS most powerful OS-tan alive, but she's too apathetic to assert herself as such. Because of this, she just sort of works quietly in the background, giving exactly zero fucks about what she could do with her powers if she chose to...
And so SAGE's status as god of the OS-tanverse remains unchallenged....
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Krizonar on June 10, 2012, 04:20:16 pm
Quote from: Aurora Borealis on June 09, 2012, 07:54:07 pm
I'm guessing that she disregards the older OSXs, who likewise disregard the Unices, unless coerced into attending the meetings? As I see the older OSXs as knowing of their Unix ancestry, but seeing themselves as Macs first or only,

That would seem to be how it is to me, Apple touted OSX as a Unix platform with a command line but that's all they did, they never went into much detail besides yupyupyup it's Unix, because Mac OSX is what they sell obviously.

Quote from: Bella on June 09, 2012, 05:56:24 pm
That sounds about right. It could also be that Unix-sama bided her time, waiting for an OSX-tan of suitable power/magic to come along


We'll surprise you.
Mac is our heart, Unix is but our blood, hooplah!


Also; dat Macintosh IIfx. Where is your workstation now?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on June 10, 2012, 04:36:48 pm
@Bella: You're right- I was asking about how characters representing non-existent OSes would fit into the OS-tan universe. Interesting theories, the one on VMS's skills shows another side and reason why she is or appears to be emotionally cold, and reconciles that with her also being Kuudere or Dandere! I remember when she was first listed as such in the OS-tans and Tropes thread, I was quite surprised. Her claims, plus Multics' and Unix's opportunities as the most powerful OS-tan alive sound spot on.

Another contender for that claim is QNX-tan, but she willingly falls short of her potential because she doesn't want to risk getting corrupted or overwhelmed by her power, and also possibly wanting to keep up the underdog image so she'll still fit in with her friends in the Anti$oft Coalition. A very powerful and ambitious OS-tan who is an underachiever at the same time.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on June 10, 2012, 06:59:55 pm
if she's a ghost, wouldn't she just spend time with the other undead OSes, like system 1? or maybe she IS dead, and they just don't talk about her because it's an uncomfortable topic.

@bella: are you sure you didn't say that sage comment because of stew's username
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on June 10, 2012, 07:50:05 pm
@Choco: System 1-tan's still alive; maybe you mean Apple I-tan? System 5-tan's existence is a conundrum, with her having either died, or being an apparition that was spontaneously created (depends on interpretation), yet she isn't listed among the deceased OS-tans (http://ostan-collections.net/wiki/Deceased_OS-tan_Annex_Bios). Maybe she's able to exist in the living world because she's still connected to the Classic Macs' lifeforce somehow, making her alive and (un)dead(?) at the same time, and thus not fitting the definition of a deceased OS-tan. @_@

Are we in Mind Screw territory yet?

Though that would be a neat ability for her to visit both the worlds of the living and deceased.



Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on June 11, 2012, 11:57:00 am
Quote from: Krizonar on June 10, 2012, 04:20:16 pm
Quote from: Aurora Borealis on June 09, 2012, 07:54:07 pm
I'm guessing that she disregards the older OSXs, who likewise disregard the Unices, unless coerced into attending the meetings? As I see the older OSXs as knowing of their Unix ancestry, but seeing themselves as Macs first or only,

That would seem to be how it is to me, Apple touted OSX as a Unix platform with a command line but that's all they did, they never went into much detail besides yupyupyup it's Unix, because Mac OSX is what they sell obviously.


I'm glad the theory is satisfactory to you. (You are one of the go-to Mac-tan experts around here after all). ^^

Quote from: Aurora Borealis on June 10, 2012, 04:36:48 pmAnother contender for that claim is QNX-tan, but she willingly falls short of her potential because she doesn't want to risk getting corrupted or overwhelmed by her power, and also possibly wanting to keep up the underdog image so she'll still fit in with her friends in the Anti$oft Coalition. A very powerful and ambitious OS-tan who is an underachiever at the same time.


I can't really comment since I don't know much about QNX, the -tan or the OS. ;^; But I'll also mention that OS/2-tan probably fancied herself one of the most powerful (or at least potentially-powerful) OS-tans, though she was thwarted by a mix of corporate incompetence and character flaws! Also, ITS-tan thinks she could have been more powerful than Unix-tan had she gained a larger following. It's debatable if either of them were actually ever as powerful as they assumed they were, though.

Quote from: Chocofreak13 on June 10, 2012, 06:59:55 pm
@bella: are you sure you didn't say that sage comment because of stew's username


Nope. It comes from a mix of in-story hints about SAGE-tan, Word of God revelations, and following various confirmed facts about SAGE-tan to their logical conclusions.

For instance, it's still a huge mystery how SAGE-tan remains alive, even when all of her systems were shut down (supposedly a death-blow for an OS-tan). She's been hinted at being extremely powerful - having the ability to mentally-connect to just about any OS-tan, commandeer their sensory systems for use by her own body and draw off their powers, and possibly have limited precognitive abilities. Not to mention the theory that she (wittingly or unwittingly) laid the foundation of computer-tan culture and manipulated events to mold the course of OS-tan history.

There's also the matter of her possibly resurrecting Multics, which fits into another theory that she may be attempting to reunite her family and friends, both living and dead.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on June 11, 2012, 12:21:58 pm
@Bella: QNX was originally an academic OS in the 80's, but wasn't very successful and became one of the most successful embedded OSes starting in the 90's or early 2000's; used in a great variety of hardware, including automobiles, and nuclear power plants, and the most powerful routers. That gives her a tremendous amount of hardware to draw her power from. Despite success, QNX isn't very well known aside from it being the basis of Blackberry's Playbook OS, which isn't selling very well!

QNX-tan is essentially a superpowered nuclear physicist who is now competing in the mobile market because her new boss, Blackberry-tan said so.

OS/2-tan definitely would have been one of the most powerful consumer-level OS-tans, whose power would easily blow all the DOS-tans and nearly all the Windows-tans out of the water, so to speak. NT-tan may have been the biggest threat to her. Also assuming that OS/2-tan knew that NT-tan was genetically engineered from some of the same technology as her, NT-tan's other genetics, inherited from VMS-tan, and the more advanced training she received (that was originally promised to OS/2-tan!) would have caught her off guard. If it weren't for her constantly getting screwed over after MS-IBM Family's break-up, OS/2-tan could have been even more powerful.

That explanation for SAGE-tan makes perfect sense. And I thought her death exemption was mainly just for story reasons!
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on June 11, 2012, 12:58:52 pm
SAGE Psychopathic god much?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on June 12, 2012, 01:13:05 am
@Aurora: I had no idea QNX-tan is so powerful. : o

@Nej: Yeah, pretty much. She's like the ultimate wrathful, abandoned deity. .__.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on June 23, 2012, 12:10:04 pm
Theory: Multics-tan originated animal features/animal magic in most OS-tans.
Multics was the first (documented) OS-tan with animal features. Her daughter Unix-tan sports owl ears and has wings, CB Unix has cardinal features, various BSD-tans have horns and tails (and one has dragonfly wings), Plan 9-tan has bunny features, the OSX-tans have cat features, Minix-tan has raccoon ears, various Linuces have animal features, etc, etc. OpenVME-tan is loosely related to both Unix AND Multics, and she has wings too.

You can even make a case that Multics passed down animal traits into the Windows NT family via OpenVMS, who shared a loose spiritual relation to Multics. While VMS-tan doesn't have any outward animal features, she it very closely linked with sharks, and seems to display a lot of shark-like personality traits. Her granddaughter, Inu-T-tan, has dog features (and 2K-tan is often portrayed as a catgirl, though I'm not sure if that's canonical or just artists' attempts to make her more moe). 

That being said, there are several OS-tans that I know of that have animal features despite being seemingly unrelated to the Multics line - KolibriOS, GS/OS (?) and Bendix G-15-tan are three I can name off the top of my head, there're probably more that I'm missing though.

Theory: The DEC-tans (and other minicomputer/mainframe factions) were wary of the Unices because of their political and magical power structure.
Until the Unices came along, OS-tan clans/factions were typically comprised of many loosely- or un-related OS-tans. There would sometimes be small family structures - with a mother and children, or a group of sisters - but it was very rare to see large families. Magical powers were usually an entirely individual, and often learned, skill.

The Unix "clan" was different - with a distinct lineage, all the Unix-tans being related by blood or cloning, and all/most of them deriving their magic from a shared "pool" of power. Animal-type OS-tans are common among the Unices, so it's probably not a stretch of the imagination to think that their distinct forms of animal-type magic and unusual physical features were strange, and sometimes upsetting, to outside OS-tans. Combined with their reputation for assimilating cultures and whatnot, you can see why so many outside factions were afraid of them.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on June 23, 2012, 05:28:38 pm
First theory: It does seem that nearly every animal-featured OS-tan has some tie to Multics, whether a descendant or a spiritual tie. If VMS's tie with Multics is all spiritual, maybe VMS's animal-associated traits must have been acquired, yet changed her on a genetic level so they could be passed down. If this, you may have an example of Lamarck Was Right (acquired traits being passed down through a bloodline)

The alternate explanation is that VMS's traits were developed independently, and she had them all along, but they just needed to be awakened.

Generally, 2K-tan's cat ears are fake, they are mechanical and resemble speakers, unless 2K-tan is a cyborg catgirl?

KolibriOS, GS/OS and Bendix G-15 are among the outliers, whose animal features were developed independently as a result of genetic and magic engineering. I would also nominate DexOS as another, being associated with ants, though she's a robot.

Second theory: That's a really good explanation why lineages older than Unix aren't clear-cut, or are less organized, like the DECs and their various branches, or the CDCs, whom might or might not be blood-related to one another. On another note, the Unixes were the first clear-cut OS lineage, which made the structure of sharing magic from a pool of power possible, and as a result was influential, with OS families created afterwards using that type of structure. Because of the shared code-base of related OSes, that is feasible, but hardware-tans, even related ones, wouldn't be able to have that kind of structure since hardware can't share code.

Both Windows bloodlines and DOS would also have their own shared code pools for magic like the Unixes do, since they aren't very dependent on hardware.

The home computer-tans, being mostly or all hardware-based, would have all their abilities individually, like most of the mainframes. OS-tans created from no existing bloodline would also be this. The Commodore-tans might be an exception though, with different hardware but all run versions of Commodore BASIC as their OS, and may take the middle-ground approach in which part of their power is individual-based (hardware), part from a shared code pool (shared OS lineage, if a version of BASIC counts).

The Classic Mac-tans may also take the middle ground, because the Classic Mac OS* is more hardware-dependent than Windows, DOS and Unix, yet less hardware dependent than most mainframes and home computers. Strangely, the Classic Macs are genetically very similar, practically modified clones as even Mac OS9 at its core changed little from System 1.0. Yet there are considerable individual differences among them in appearance, and in abilities, such as System 5 being a ghost, System 2 essentially lost the superpower lottery, System 4, 6 and 7 are super soldiers, and System 3.4 is some freak of nature who cheated death many times.

Even more odd, System 7 is the least hardware-dependent Classic Mac version, being the only one that ran on the authorized Mac Clones.

*OSX is about as hardware-dependent as Classic, unless you count the "Hackintoshes"!
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on June 26, 2012, 12:49:40 am
TBH, I never really thought about other OS-tan familes besides the Unices having shared power pools. I always thought it was a Unix-specific trait. O.o

I don't really have anything to comment on/add beside that. ^^;

Crackpot Totally Sane Theory: Multics is CTSS and Besys-tan's child.

Let  me  explain  through  the  magic  of  colors:

(http://ostan-collections.net/wiki/images/1/17/CTSSLarge.png) + (http://ostan-collections.net/wiki/images/a/a9/BESYStan.jpg) = (http://img801.imageshack.us/img801/8720/screenshot20120626at123.png)

Admit it, you will never look at Multics' purple hair and blue eyes the same way again.
(Also, that Multics icon is from a picture I'm working on... gonna post it soon, I promise.)
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on June 26, 2012, 01:42:17 am
@Bella: I may have misunderstood, since I was thinking of the OS-tan life force theory which involved shared code pools within OS families, and thought that for most OS-based families, the same thing would apply to their magic; I was also thinking about how certain magic styles run in families (unless those abilities, even the shared ones are hard-wired on an individual level?). Did what I propose in my last post sound reasonable, and do you accept? I thought the Unixes were the first to pioneer the magic-powered code pool.

As for Multics' parentage... Hahahaha! That sounds and looks perfect!
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on June 26, 2012, 04:02:11 pm
Quote from: Aurora Borealis on June 26, 2012, 01:42:17 am
@Bella: I may have misunderstood, since I was thinking of the OS-tan life force theory which involved shared code pools within OS families, and thought that for most OS-based families, the same thing would apply to their magic; I was also thinking about how certain magic styles run in families (unless those abilities, even the shared ones are hard-wired on an individual level?). Did what I propose in my last post sound reasonable, and do you accept? I thought the Unixes were the first to pioneer the magic-powered code pool.


Oh! Sorry, I misunderstood you. I'm not familiar with applications of OS-tan life force/code-pooling outside the Unix family (and in fact am a bit confused by the concept ^^;), but I'm pretty sure it was agreed that most OS-tan families would have some sort of shared code pool? I don't have any objections to the ideas you posed and am in agreement, though I still think that the Unices might be more sensitive to and easily affected by changes in their code pool.

Quote from: Aurora Borealis on June 26, 2012, 01:42:17 amAs for Multics' parentage... Hahahaha! That sounds and looks perfect!


This may be one of my better crackpot theories (along with Sam Linux-tan being PDP-1 in disguise).  8)

If you wanted to form it into a dramatic plot point, you could argue that CTSS-tan originally planned for Multics' stay with BESYS, in hopes of her daughter discovering the other half of her heritage... whether or not Multics ever discovered her connection to BESYS could be left unclear, but either way, it would be kind of heartbreaking.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on June 26, 2012, 10:31:13 pm
Yeah, we agreed about members of OS-tan families sharing a code pool as their life force, however since the Unixes and Linuxes have some of the least hardware dependence, they'd should the most versatility in their magic, and I agree that they'd be the most affected by changes to their code pool.

Regarding CTSS, BESYS and Multics: It sounds like CTSS had good intentions sending Multics to BESYS, but presumably didn't know that BESYS felt resentful of Multics since her creation cost some of BESYS' life force and cause her health to decline.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on June 27, 2012, 11:14:18 am
Okay, I follow you now.

It makes it all the sadder that BESYS gave up part of her life force/health to create Multics-tan, and Multics, in turn, was so ungrateful and impetuous toward her. :(

It's also worth noting that Multics may've used up some of CTSS-tan's life-force when being created (this would be a very literal real-world example, since many users abandoned MIT's CTSS machines when Multics was made available). Which makes me wonder ... perhaps Multics-tan was so powerful, that she had to use up a LOT of her parents' magical powers/life force just to support her own nascent magical abilities?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on June 27, 2012, 12:19:07 pm
Makes sense, combined with the contemporary attitude that once an OS-tan is obsolete, she is to be sacrificed or abandoned. As for Multics' ungratefulness, well, it didn't help that BESYS was short-tempered and hard to get along with anyways. However, I think that BESYS would have liked UNIX, but unfortunately died right around the time UNIX was created, possibly shortly after.

BESYS also has the same kind of eyes UNIX has, blue with the Bell logo; a trait from BESYS' side, or part of an old tradition among the Bell Labs-originated OS-tans? 

Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on June 27, 2012, 02:08:02 pm
Quote from: Aurora Borealis on June 27, 2012, 12:19:07 pm
Makes sense, combined with the contemporary attitude that once an OS-tan is obsolete, she is to be sacrificed or abandoned. As for Multics' ungratefulness, well, it didn't help that BESYS was short-tempered and hard to get along with anyways.


That's also true, BESYS never made much of an attempt to get along with Multics.

Sounds familiar though, doesn't it? The same thing played out between Multics and Unix-tan (parent and child mutually antagonistic toward each other with little motivation to get along, ending with the [near] destruction of the parent).

Quote from: Aurora Borealis on June 27, 2012, 12:19:07 pmHowever, I think that BESYS would have liked UNIX, but unfortunately died right around the time UNIX was created, possibly shortly after.


It's also interesting to note that it's been theorized that CTSS-tan would have probably gotten along with Unix too, and that Unix may've been a very different person had she known her ancestors. :/


Quote from: Aurora Borealis on June 27, 2012, 12:19:07 pmBESYS also has the same kind of eyes UNIX has, blue with the Bell logo; a trait from BESYS' side, or part of an old tradition among the Bell Labs-originated OS-tans?


The Bell logos in Unix-tan's eyes were originally supposed to be implants, and I always assumed BESYS-tan's eyes had a similar origin. However, I think we have enough material to construct an alternate theory - that they're actually a magical/biological trait that originated with BESYS and manifested itself in Unix.

Speaking of which, I'm probably going to add "BESYS is related to Multics" to the theories article.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on August 06, 2012, 08:54:26 pm
@Bella: You're right! There is that theme in Unix's backstory of wanting to avoid the fate Multics suffered, but shows signs of succumbing to it. Does the notion of "You can't fight fate, but I'm going to try anyways!" run in Multics' and Unix's family?

-------------

15 years ago, after Windows' stranglehold on the computer market  (and Apple's own backfiring tactics at the time) nearly destroyed Apple, Microsoft would end up saving Apple?! (http://lowendmac.com/musings/12mm/microsoft-saves-apple.html)

I had known about Microsoft investing $150 million in Apple to bail them out, but thought on the anniversary of that event would be a good time to discuss how this would translate into the OS-tan universe.

After the Windows Empire, led by 95-tan's forces conquered and plundered nearly all of the Mac-tan's territory, there was the sudden decision to help rebuild what the Mac-tans had left? Clearly, 95-tan wouldn't have agreed to that, but maybe 3.1 and NT did? I interpret 3.1-tan as having regret fighting in the OS Wars, and NT-tan conquered the Unix and server territory but didn't really fight the Macs.

Part of the deal required the Macs to give up some of their old ways, referencing IE being adopted as the default browser. Now was this a serious attempt to end the blood feud, or could you suspect some conflict of interest, or was the main intent to fight against anti-trust allegations? Rivalries between the Macs and Windows continued, neither clan trusting each other very much for years afterwards, and the negotiations couldn't have gone smoothly (referencing the huge amount of booing when the deal was spoken of at the 1997 Macworld Expo), but their fights would never be as bad as during the OS Wars, and in the present day, the families do meet up to try and talk things out and prevent escalating conflict even though it's not the easiest option.



Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on August 07, 2012, 12:44:47 am
Re: Unix and Multics: Well, Unix-tan certainly tried to fight her (perceived) fate and seems to have secured a degree of success, at least in modern times - she was able to restore a certain level of peace to her family and is living out a relatively stable "old age", something that neither her grandmother(s) nor mother was able to do. Multics-tan, on the other hand, seemed to have learned nothing from her falling out with BESYS, as evidenced by her treatment of Unix in the early 70s....

Also, one other note, since in my last post I mentioned the relationship that could have existed between CTSS and Unix-tan. Earlier today I found this quote in a 1976 paper by Dennis M. Ritchie:

Quote from: dmrIn most ways UNIX is a very conservative system. Only a handful of its ideas are genuinely new. In fact, a good case can be made that it is in essence a modern implementation of MIT's CTSS system [1]. This claim is intended as a compliment to both UNIX and CTSS. Today, more than fifteen years after CTSS was born, few of the interactive systems we know of are superior to it in ease of use; many are infe- rior in basic design.


I know it's somewhat tangential to the topic at hand, but I find it kind of amazing and beautiful that dmr recognized Unix as a sort of "spiritual successor" to CTSS. Especially given the contrast between CTSS and Unix, the former of which was dead and all but forgotten outside of MIT by the mid-70s, while the latter was really just starting to lay down the foundation for its future takeover of the operating system market.

Re: MS saving Apple: To be honest, I've kind of tried to bury that piece of history deep in the recesses of my mind so I've never really thought about the implications to OS-tan fanon. >> But I think you have it about right - it was probably the event that patched up most of the major conflict between the Macs and Windows-tans, or at least turned their conflict from a more open and violent one into a sort of ... cold war, i guess.

As for WHO helped the Macs rebuild ... I can actually see NT-tan lending a hand to the Macs. As you noted, her enemies were mainly the Unices and she probably wouldn't have viewed the Macs as a threat in the same way 95-tan did. Not to mention the fact that NT-tan seems rather predisposed to a nurturing attitude....
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on August 07, 2012, 01:15:08 am
Yes, Unix has partly avoided Multics' fate, though she was reluctant to nominate Linux as her heiress, not wanting to risk Linux getting corrupted by the kind of power that corrupted Unix, and Multics a generation back. It is sad, Multics had to learn the lesson of humility the hard way, though Unix did try and assassinate her because GECOS wanted her to.

Good find about that dmr quote!

---------

Making the issue of the Mac-tans, and the help they got rebuilding their society more complicated was that the Macs also had forged an alliance with the Unixes at that point because of NeXTSTEP-tan... even though NeXTSTEP-tan would later defect from the Unix faction. I think. It was around that time that Apple bought out NeXT. @_@

Would NT-tan have not known that, or if she did, would she have been willing to overlook that, since the Unixes were no longer much of a threat at the time, and there is NT-tan's nurturing personality. Interesting how NT-tan can be kind to others, but show no mercy to others. Yangire? :P The only of the Apple-tans she would have competed with would have been  System 7-tan, since System 7 was the default OS on the Apple Workgroup Server (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Workgroup_Server) models released, and A/UX, though a Unix OS, was the secondary OS sometimes used on the Workgroup Servers.

And also complicating things further was the brief stint AIX-tan had as a mercenary to the Apple faction, from 1996 to 1997, since AIX ran on the Apple Network Servers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Network_Server). Her career as a mercenary failed miserably due to the ANS' very poor sales, and she has little to show for it, as few ANS machines survive to this day. The financial losses incurred were another factor that endangered the Apple faction. AIX-tan would prefer not to talk about that due to personal shame.

Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on August 23, 2012, 12:54:19 am
Yeah, NT-tan is certainly yangire. I didn't know that System 7 ran on a server, or that AIX ported to Apple hardware! Considering how proud AIX-tan is, I'm sure she'd be be ashamed of her failures at Apple...

Anyway, I may attempt to develop TECO-kun further...  I was inspired after reading an anecdote  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:RSTS/E#TECO)about how TECO was vital for the installation of certain DEC OSes, but never receiving actual support from the company. It makes me think that TECO-kun might be some sort of assistant to the DEC-tans, but never actually a part of their faction...

Secondly, I had a random thought about the nature of Multics-tan and Emacs-kun's relationship ... for a long time it's seemed odd that those two characters would get along, given that Multics and Emacs came from rather different social/corporate environments, but the more I read about Emacs (in particular, the Vi fandom's view of Emacs), the more I began to realize that there was actually a decent in-story reason for those two to like each other. Namely, being eerily alike.

-Both were raised by mainframe-tans (Multics and Emacs developed on mainframes)
-Both originated at MIT
-Both were/are leaders of passionately-devoted, pseudo-religious factions/cults (the Multicians and Church of Emacs/Emacsians)
-Both traveled far and wide and befriended many other computer-tans (Multics sites were located all over the world, Emacs ported to tons of platforms)
-Fans consider their complexity endearing, while detractors brand them elephantine. (Multics and Emacs considered feature-full by advocates and  bloated by critics).
-Both had/have long-standing rivalries with nimbler competitors (Multics v. Unix; Emacs v. Vi).

There are more reasons, but I can't think of them at the moment... when I do I'll post them. x.x
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on August 23, 2012, 02:51:29 pm
System 7 is the Classic Mac OS with the most hardware support and range of hardware (68k Macs, PPC Macs, Mac Clones, could run on Macs as low-end as the Mac Plus), and the only OSX version with a similar range of support and versatility is Tiger (PPC Macs, Intel Macs, 'Hackintoshes', could run on Macs as low-end as most of the G3 iMacs). This leads me to think that System 7-tan has an adventurous side and disregards the family's walled garden as much as Tiger-tan does, though she doesn't appear to be the type that would! Also those two OSes were the Classic and OSX versions supported for the longest time.

Check this out: [link] (http://lowendmac.com/musings/12mm/rise-of-mountain-lion.html) Even with the rise of Mountain Lion (who I'd still like to think of as being the same character as Lion-tan, but tougher and a better fighter), Snow Leopard is still widely used; paralleling System 6 still being widely used even after System 7 was introduced and Mac OS 9 being widely used after OSX 10.0 - 10.2 were introduced. :)

I could see TECO as a DEC assistant, being the closest to RSTS-tan and RSX-tan in particular. Being unsupported and presumably unpaid, he'd be a volunteer of some sort.

The relationship between Multics and Emacs is the tale of a sequestered aristocrat and a working-class hacker who can see past their socioeconomic differences and see that they have in common more than they are different. Both of them having enigmatic personalities, being able to understand each other for that reason alone was enough of a challenge!
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: stewartsage on August 24, 2012, 12:02:53 pm
Brief suggestion; perhaps the Windows set up some sort of Marshal-style recovery plan for their former enemies?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on August 24, 2012, 12:29:07 pm
Stew's in the theories thread, trap him!!!!

That's really interesting about System 7-tan! I would have never guessed she had such an adventurous side, probably because of her generally-stoic nature. That article was pretty interesting, I had no idea Mountain Lion was so popular already - in regards to Mountain Lion-tan, I'm really not sure if I want to view her as the same character as Lion-tan or not. On one hand, it sort of makes sense from a plot POV to make them the same character, on the other, I really like Esu's Mountain Lion-tan design. >>;;

I like the parallel between SL, System 6 and System 9 though. :D

TECO-kun is probably begrudgingly unpaid, since he's kind of a grumpy character to begin with. I wonder why he sticks with the DEC-tans even though he's (seemingly) not getting anything out of it...

Quote from: Aurora Borealis on August 23, 2012, 02:51:29 pmThe relationship between Multics and Emacs is the tale of a sequestered aristocrat and a working-class hacker who can see past their socioeconomic differences and see that they have in common more than they are different. Both of them having enigmatic personalities, being able to understand each other for that reason alone was enough of a challenge!


Your description of them made me smile. :)

I'd also like to note that both Emacs-kun and Multics-sama are just a bit, narcissistic, I suppose, so it makes sense that they'd seek out a partner who is somewhat similar to themselves.

It's also worth noting that IRL, Multics had a fairly large impact on Emacs ... I believe Multics Emacs was the first to have user extensions written in LISP? I'm not sure, I'd have to check out the Emacs history page again.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on August 24, 2012, 04:43:08 pm
@Stew: That sounds spot-on!

@Bella: I like Esu's Mountain Lion-tan design too, so I'm also ambivalent on whether they should be the same character.

Wonder if System 7-tan and Tiger-tan would be the types to sneak out of the walled garden together, with Tiger being all hot-blooded about it while System 7 is almost as stoic as she usually is. Hidden depths FTW. :P

That parallel is pretty good, though Mac OS9's reputation isn't so much about speed and stability (which vary considerably from user to user, it was a love-it-or-hate-it OS), but it did have more usability and some nice features that still haven't gotten ported over to OSX.   And also as a downside in those comparisons, SL and System 6 were both relatively malware prone; Most Macs infected with Flashback ran SL, and quite a few of the Classic malware only affected System 6. I'm drawing a short comic about this.

With TECO being unpaid and grumpy, I'd like to think that the DECs are considerate enough to leave him a plate of cookies just for him as compensation when he's needed.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on August 26, 2012, 10:51:03 pm
Yeah, I really don't think we can pull of a two-separate-designs-representing-the-same-character gimmick with Lion-tan/ML-tan like we did with Leopard-tan/SL-tan. Unless you want to propose that Lion-tan stole Leopard's time machine and eneded up doing a bit of intertemporal tinkering herself. Your description of System 7 and Tiger-tan's friendship makes me think that they might have something of a "red oni, blue oni"-type partnership.

I didn't know SL was any more malware prone than any of the other OSXen... also, I'm a bit curious about what these useful-but-unported OS9 features are, since I'm not familiar with OS9 at all. And I can't wait to see this mini-comic! : D

Hahaha, I am totally going to make TECO-kun being paid in food by the DECs a part of his backstory! :p

...

Anyway, I'll post this here since it IS the theory thread...

THEORY: TX-0-tan was purposefully excluded from most accounts of MIT-tan history
So, we retconned portions of Whirlwind-tan's backstory when it was discovered that Whirlwind-tan does not represent both her namesake system and the TX-0/-2 computers. This has left a huge hole in the MIT-tan timeline, since the TX-0/TX-2 was a VERY significant computer and should certainly get an OS-tan.

I theorize a way to preserve the TX-0-shaped holes in the MIT-tan's history, while making it clear that TX-0-tan did, indeed, exist. Basically, TX-0-tan's existence has been ignored in most (surviving) accounts of MIT-tan history.

"But, why?" You ask, head cocked skeptically at this rather elaborate conjecture.

You may recall that Whirlwind-tan, beloved matriarch of the MIT clan, was terribly disfigured (and eventually killed) in the pursuit of creating TX-0-tan (Word of God states that those experimental surgeries were more-or-less 'test runs' for the creation of TX-0). You may also recall that TX-0-tan is, in essence, a clone of Whirlwind, albeit simplified/miniaturized. Surely you can imagine that some of the MIT-tans would view her as a sort of strange usurper to Whirlwind-tan's throne, even though the two were vastly different in personality and purpose.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on August 26, 2012, 11:39:27 pm
I don't think that SL wasn't inherently more malware-prone, but got infected more because it was still more widely used than Lion. I can't remember all the features off the top of my head, but one of the most missed features from OS9 (and earlier) was the customizable Apple menu. Labels were another widely missed feature, but were brought back with OSX Panther.

Glad you like what I suggested for TECO-kun! :D

The theory about TX-0 sounds good, and doesn't disrupt too much of what was already established. Isn't TX-0 to Whirlwind what Unix is to Multics? Simplified but influential computer-tans who were practically disowned from their social circles?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on August 27, 2012, 12:29:27 am
Ohh, that actually makes more sense. A customizable Apple menu sounds pretty cool, I didn't know that labels originated with Classic Mac either...

Comparing TX-0 and Whirlwind-tan to Multics and Unix is somewhat erroneous, since Whirlwind-tan and TX-0-tan ran in the same social circle and TX-0-tan didn't directly displace/compete with Whirlwind. Also, I don't imagine that TX-0-tan faced much direct opposition at the time - most of the unease toward her was probably retrospective.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on September 01, 2012, 01:50:49 am
@Bella: Labels originated with System 4.2 on color Macs, IIRC.

Another Classic Mac feature not in OSX is the "Print Window" feature, introduced in System 6, where it was called "Print Directory" (http://macfloppy.net/post/23349332883/the-print-directory-command-made-its-first). I thought that was amusing because never before have I seen any other Classic Mac OS version use the term "directory" instead of "folder" or "window". :P (Alternate character interpretation: Aside from also being a Large Ham type of character, System 6-tan also speaks in a Totally Radical manner, dude.)

--------
Oh, okay. That's strange that TX-0-tan was accepted at first, but did something or was perceived in a way that in hindsight made her look bad. Maybe she was accepted by the earlier MIT followers, but they turned against her after Whirlwind's death?

-----
Here's a panel from the first page of the mini comic:
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on September 01, 2012, 02:13:50 am
Or maybe Mac System 6-tan was influenced by the Unices in her choice of "directory" over "folder". : p

Snow Leopard-tan looks totally adorable in that panel~ and I actually have more info on TX-0-tan (as well as two recently-discovered MIT computer systems from the early 1960s that we may or may not be able to personify), but since I'm about ready to call it a night (again), I'll save that for tomorrow.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on September 01, 2012, 02:31:29 am
That makes sense, since A/UX-tan was her mentor, and System 6-tan presumably picked up some mannerisms and word choices from her.

Glad you like the preview, and I'll be looking forward to seeing more info on TX-0 and those recently-discovered systems. Hopefully we can get an article written for TX-0-tan. I added her, and a few other mainframes to the list on the wiki.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Krizonar on September 01, 2012, 02:36:18 am
Quote from: Aurora Borealis on September 01, 2012, 01:50:49 am
@Bella: Labels originated with System 4.2 on color Macs, IIRC.

Another Classic Mac feature not in OSX is the "Print Window" feature

Command Shift 4 Space?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on September 01, 2012, 02:45:57 am
I've never heard of that shortcut until just now, but it's neat, and makes screenshots of the active window much easier!

However, Print Directory/Print Window is printing the window contents and not making a screenshot. On the other hand, I don't know if a screenshot feature ever was in the Classic Mac OS.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Krizonar on September 01, 2012, 02:56:49 am
Quote from: Aurora Borealis on September 01, 2012, 02:45:57 am
I've never heard of that shortcut until just now, but it's neat, and makes screenshots of the active window much easier!

However, Print Directory/Print Window is printing the window contents and not making a screenshot. On the other hand, I don't know if a screenshot feature ever was in the Classic Mac OS.


I had known about Microsoft investing $150 million in Apple to bail them out

Classic Macs could take screenshots, yes.
This most likely replaced the print function, since with a screenshot you have more control on what you do with the picture and with print, well, it only prints.

As for the last quote from the previous page, Apple reportedly had $1.2 billion in cash in the bank.. It didn't really save them. Their second quarter from that year ALONE claims a revenue of $1.6 billion. Microsoft bailing them out is just a tech legend.

"CUPERTINO, Calif. April 16, 1997 Apple Computer, Inc. today announced financial results for the Company's fiscal 1997 second quarter ended March 28, 1997. Revenues for the quarter were $1.6 billion," - an Apple quarterly report.

My guess was they could see the lawsuit was never going to be "won" so they just decided to settle it and get what they could.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on September 01, 2012, 05:06:41 pm
Quote from: Aurora Borealis on September 01, 2012, 02:31:29 am
That makes sense, since A/UX-tan was her mentor, and System 6-tan presumably picked up some mannerisms and word choices from her.


Exactly what I was thinking. ; )

Quote from: Aurora Borealis on September 01, 2012, 02:31:29 amGlad you like the preview, and I'll be looking forward to seeing more info on TX-0 and those recently-discovered systems. Hopefully we can get an article written for TX-0-tan. I added her, and a few other mainframes to the list on the wiki.


Well, I imagine that TX-0-tan was well-liked/regarded in her day (especially by the DEC clan), with the exception of a few (LINC-tan comes to mind - but then again, LINC-tan doesn't get along with many people!). My personal theory is that SAGE-tan was actually the one who managed to "erase" TX-0-tan from the history books, since she would have hated TX-0-tan and blamed her for their mother's death, and to SAGE, there would have been no better vengeance than making her become all but forgotten.

However, this theory requires subscribing to the view that SAGE-tan is actually very powerful and managed to consciously manipulate large portions of OS-tan society - which, as far as I know, isn't a widely-held interpretation of the OS-tan universe.

...

As for those newly-discovered MIT systems, I present the ARC-1 (http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/53406/RLE_QPR_057_XV.pdf?sequence=1) and Lincoln Labs L-1  (http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/mit/lincolnLaboratory/51G-0012_Functional_Description_of_the_L1_Computer_Mar60.pdf)computers.

From what I can tell, the ARC-1 and L-1 were both small computers, from around the same era as the TX-2 (so, late 50s/early 60s). The ARC-1 was, apparently, used in medical research, monitoring electrical activity in the brain or something like that. The L-1 was a 10-bit computer created by Wes Clark at Lincoln Laboratory - Clark was a creator of the LINC computer, which originated in the same institution as the L-1.  The L-1 is described as being very small (4 cubic feet), taking simple instructions and being used for analysis of radio-frequency engineering data. According to Computer Engineering: A DEC View of Hardware System Design, DEC engineers originally considered using the L-1 computer as the basis for a system called the "DC 12" - better known by its production name, the PDP-5. So the L-1 very nearly became the inspiration for the PDP-5 (and subsequently, PDP-8), but the LINC was chosen for that great honor instead. Also, this book says that "Some of the ideas studied in the LINC and L-1 were used in other DEC machines, including ... the PDP-4". So there may be a LINC - L-1 - PDP-4 connection there too.

As for the ARC-1 and L-1's possible relation to other MIT computers, I offer you this tantalizing snippet from The LINC was Early and Small, a paper that's (sadly) hidden behind a paywall:
QuoteThe LINC represents one of the earliest attempts to put the stored program computer into the form of a general instrument for laboratory use. In a deliberate departure from the technology of Timesharing then just beginning nearly two decades of development, the LINC was designed for use by individual experimenters and thus anticipated features of the modern personal computer and personal workstation. Built at M.I.T. in 1962, its immediate forebears were the TX-O, ARC-1, and L-1 computers, in turn direct descendents of the M.I.T. Whirlwind and MTC computers. Of course the LINC in its day was neither personal computer nor personal workstation but simply the LINC. The LINC was an outgrowth of interactions between two M.I.T. groups of scientists and engineers: the Communications Biophysics Laboratory interested in the quantification of neuro-electric activity, and the Lincoln Laboratory Digital Computer Group engaged in the development of advanced computers. Twelve LINCs were placed initially in biomedical research laboratories across the country under a unique NIH/NASA-sponsored evaluation program. Ultimately more than 1200 LINC or LINC variants were manufactured commercially for worldwide use. The basic system design went on to influence the design of the DEC PDP-4 and PDP-5 computers, which in turn helped to pave the way to the PDP-8.


This implies that the MTC and Whirlwind influenced the L-1, ARC-1 and TX-0, which influenced the LINC - which, as we know, served as a basis for the PDP-5 and PDP-8 computers.

Now we just have to see if we can convert this information into any sort of workable personification. An ARC-1-tan is going to be difficult to make, but we just might have enough for an L-1-tan.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on September 29, 2012, 09:57:26 am
:::revival initiated:::

Okay, guys. With the next installment of MR@S we'll see some stuff that definitely will freak some people's headcanons out major beatup style.

(i hope.)

But first off,
Aurora can you sticky this thread? Since we've got all pieces of theory so handily summed up in the first page, it's invaluable for those looking to read up on theory works (or updating their heads like I just did). If we happen to make a new one to take its place (as unlikely as it may seem atm) we'll do something about that, but until then I'd say this would be pretty important.

But anyway, I'll continue my post on this matter when the chapter is out.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on September 29, 2012, 03:14:40 pm
Okay, got it stickied.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on September 29, 2012, 03:57:00 pm
Two theories:

-Awhile back I was telling Pent about some thoughts I had in regards to OS-tans and how they interact with their human handlers, hardware and software, particularly when it comes to granting 'magical' favors or protection to these companions.

This is pretty much limited to head-canon right now (though it'll probably show up in my stories at some point). Basically, how I view it is: in addition to their various self-defense spells, and whatever little spells they use in their day-to-day lives, they have a certain sorcery abilities that they use in whatever job they're assigned to - ie, magic that's related to business stuff, keeping track of information, collecting data from scientific experiments, etc. And that their human users and/or program-tans can ask them to invoke these particular practical-spells, which may not be possible with their more, I guess you'd say reflexive security spells and whatnot.

Taking Multics-tan as an example, she's an OS-tan who was built to have heavily-integrated security skills - so her self-defensive magic goes right down to the core of her very being. On the other hand, she's a general-purpose timesharing system-tan, which means that she can be taught a variety of practical-spells (sometimes she might be asked to help with business or government assignments, or academic or scientific stuff), and it's assumed that she'll be able to be able to serve thousands of users with her magic. Hence her very high power levels.

Unix-tan, on the other hand, wasn't born with the sort of self-defensive skills that Multics-tan was - she had to steal part of it from Multics, and learn the rest. In the beginning, she was much weaker as far as timesharing system-tans go - only able to provide magical services to tens of users, not hundreds or thousands like the more powerful timesharing system-tans - but at the same time, was very magically-flexible, meaning that she could learn many practical magical applications. Her daughters inherited this skill set, hence the large numbers of Unices who are built for very narrow uses - some control telephone systems, others are involved with networking, power spacecraft, etc, etc.

As a third example, many modern OS-tans (not naming names) have large practical-magical skill sets, but are notoriously poor at security magic, to the point where they need purpose-built antivirus-tans to assist them in staving off maleware-tans.

I could probably say more about this, but I'm going to stop rambling now and move on to the second thing I've been pondering lately......

-Making some Database Management System-tans. This was originally sparked by a conversation with a friend on dA about hypothetical DBMS-tans, as well as the fact that I've been meaning to make a Multics Relational Data Store-tan since forever. Anyway, this raises interesting questions about their role in the OS-tanverse - I'm guessing they'd be the custodians of all kinds of information, and may even draw some kind of psychic sustenance from the accumulation of data.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on September 29, 2012, 05:41:49 pm
Sounds great! I'd like to think about what kind of magic groups of characters, or individuals have specifically.

Another factor affecting an OS-tan's power levels, even their capacity, is if they can live up to their potential or if it's wasted. The most unfortunate case would be Kitchen Computer-tan, who never was able to show off what power she had.

Amiga, RISC OS and OS/2 are among those who were designed to be very powerful, but didn't get to live up to their full potential, or their capacity. It's known that Amiga-tan has very powerful magic abilities which she doesn't live up to in part because of self-esteem issues.

On the flip side, there is VIC-20-tan, who was born frail and with very limited magic ability, but was able to push herself well above her original capacity. Then there's QNX-tan, who was an average Unix-like, but became one of the most powerful OS-tans ever because of QNX's success in the embedded market and being used in nuclear power plants.

C128-tan would have been very powerful, and one of the most advanced 8-bit computer-tans. Since the C128 was mainly used for backwards compatibility and didn't have much native software for it, so she rarely got to use her abilities to their full capacity. On average she may be less powerful than C64-tan, whose original magic capacity was lower but had the opportunities to fulfill it and push it higher. (see the impressive hardware and software extensions for the C64, and the games and demos that maximized the C64's capabilities)

And how about the effects of third-party extensions that add extra functionality to an OS? System 6 may be one of the best examples of this, with third party extensions that add the functionality of System 7 (ability to use more than 8MB RAM, use a custom desktop wallpaper, use virtual memory). Windows 3.1 may also be a good example, with an extension for it that adds functionality from 95. Or to hardware, since extensions are what made the VIC-20 and ZX81 useable. Could this be represented with extra magical spells, or cybernetic enhancements?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Penti-chan on September 29, 2012, 06:30:33 pm
That is an interesting idea, on the extensions

My idea is maybe it would fall under additional magic spells; allowing one to preform tasks they normally would be incapable of (As an example, a 3rd party mod that allows Windows 98, 98SE, and ME to run software that would otherwise only run on Windows XP or higher). Cybernetic enhancements could also work as an explanation, depending on the story.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on September 30, 2012, 04:28:12 am
Humans and Codespace

As you might have noticed, I've been throwing humans into codespace recently. There are various ways of doing this, but it all revolves around tagging along with a system for the ride. There is also, for the devious coder, the possibility of making a program or system to operate as a portal under the same principle.

Ultimately, codespace exists in four varieties. Linked space, or the Internet; Locked space, closed networks that are not connected to the rest of the world; Coded space, more or less temporary bubbles of codespace conjured by Sorcery; and Pseudospace, parts of human space that have been heavily injected with code and magic to the point where it acts more like codespace than human space.

While this may seem confusing, these categories do not have anything to do with Closed/Open status of codespace. Any of them can be either open or closed, depending on the creator's wish (though why one would have an Open/Locked space, I can't bother figuring out) and the methods used in its conception.

As the general rule goes, one cannot jump directly from one category of codespace to another. It is generally impossible to establish a connection between them, as they are not connected in any way except for their ties to human space. One must exit codespace and reenter from human space when switching categories, or "jumping networks".
Pseudospace is a bit of a special case since it's still technically a part of human space. Generally, pseudospace isn't identified as pseudospace until the code saturation gets high enough for it to start interfering too much for connections to be bridged. However, as most pseudospace locations are places of special significance to computers, there generally exists plenty of terminals and other natural connections; internet uplink is practically mandatory, and a locked space network isn't unusual either. As such, pseudospace normally allows normal operation on the connected networks, but wireless/3G broadband and other such things have a tendency to fail. It is also impossible to fully leave the pseudospace without actually exiting into human space and leaving its physical boundaries; i.e, one cannot enter from pseudospace into linked space and then exit at a different location. For example: you enter the internet from a pseudospace location in Paris. This allows you to access and trawl data as you please, but you cannot physically transfer your body to any other exit point than the same one in Paris you entered through.

Humans entering codespace tend to suffer a variety of symptoms. Most commonly they will suffer from shortness of breath and asphyxiation, due to much of the air having been replaced with lines of code instead. Masks are recommended. More sensitive individuals may experience panic, claustrophobia or paranoia. This has been attributed to their interpretation of the local code as speech or other sensations they are familiar with, since it tends to become badly distorted due to not being so at all.

There's a multitude of local symptoms that change between networks, but those two are the most common. As a general rule, the symptoms get stronger as the code saturation rises. This means that Closed space is harder to handle than Open space (because whatever encryption is in place will increase the saturation as it is yet another construct in the local code); while the rest commonly depends on local conditions. Linked space has several hotspots of extreme code saturation levels, while being almost empty elsewhere; locked space vary from network to network, as do pseudospace; coded space generally is very heavily saturated but can be altered by its creator.

If unaware of the existence and properties of code, humans in codespace will experience it somewhat like a form of radioactivity (though symptoms are seldom permanent). On the other hand, if they are made aware of it, they may develop a rudimentary grasp of its application. Of course, having no code pool to draw power off, they cannot reliably use Sorcery by themselves. They can however assist other Sorcerers, as well as tap power from willing allies and controlled enemies. They may also, if they are in codespace, attempt to use the local code as a power source. While generally slightly more difficult to control, this works pretty much in the same way.

TL;DR - Humans can go into codespace, but will have a hard time adapting (oxygen masks recommended). There are 4 kinds of codespace; Linked, Locked, Coded and Pseudospace. Humans can use code magic if provided with a code pool by allies, or tapping controlled enemies - alternately they may use the local code for the purpose. Twilight Sparkle is best pony. You cannot jump between different codespace categories of networks, as they are not connected; Pseudospace is special, but carries its own restriction of not being able to exit at any other node than the one inside the pseudospace you entered from.


WHAT JOO TINK, /OSC/
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on September 30, 2012, 04:00:24 pm
@Nej: Sounds good. ^^

You mentioning humans using code magic .... I was considering the possibilities of humans being able to invoke certain kinds of magic, but the way I view it, it's more along the lines of asking an OS-/app-tan to perform a spell for them.

Actually, this idea could provide an interesting metaphor for interactive/real time vs. batch processing - with interactive OS-tans being able to fulfill spell requests in real time, while batch process-using -tans have to have spells written out before they can perform them. This also bring up the possible place of recording mediums in the OS-tan universe, such as punched cards, magnetic and paper tape, etc.... *imagination goes into overdrive*

@Aurora: Tbh, I would assume that 3rd party extensions are just new spells - the only time I'd consider cybernetic enhancement in OS-tan improvement is in the case of system overhauls, etc.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on September 30, 2012, 06:42:43 pm
Well, that's usually the case since few humans have the patience to learn the various intricacies of code magic. Much less try and dig deeper into it, but, as they say, exceptions make the rule... You'd still have to find a more or less willing teacher, which might not be the easiest thing, but hey. If you're in the position where you're trying to steal magic from computers, you're probably either a huge DnD fan who went off the deep end and accidentally the jackpot, or already a prominent computer scientist/programmer/coder and all, which would give you a pretty decent grasp on how coding works in the first place.
It's rather like when Artemis Fowl steals magic from the fairies. It's a foreign substance in his body, since he's a human, so he has a hard time using some of it and coping. But it works. Similarly, humans attempting to procure a code pool of their own for spell usage would certainly find a few...interesting side effects waiting for them.

Storage mediums being used as spellbooks - now that's an idea. I'll dig into that later.
As for interactive/batch processing spells, isn't that just a copy/paste from how Spell Scrolls (batch) vs ordinary casting (interactive) works? Just about any RPG worth its name does this in its magic system somewhere.
I'm more of the mind that batch spells are more ritual-like in their execution, since they are a bunch of commands bundled together - they would require greater preparation and time to cast. Whereas your average interactive spell is cast just as you expect it to be.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on September 30, 2012, 07:04:30 pm
Hm, that's an interesting way of looking at it and lines up pretty well with how I would envision it - only a relative handful of highly competent (or obsessed) programmers/hackers would be able to manipulate code.

I'm glad you like my storage mediums = spellbook idea, it literally just hit me as I was typing up that reply, haha.

Yeah, spell scrolls vs regular spellcasting is more or less what I was getting at, just put in more OS-tanny terms. And yes, that's exactly how I envision batch spells too... it's good to know we're on the same letter of the same page in this regard. :D
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on October 07, 2012, 03:00:25 pm
Whoa guys I had a crazy idea....

Assuming that OS-tans have certain practical spell skill-sets ("networking" spells, "programming" spells, data-collection spells, etc) that are put to use in business and work settings, how do we fit OS-tans that have been "retired" from work, but still exist in operational condition into this? I'm thinking that maybe vintage "hobbyist" OS-tans are kept around not just for study (for instance, allowing people to examine their magical powers and spellbooks, etc) and historical value, but also put into competitions and reenactments and stuff, to show off who has the best spells/fighting skills....

What I'm saying is, old OS-tans for the most part have very low work value, but are probably still very valuable for historical and recreational purposes.

BUT WAIT, I just had another crazy idea! What if the Benteji Renmei exists to keep older OS-tans from having to partake in these zany antics to keep themselves afloat? Surely, kind-hearted Amiga-tan thought it was undignified for her elders to have to live out their retirements entertaining and educating people with their ancient magic and tales from the old days. So, with the help of Unix-sama she created a place where they could live free from pressure to  prove their worth to those ungrateful human bastards.

This could also tie into how we view and personify OPERATIONAL vs. NON-OPERATIONAL systems.... for instance:
-There are many operational PDP-8s in existence, PDP-8 replicas have been built, and original PDP-8s are still used in certain pieces of industrial equipment today. So PDP-8-tan is portrayed as alive and volunteering as historic/hobbyist system AND still contributing to society as a worker (I imagine she probably has a job in a metal shop, or something of that sort). She is alive, a hobby system, and a working system.
-The PDP-1, on the other hand, hasn't been used for any practical applications in decades. There is still at least one working PDP-1 in existence however, at the Computer History Museum. So PDP-1-tan is portrayed as being a historic system who helps educate the public about old OS-tans. She doesn't hold down a job anymore, however. She is alive, and a hobby system.
-Multics is open-sourced, meaning it could be operational again if the right emulation software was created. Multics-tan is depicted as being alive, but more-or-less retired and not really contributing, either as a hobby-system or a worker. She's alive, but completely retired.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on October 07, 2012, 03:16:12 pm
Sounds good. Also remember that Amiga was just one of co-founders the Binteeji Renmei; the others were Apple II, Lisa, GS/OS and their first recruits were Windows 1.0 and 2.0, but I know what you mean. I think that goal of freeing less operational OS-tans from having to be studied would have come later; their first goal was finding displaced OS-tans and help them survive the OS Wars!

Of course, some of the Vintage-tans are sociable enough that they wouldn't mind doing re-enactments and entertaining people, such as Atari ST-tan, C64-tan and Spectrum-tan. But not requiring all vintage-tans to be entertainers to prove their worth is great for the more timid and reclusive such as Adam-tan, Lisa-tan and RT-11-tan.

I like that distinction between hobby and working, hobby only and completely retired. When updating the articles for each of the Vintage-tans or any other long-discontinued system that's still alive, something about their status should be added.

I'm stuck trying to figure this out, but one question at a time, what vintage and historical systems are alive, hobbyist -and- working?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on October 08, 2012, 01:41:18 am
Don't worry, I didn't forget about the other co-founders and I know their primary aim was to give vintage OS-tans sanctuary during the OS Wars ... I just think that Miggy would be the most concerned with the plight of the unwillingly-hobbyist-OS-tans. ^^;

Quote from: Aurora Borealis on October 07, 2012, 03:16:12 pmOf course, some of the Vintage-tans are sociable enough that they wouldn't mind doing re-enactments and entertaining people, such as Atari ST-tan, C64-tan and Spectrum-tan. But not requiring all vintage-tans to be entertainers to prove their worth is great for the more timid and reclusive such as Adam-tan, Lisa-tan and RT-11-tan.


You're completely right. ^^

Quote from: Aurora Borealis on October 07, 2012, 03:16:12 pmI like that distinction between hobby and working, hobby only and completely retired. When updating the articles for each of the Vintage-tans or any other long-discontinued system that's still alive, something about their status should be added.


I had this in mind too! Actually, the thought to make a distinction between working, hobby and retired OS-tans came when I was working on wiki articles for some of the PDP-11 OS-tans. The term "Hobbyist system" kept showing up and I started to wonder, "Wait - how does this translate into OS-tan terms, exactly?"


Quote from: Aurora Borealis on October 07, 2012, 03:16:12 pmI'm stuck trying to figure this out, but one question at a time, what vintage and historical systems are alive, hobbyist -and- working?


That's a good question... there are plenty of alive and working historical OS-tans (this is especially true of obscure mainframe-tans like MCP and OpenVME-tan), but working AND hobbyist OS-tans are harder to pin down. I'd wager a guess that PDP-11 and VAX-tan (and various OS-tans associated with them) are among their rank, possibly some of the Data General-tans and IBM mainframe-tans too.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on October 08, 2012, 02:49:19 am
Do you define 'working' as 'still currently has some practical use', or 'still has commercial use'?

Windows 3.1 and MS DOS may be hobbyist and working OSes. Windows 3.1 is used as an embedded OS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_3.1x#Legacy). In fact, it wasn't until 2008 that MS stopped selling copies of 3.1! That kind of gives me an alternate interpretation of 3.1's backstory, that she didn't become completely melancholy and closed off. Instead, she got a new lease on life when she entered the embedded market after her obsolescence, but maybe she had to keep that secret as to not upset the family balance.

I also know that some schools still use Mac OS9 because some very important software used in some schools doesn't have an OSX version or good equivalent. Not sure about the older Mac OSes though.


Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on October 08, 2012, 07:22:33 pm
Quote from: Aurora Borealis on October 08, 2012, 02:49:19 am
Do you define 'working' as 'still currently has some practical use', or 'still has commercial use'?


This exactly.

Quote from: Aurora Borealis on October 08, 2012, 02:49:19 amWindows 3.1 and MS DOS may be hobbyist and working OSes. Windows 3.1 is used as an embedded OS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_3.1x#Legacy). In fact, it wasn't until 2008 that MS stopped selling copies of 3.1! That kind of gives me an alternate interpretation of 3.1's backstory, that she didn't become completely melancholy and closed off. Instead, she got a new lease on life when she entered the embedded market after her obsolescence, but maybe she had to keep that secret as to not upset the family balance.


That's really amazing, I had no idea that 3.1 had found a second life as an embedded OS! I can personally vouch that MS-DOS is still being used in business, some shops in my town still run DOS-based systems.

I am a bit confused how this fact would fit into 3.1-tan's story - I like your idea of her having a job but keeping it secret from the other Win-tans, because that sounds like something she'd do. ^^;
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on October 08, 2012, 10:03:03 pm
I wouldn't have guessed that 3.1 was still widely used either! 3.1-tan does have kind of a double-life. Another aspect to her double life is that she's also the only Windows-tan in the Windows Family who knows 3.2-tan's origins. Speaking of which, there was a story I was working on, I have a few parts of it done, of 3.2-tan's backstory and in one of the arcs, she meets 3.1-tan for the first time. 3.2-tan can't trust most of the Windows-tans because she's been attacked by many malicious bootleg-tans who look like them, but she ended up trusting 3.1-tan.

On another note, 3.1-tan is probably also more badass than others think she is since some of her competitors in the embedded market sure are daunting!

That's cool seeing DOS systems still running in your area.

Windows 1.0 and 2.0 are hobbyist-only of course. I don't know who the oldest Mac-tan who can claim to be hobbyist and 'working' is though. I can however say that I was able to find a practical use for running System 6, which for a while I used when typing up papers. Still considered a great OS for creative writing with few distractions, but probably doesn't have any remaining commercial use so I'm not sure if that counts.

On the other hand, I wouldn't count System 1 as a working OS in the present day since its usability was already limited for its time.

OS/2 is another OS that is vintage, hobbyist and working. Would Amiga count too? It's hobbyist and working, but might or might not be considered vintage because it is currently maintained.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on October 08, 2012, 10:39:23 pm
In regards to 3.1-tan - that sounds about right. I've always sort of assumed she was more mature/competent than her looks let on, so it's no stretch of the imagination to think that she holds down a job as well. And I can completely envision 3.1-tan being a covert badass too.

Yes, I recall you mentioning using System 6 for writing papers! Coincidentally, the kid who traded me those TRS-80s owned a Macintosh Plus and once brought it to school to type up some assignments on ... :D

OS/2 is an excellent example of a vintage OS that's still working and used for hobby purposes. I'm not sure if the Amiga would count, but for a different reason - are Amigas still used for commercial work purposes?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on October 08, 2012, 11:33:50 pm
Yeah. Among her rivals in the embedded market are ROMDOS-tan and QNX-tan.

I love seeing retrocomputing that's also practical! :D I also tried to use Ubuntu under Virtual Box at the time, and it worked but I had no way to transfer my files so it wasn't worth it. (In mini vMac, the disk image a file is saved in can be opened in OSX, but will only work if the file is plain text. All formatting is lost, and it's annoying to re-format, but it's better than nothing.)

I can't seem to find anything about vintage Amigas having commercial uses today, but I know that for several years they were used in video editing.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on October 15, 2012, 05:47:52 pm
Theory: UNIX-SAMA WAS A PART OF THE DEC FACTION FOR A TIME.

Supporting Evidence: DEC RELEASED AN IN-HOUSE VERSION OF UNIX SYSTEM 7 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Version_7_Unix).

In-Story Implications: Unix-sama in a DEC uniform. PDP-11-tan no longer having to travel to creep on Unix. VMS-tan dying a little a lot inside.

Out-Of-Story Implications: We're all going to have to get our little bottles of white-out and Canon Retcon pens out, 'cause this changes DEC-tan history. Quite.

Pros:
-Neatly explains how Ultrix-tan ended up in the DEC Faction.
-Happened toward the end of the 1970s/early 1980s, and nobody really knows what the hell Unix-sama was up to during that time anyway, so there are no conflicts in Unix's backstory.
-Has fascinating storyline potential.
-Unix showing up where the DEC-tans live to personally torment them is an excellent source of comedic material.

Cons:
-Sort of contradicts recorded DEC-tan history?
-Makes comprehending the already-complex DEC-Unix relationship even more confusing.

EDIT: WHOA! DEC's Unix Engineering Group (who created V7M Unix and Ultrix) was HQ'd in Nashua, NH! Which presents the relevant-to-my-interests implication that Unix-sama was simultaneously a DEC-tan and New Hampshirite for a time.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on October 15, 2012, 06:04:19 pm
RELEVANCE TO MY INTERESTS=HIGH

This material will be used :3
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on October 15, 2012, 08:45:46 pm
Really then? : o
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on October 15, 2012, 09:37:52 pm
Whenever I get off my bootlegs and start writing not ponies again -.-
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on October 21, 2012, 12:48:49 am
*pokes Nej in attempt to motivate him*

Anyway, you guys I really have to stop reading the Wikipedia Talk pages on various vintage/historic computer articles.... they're chock full of personal stories and anecdotes, but it could all be apocryphal. Case in point, I ran across this snippet on the Talk page for DTSS: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Dartmouth_Time_Sharing_System)

Quote from: DonPMitchellI agree, DTSS was very important. It was the template for many commercial time sharing systems, including Control Data's KRONOS and NOS systems, HP's timesharing systems, and UNIVAX's RTB (real time basic) system. Probably others as well. The history of operating systems often appears MIT-centric, but I think that is partly a matter of bias. Contemporary work simply has not gotten the same attention.


(I tried to further explore the possible relation between KRONOS, NOS and DTSS via Google, but only turned up a couple of blog posts suggesting a relationship, noting with any decent sources though.)

Suddenly i had a flash...... KRONOS-kun, NOS-tan's kid - NOS/VE-tan - and DTSS-tan all have the same freakin' blue eyes/light blonde hair color scheme. Way to give me a new headcanon, Talk poster. : (
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on October 21, 2012, 01:11:38 am
Unix being part of the DECs for a while sounds really interesting, but I am concerned how to fit that in without retconning a ton of things. I had thought that during the late 70's and early 80's, Unix was in the process of building her empire, and an attempt at an alliance was made in the early 80's. Their alliance was marked by Ultrix's creation, akin to a child produced from a political marriage between royal houses. Of course when the Unix Family and DECs fought each other again, it's not like Ultrix could be tossed aside. She was as much of a DEC as the native DEC-tans, but her being a Unix led to her being widely distrusted by the native DECs.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on October 22, 2012, 03:32:33 pm
I've considered the impact it would have on everyone's backstory and how we could go about fitting it in with what's already been established. You're correct that Unix-tan was building her empire by the late 1970s, but also remember that this was around the point that she started to "sell out" to a certain extent - seeking out alliances with basically anyone she could and becoming somewhat more greedy/capitalistic than she had originally been. I don't think it would be a particularly jarring to Unix-tan's backstory to say that she collaborated with the DECs for a short time, especially since it seems that her inclusion did little more than secure a place for future generations of Unix-tans within the DEC faction.*

(*This is based on the real-world fact that DEC's Unix V7M didn't seem to be particularly popular [there's very little documentation about it online] or have any impact on the success of the homegrown DEC OSes.)

To be honest, I'd never really thought of Ultrix-tan being analogous to a child produced from a political marriage, but that metaphor fits perfectly.

In regards to the DEC-Unix conflict, I now view it as being less monolithic than I did when I first envisioned it years ago. PDP-11 and VAX-tan probably would have welcomed the inclusion of Unix-tans into their faction, while the PDP-11 OS-tans and VMS would have (understandably) viewed the Unices as a risk to their dominance. PDP-10-tan and her OSes would have viewed them as a dire threat as well, due to their place as historic enemies and the damage that had already been inflicted upon their livelihoods by the VAX-Unix alliance. However, the DEC-tans would have been trained to keep a nice cohesive façade at all times, so it seems unlikely that they ever would have publicly voiced opposition - though there was likely a lot of that going on behind the scenes.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Penti-chan on November 10, 2012, 01:23:10 pm
WMG: OS/2-tan is a fan of James Bond films

This is something I thought of last night, while watching Goldeneye for the first time. Throughout the film, you can see the OS/2 Warp 3.0 splash screen displayed on some of the computer monitors, as part of the product placement for IBM (You also see PC-ATs and PS/2s frequently, as well). The OS/2 splash screen is most easily spotted during the pen grenade scene from towards the end; in which you can more clearly see it on the monitor. It's also mentioned in Wikipedia's article on the film, in the "product placements" section (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GoldenEye#Product_placement), for the curious.

Given that detail, it makes sense to me that OS/2-tan would also enjoy the Bond films; after all, it's already known that she's a Trekkie, since people involved with Star Trek helped promote the OS back in the day.

Thoughts?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on November 12, 2012, 03:44:44 pm
Nice catch. I don't really have anything to add, besides adding it to the Theories list in the wiki if you'd like.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Penti-chan on November 12, 2012, 03:48:30 pm
If you want to add it, go for it :3
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on December 15, 2012, 05:34:46 pm
WIP TIMELINE OF THE UNIX WARS, AND RESULTS THEREOF~
If anyone has any Unix-tans / events that they'd like to add to this list, let me know. I'm trying to make this as comprehensive as humanly possible, so the more info the merrier. Also, I basically threw this together in a couple of hours, so forgive any mistakes made.


...



1980s:
-Originated in the mid 1980s, when BSD and Unix-sama competed for social dominance.
--BSD tried to establish her own bloodline and culture as the dominant Unix line, and Unix-sama attempted to keep her foothold/bloodline in the social hierarchy.
---At this point, SunOS (later called Solaris) was still entirely BSD-based, and the BSD heir-apparent. Unix was voluntarily heirless at this time, but promoting herself (as SysV) and own direct descendants opposed to SunOS.

-In 1984, various Unix-employing corporations banded together to form X/Open Standards Group (X/Open).
--Unix was pleased by this consortium and wished to use it to her advantage. She saw a solution for her problem: a unification of hers' and BSD-tan's lines to put an end to the discord.

-In 1987, BSD agreed to this compromise, possibly to avoid reprisal by Unix, and SunOS underwent training / socialization into SysV culture.
--However, this turn of events upset other Unix factions, who were afraid that SunOS would become the dominant Unix and that they would be shut out of the Unix political process, or altogether destroyed.
-In 1987, MINIX-tan is born.

-In 1988, as a direct response to the SunOS-BSD-Unix alliance, the Open Software Foundation (OSF) was formed by DEC to create an "ultimate" Unix-tan, who would once more bring unity and harmony to the factions. They were sponsored by Apollo, Groupe Bull, HP and IBM among many others. HQ'd in Cambridge, they appeared to the public to be nothing more than an advocacy group. However, they created OSF/1-tan (later called Digital Unix, Tru64 Unix). Genetically-derived from BSD-tan, she planned to be free of any of Unix-tan's copyrighted source.
--OSF/1-tan was set up as the third major party in the Unix Wars (the others being BSD and Unix-tan herself). While a DEC-tan, she collaborated with many other companies within the OSF and planned to take down her competitors through cunning and with her real-time and multi-threading capabilities, powers that few Unices had at this time.
-In 1988, Unix International (UI) was set up by Unix and SunOS to counter OSF.
--UI and the OSF emerged the major players of the conflict, and the Unix Wars intensified.
---Public opinion began to turn on the Unices as the fighting became ever more vicious.
-QNX-tan drafted into the War as a medic.

-In 1989, Unix System Laboratories (USL) was founded by Unix. It began a series of offensives against BSD-tan, for alleged theft of Unix's "intellectual property".  BSD had to purge much of her (Research Unix) source during this time.
-SCO Unix-tan is born 1989.

1990s:
-Xenix-tan dies in battle in 1990 - 1991(?).
-GNU/HURD-tan debuts. She is set up to be the eminent GNU OS-tan, but various issues hinder her progress. 
-While Plan 9-tan had been born in the mid-1980s, Unix-tan didn't select her as heir until the last part of the decade. She was considered unsuitable as an heir by the majority of her peers.
--Traumatized by the fighting and sick of her mother's inability to stop it, Plan 9-tan rejected her heirship and fled Unix in 1991.
-OSF/1-tan's source was incorporated into AIX-tan in 1991.
-BSD-tan's preoccupation in the Unix Wars - and her shaky legal status - caused a power vacuum for a FOSS, Unix-like OS-tan.
--Linux-tan was created to "fill" this vacuum. By her creator's own admission, she probably wouldn't have been built if BSD-tan hadn't been entrenched in fighting.

-In 1992, Linux-tan began her travels in the outside world. She avoided the War and is able to go mostly undetected, since she was free of blood-relation to, or social-entanglements with, the Unices.
-In 1992, Unix, backed by USL, undertook a serious offensive against BSD.
--Unix and BSD were eventually able to peacefully reconcile their differences, but great damage had been done to the both of them by that time.

-In 1993, UI and OSF merged, forming the Common Open Software Environment (COSE). This was done as a last-ditch attempt to stave off destruction at the hands of Microsoft, which had already been able to secure large sections of territory which once belonged to the Unices. Members of the COSE included Sun, SCO, USL, HP and IBM. DEC was not a founding member but later joined.
--Unix and her group USL were deposed from AT&T and her source rights sold off to Novell. She became a part of X/Open.

-BSD-tan became fully free of Unix-tan's code in 1994. About this time, her children started to gain popularity.
-FreeBSD-tan defected from the Unix faction after being drafted into the fighting.
-Solaris-tan's younger sister SpringOS-tan died, allegedly due to lack of medical treatment by QNX-tan.
-Linux-tan became more powerful and began to capture the attention of the Unix-tans, who feared she would usher in a new wave of fighting (this time between the Unices and Linuces - or worse, the pureblood Unices and Unix-likes).
-In response to Unix-tan's change of allegiance, OSF stopped funding OSF/1-tan.
--She was fully adopted by DEC and renamed Digital Unix in 1995.
-Plan 9-tan and various BSD descendants form the User Space Gang (USG)

-In 1995, Unix, fearful of displacement by the Linuces, captured Linux and offered to form an alliance with her.
--Linux agreed and the foundation of the Linux/Unix Consortium was laid.
-HP-UX, SCO Unix and UnixWare formed an alliance (3DA) in an attempt to create a new Unix standard. It was a failure and they parted ways by 1998.

-In 1996 X/Open and OSF merged forming the Open Group. They began the first meaningful steps toward lasting peace and reconstruction of Unix culture, but much damage had been done to the Unix name by then.

-In 1998, IBM, SCO and several other factions teamed up in an attempt to build an "ultimate" Unix-tan (Project Monterey). AIX-tan was chosen to lead this project. The project got out of hand, and many members defected to the Linux faction. IBM dropped out, instead opting to train Linux-tan. This effectively ended the venture.

2000s:
-In 2002, Unix-tan was made open source.
--Unix viewed this as a significant step in throwing off her past encumbrances. She began dabbling in work as a hobby system, and volunteered as a teaching system at MIT.
---She and Linux-tan became closer as a result. Arguably, the foundation of their later romantic relationship was laid at this time.

-In 2003, SCO Unix (still enraged over IBM's perceived betrayal in Project Monterey) sued IBM and began her long-running battle with Linux-tan.
--In the same year, SCO Unix attacked Red Hat-tan.
--She also went after Novell, the owners of Unix-tan's source, claiming that she herself is the rightful owner of said source.

-In 2008, Solaris-tan began dabbling in Open Sourcery.

...

There are some things I left out. For instance, Linux-tan's rise to power and her full role in the LUC isn't really explained. Nor are the root causes of the war, or the motives the Unix-tans had for fighting it, or concepts like the ownership of another OS-tan's source or how BSD-tan was able to rid herself of that old source code. I'd like to explain things further, but I really just wanted to throw this timeline together to get things straight in my mind.

And as I said at the beginning, info on what other Unices were doing at this time would be much appreciated.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on January 14, 2013, 07:43:32 pm
WRY DOES NOBODY REPLY TO THIS THREAD ANYMORE?

Anyway I just had a thought involving the relation between computer-tans and programming languages. Basically, I'm thinking that if various computer functions = magic in OS-tan universe terms, and programming = formulating the spells that invoke these magics, then programming languages = various styles/schools of magic creation.

This would have interesting implications for programmers and OS-tans. For instance, creating a spell in BASIC would be simple enough that even a non-programmer could manage it, but the resulting magic wouldn't be particularly awe-inspiring or powerful. Whereas creating a spell in LISP would be difficult but has the benefit of being incredibly powerful (in the right hands). Some languages would be general-purpose, while others would be highly specialized for specific forms of magic. Some would be light and nimble (like C) while others would be complex and heavy enough that only powerful OS-tans could actually use them (LISP, historically).

Some OS-tans would only be able to handle spells created in certain languages, and others would be constrained by the speed / complexity of certain languages. Some computer-tans would be particularly well-known for their connections to certain languages - for instance, UNIX-tan and C, Multics-sama and PL/I, Emacs-kun and LISP or DTSS-tan and BASIC - with some OS-tans actually being created themselves with the language they're known for (UNIX+C and Multics+PL/I). Some computer-tans would be purpose built to practice sorcery in a certain language (LISP Machine-tan) while others would be able to handle almost any language thrown at them (almost any modern computer-tan).

There's the matter of how programming language-tans fit into this, but I guess i'll save my musings on that subject for later.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on January 14, 2013, 08:31:16 pm
Quote from: Bellsvarious computer functions = magic in OS-tan universe terms, and programming = formulating the spells that invoke these magics, then programming languages = various styles/schools of magic creation.

Don't forget - there's also the code that make these spells up; which is, in essence, the "lifeforce" (mana?) of the OS-tanverse. But yeah, those are pretty much what I'm working after in my canon as well.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 14, 2013, 08:46:56 pm
if code = lifeforce, then we could assume that the spells come from the -tan/-kun themselves, such as the magic in Maburaho (though hopefully not as literal). (if the effects from Maburaho WERE the same as on the OS-tans, however, that might be an interesting plot point for a story. for those who don't feel like looking it up, people who use up all their magic in the show turn to ash.)

i agree with the programming language magic schools, though. but would -tans be able to belong to more than one school? or would they have to choose a particular path to complete before going for another, if they could at all?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on January 14, 2013, 09:03:12 pm
We've already established that an OS-tan lives off her code pool, which she also uses for spells. Since it's constantly replenished, they probably can't exactly kill themselves off like that...probably.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 14, 2013, 09:11:01 pm
wouldn't that depend on the base of the OS? after all, i doubt that the older ones would have a large code pool to work with?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on January 14, 2013, 09:23:45 pm
And in those cases, we improvise.

But there's really quite few cases of in-verse "magically powerful" OSes that don't have a large code pool due to DYNASTIC INHERITANCE and all that. There's SAGE, who is a...special case, and then there's...really not many else.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on January 14, 2013, 09:26:28 pm
Sorry I haven't replied, but the Unix Wars timeline looks about spot-on! I had wondered what was it that sparked the Wars, and with the upbringing Solaris-tan had, and her pivotal role in the Wars, no wonder why she is so spoiled! I had also wondered when QNX-tan got drafted. Although she's a Unix-like, I wonder who drafted her, and for which side? Another Unix-like that was around in the 80's is OS-9. QNX's history has a dark side to it; she hated the Unices, and reveled in having one of them (SpringOS) at her mercy. Even better is that SpringOS was the younger sister of one of the most high-profile Unices, and possibly motivated by spite, might have deliberately let SpringOS die. If that happened, QNX has regretted it, and doesn't want to fight again, and devotes her life to building machinery and saving lives.

Starting from the roots of the Unix Wars, what was it that motivated BSD to make her own culture and be disrespectful to her mother? :P
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on January 14, 2013, 11:11:06 pm
@Nej: SAGE and Multics are both -tans who had little in the way of inherited code-base. However, Multics underwent unusually intense magical training and SAGE drew power from her radar systems / peripherals / anyone and everyone computery around her.

Quote from: Aurora Borealis on January 14, 2013, 09:26:28 pm
Sorry I haven't replied, but the Unix Wars timeline looks about spot-on! I had wondered what was it that sparked the Wars, and with the upbringing Solaris-tan had, and her pivotal role in the Wars, no wonder why she is so spoiled! I had also wondered when QNX-tan got drafted. Although she's a Unix-like, I wonder who drafted her, and for which side? Another Unix-like that was around in the 80's is OS-9.


I don't know who drafted QNX into the war but was hoping you may have some ideas (she is your character after all). Any idea what OS-9's role in the Unix Wars was (if she had any at all)?

QuoteStarting from the roots of the Unix Wars, what was it that motivated BSD to make her own culture and be disrespectful to her mother? :P


The conflict arose due to differences in their upbringings, personalities, goals and plain greed. BSD-tan had a far easier life than Unix ever knew and it really changed her perspective on things. She never liked Unix's draconian practices and wanted to make the Unix community less austere in general. As well, she disliked Unix's increasingly closed-up nature and wanted to revive freedom and openness within the community. There were also the social and power reasons - BSD simply wanted to be the dominant member of the Unix hierarchy, and Unix-tan simply wasn't willing to give up her position.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on January 15, 2013, 01:48:34 am
Special case, as I was saying. :)

Then on my end of the spectrum there's Ruka, who is powerful mainly because of the rule of cool (I mean, doomsday weapon, come on) and storyline purposes, and the OMEGA peeps who are so because necromancy. But I'm getting ahead of myself now, aren't I. -v-
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on January 16, 2013, 07:03:05 pm
YES YOU ARE *prods Nej to write / post writings moar*

Also WMGs caused by Emacs culture research / just talking with Stew a minute ago....

THEORY: Emacs-kun is attempting to evolve into something bigger/better than a text editor
...and may be attempting to become an OS-kun at some point. Okay, while there have been schemes to make Emacs into an experimental operating system (Google Emacs Native Operating System), this is mostly inside-jokey and a play on the old EMACS IS A GREAT OS, IT ONLY LACKS A DECENT TEXT EDITOR crack, but Emacs-kun has picked up an unusually wide range of abilities over the years (considering that he can be considered a web browser-, media player-, newsreader-, email client-, game system- and shell-kun, among other things). Coupled with his general tendency toward überarrogance (http://web.archive.org/web/20060506144721/http://www.dina.kvl.dk/~abraham/religion/prophesy.html) and rhetoric-of-grandeur (http://web.archive.org/web/20051229234510/http://www.dina.kvl.dk/~abraham/religion/), it doesn't really seem out-of-character for him.

THEORY: Fancy!SAGE is a figment of Normal!SAGE's mind
Stew got me thinking about this with an offhand comment about my SAGE-tan stickers (http://bellacielo.deviantart.com/art/SAGE-tan-Stickers-191187579) (which he is now in possession of). Basically, there are two separate modern SAGE-tan interpretations: god-level super-manipulator in one hell (http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/displayimage.php?pos=-6954) of a (http://bellacielo.deviantart.com/art/SAGE-tan-142929111) fancy outfit (http://bellacielo.deviantart.com/art/Kami-SAGE-269458393) and insane amnesiac who spends all day yelling at the kids/birds to stay the hell off of her lawn. I propose that God!SAGE is just a figment of Normal!SAGE's imagination. Whether or not this is her true self or some crazed delusion will be left up to interpretation....
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on January 16, 2013, 09:50:44 pm
Well, seeing as she lost most of her nodes - or at least the ones she knew about - she'd be unable to accept the fact that she once was as powerful as that, imo, and thus she's dissociated that part of herself into a separate personality.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on January 17, 2013, 06:53:58 pm
If you believe the god!SAGE = figment of normal!SAGE's mind then yes, I suppose that would be a good way of looking at it. IDK if i fully support the theory, but it's something to think about - especially given how purposefully-ambiguous the SAGE canon is.

Also, remind me again where we go to discuss OS-tan names? I've been trying to pick some for the Unices and their allies ... usually when they're my personal characters, I just go ahead and pick a name, but some of these aren't mine (or I only helped create them)....

I'm leaning toward Hera for HURD-tan (visual similarity), Marta / Marcia for MERT-tan (again, visual/audio similarity), Fiammetta or Ignatia for Inferno-tan (name origins meaning "flame" :p), Soleil for Solaris (name means "sun", and IIRC Solaris-tan had a similar human-name in one of Stew's stories...) and Minnie for MINIX-tan (sounds similar and evokes the concept of smallness). Surnames I'll have to give more thought to, though I usually turn to creator names or in-story family names (i.e., all the research Unices have the surname "Bell") first.

I'd like to give some of the Linux-tans names too - some write themselves, more or less (Debian = Debora, Gentoo = Jennifer, SuSE = Susanne or some variant thereof) but others are trickier - I'd like to give Ubuntu-tan a name, for instance, but my cursory inspections of Bantu names haven't turned up any good leads and I haven't looked into other native South African language names yet. Unless we just cop out and call her "Ubuntu" (and even then we'll still need a surname). >>
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Penti-chan on January 17, 2013, 07:18:38 pm
@Bella: I believe the topic was "NEEDED: Your Input" for character names. Speaking of, I've considered trying to come up with some for the -tans I've made pages for (Especially Neptune, since she is kind of "my" character at this point)

On a different note, I has theory. While reading about D&D video games, I ended up stumbling onto something interesting, which lead to this:

PDP-10-tan enjoys role playing games
The reason is that one of the earliest computer RPGs is Dungeon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeon_%28video_game%29); which was designed for the PDP-10. It wasn't very popular in its day, but the fact it exists shows that she might have a love of role playing games...and maybe she tries to rope the other DEC-tans into joining her ^^;
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on January 17, 2013, 07:48:48 pm
Please do! Plenty of -tans still need names, and it's not really as if there's any set convention regarding who gets to name whom. Stew, Aurora, Nej and I have all picked names for characters that aren't ours, and the naming of "canon" characters is still pretty much fair game.

Quote from: PentiumMMX on January 17, 2013, 07:18:38 pm
PDP-10-tan enjoys role playing games
The reason is that one of the earliest computer RPGs is Dungeon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeon_%28video_game%29); which was designed for the PDP-10. It wasn't very popular in its day, but the fact it exists shows that she might have a love of role playing games...and maybe she tries to rope the other DEC-tans into joining her ^^;


Considering that it fits right in with an old theory I had regarding the DEC-tans having a fondness for tabletop gaming, consider it added to my story canon! ^.^
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Penti-chan on January 17, 2013, 08:09:10 pm
Yay ^^

Also, I'll keep that in mind
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: alfonso_rd_30 on January 18, 2013, 11:04:13 pm
Yay I got theories!!!!

Magical Source for the -tans:

it pretty much would be the way Some other universes manage their energy discharging system (ki/chi, chakra) and he tans can use both their own code pool / their code itself and draw code from the surrounding environment

Program Languages = Styles / schools of Magic:
Yes indeed.

where the fork the Program Language-tans fit in the Mess?:
They would pretty much be the Grandmasters (GrandMistresses?) of  each schools, tutoring the other tans in the Schools...

Kami(Fancy) Sage being a figment of plain old Sage:
I think it's the other way around, think of it as a deity devoting a small part of her power to create a Mortal Avatar... but Sage just didn't quite got it
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on January 18, 2013, 11:55:22 pm
Hey there Alfonso, thanks for adding your input to the thread. ^^

Quote from: alfonso_rd_30 on January 18, 2013, 11:04:13 pm
Yay I got theories!!!!

Magical Source for the -tans:

it pretty much would be the way Some other universes manage their energy discharging system (ki/chi, chakra) and he tans can use both their own code pool / their code itself and draw code from the surrounding environment

Program Languages = Styles / schools of Magic:
Yes indeed.


I think these theories match up well with the similar theories that have been posted here, so I don't really have any comments on them.

As for the other two...

Quote from: alfonso_rd_30 on January 18, 2013, 11:04:13 pm
where the fork the Program Language-tans fit in the Mess?:
They would pretty much be the Grandmasters (GrandMistresses?) of  each schools, tutoring the other tans in the Schools...


That's a good idea! To be honest, i haven't given much thought about making programming language-tans, unless it's a programming language that can also be run "as an operating system" - for instance, BASIC on various 1980s microcomputers, or FOCAL on the PDP-8 computer. But there have been program language-tan concepts proposed before, so if you wanted to design some this would be a nice way of fitting them in with the rest of our characters.

Quote from: alfonso_rd_30 on January 18, 2013, 11:04:13 pmKami(Fancy) Sage being a figment of plain old Sage:
I think it's the other way around, think of it as a deity devoting a small part of her power to create a Mortal Avatar... but Sage just didn't quite got it


I really like this idea as well! There is some debate about SAGE-tan's powers, so if you believe SAGE-tan has maintained a high level of power over the years (thus making her something of a "god"-like figure within the OS-tan community) it kind of makes sense that she would maintain a "mortal" body to interact with other OS-tans.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: alfonso_rd_30 on January 19, 2013, 02:02:22 am
Quote from: Bella on January 18, 2013, 11:55:22 pm
Hey there Alfonso, thanks for adding your input to the thread. ^^

[spoiler]
Quote from: alfonso_rd_30 on January 18, 2013, 11:04:13 pm
Yay I got theories!!!!

Magical Source for the -tans:

it pretty much would be the way Some other universes manage their energy discharging system (ki/chi, chakra) and he tans can use both their own code pool / their code itself and draw code from the surrounding environment

Program Languages = Styles / schools of Magic:
Yes indeed.

[/spoiler]
I think these theories match up well with the similar theories that have been posted here, so I don't really have any comments on them.

As for the other two...


Yes I know, in this case I was only expanding into those topics, where only was covered the basic "Magic draws life force of the Practitioner", while Magic also means using one's will to bend natural laws
Quote from: Bella on January 18, 2013, 11:55:22 pm
Quote from: alfonso_rd_30 on January 18, 2013, 11:04:13 pm
where the fork the Program Language-tans fit in the Mess?:
They would pretty much be the Grandmasters (GrandMistresses?) of  each schools, tutoring the other tans in the Schools...


That's a good idea! To be honest, i haven't given much thought about making programming language-tans, unless it's a programming language that can also be run "as an operating system" - for instance, BASIC on various 1980s microcomputers, or FOCAL on the PDP-8 computer. But there have been program language-tan concepts proposed before, so if you wanted to design some this would be a nice way of fitting them in with the rest of our characters.

Quote from: alfonso_rd_30 on January 18, 2013, 11:04:13 pmKami(Fancy) Sage being a figment of plain old Sage:
I think it's the other way around, think of it as a deity devoting a small part of her power to create a Mortal Avatar... but Sage just didn't quite got it


I really like this idea as well! There is some debate about SAGE-tan's powers, so if you believe SAGE-tan has maintained a high level of power over the years (thus making her something of a "god"-like figure within the OS-tan community) it kind of makes sense that she would maintain a "mortal" body to interact with other OS-tans.


both Ideas are just common sense applied
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on January 19, 2013, 08:58:03 am
A bit of a polling station, people, for you who write comics or tanfics regularly or just indulge in theory mess like this.

What "human names" do you use in your headcanon/story canon, and why?

This interests me because I don't think we've actually done a proper collection of these yet, or a listing of which are more or less relevant/used often etc, between the /OSC/ers.

The ones I use more or less as actual names are 3:
Linux-tan (Lina Torvalds), GIT-tan (Birgitta "Gittan" Torvalds) and WITCH (Winston Harwell).
Linux is like I stated in the comp thread a pretty special case in that she actually has a father figure, namely Linus Torvalds, who coded her from scratch, top to bottom, until she was functional, and in much is responsible for her widespread success as well. While she also has formal "corporate" ties with the Linux Consortium, she also has personal ties to humans on a level that justifies her identifying herself that much with them.

That GIT has a proper name is a bit of an extension of Linux' having one. Seeing as she's another of Linus' creations, although she might not be quite as much his "daughter" as Linux herself is, she still has ties to another using those ties - namely, her sister Linux. Because of this, their personal relations become influenced by human ties as well.
(Also, I just couldn't let that pun go. :D )

WITCH's case is a different matter, though the reasons are similar. In the end I believe that tans who actually identify with their human name, not simply use it as an alias, are only those who have a special and solid connection to the human world aside from the ties that tie her to her creators and maintainers. Thanks to her deep-code magic WITCH managed to stay conscious and operating despite deactivation, and then even the dismantling of her (only) node. She was fully conscious in a deactivated state for all her years as a museum object (1973-1997) and after that for another 12 years (1997-2009) with her node completely dismantled. During her dismantled period, while her deep-code let her remain conscious, she had virtually no code pool whatsoever, or even any connection to Code itself beyond what made herself to stay alive. Thus she spent 12 years as not quite human, yet not quite computer, living in the human world on her own. With increased contact with humans came a need to identify herself with them. The fact that her designated system name had changed several times during the years also helped solidify her human name as the one she felt was "her own", so to speak; this is especially true during her early OMEGA days before her restoration was completed and the effects of her necromancy took hold, but even then she still refers to herself as "A Witch", not "WITCH", and that's simply her own description of herself. She has spent so much time in the human world that she has effectively taken on a human identity.

Many others have "names" that they use when dealing with humans; for example Ruka's "Martta Rukka" and Leopard's "Pardus Cupertino" among others. It is arguable whether or not Snow Leopard's use of "Snow" as her name is a proper human name or not, but I'd say it isn't (even if the few humans she deals with use it sometimes).
In any case, these are clear cases of pseudonyms . Ruka's is merely a faked passport given to her to gain entrance to the States, and she certainly doesn't have a single scrap of ties to the human world, not like that; whilst Leopard's certainly has more age and use on it, it remains just as secondary.

What do you think, guys? How do you think on the topic of human-computer identity issues?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Penti-chan on January 19, 2013, 10:10:14 am
About the only noteworthy ones with my stories would be how 2k-tan's human name is Nichi Madobe, while ME-tan is Emmy Madobe. I still need to come up with a name for Neptune, as well as Fedora, so at the moment they're just known by their OS-tan name
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on January 19, 2013, 11:43:57 am
@Alfonso: I hope you post more theories here in the future. :D

@Nej: I agree with most of those names. In fact, the only that's different in my head / story canon is Leopard-tan, whose family name is Macintosh. She actually doesn't start off with a first name, but somewhere along the line in hr time-travels she encounters Whirlwind-tan, who gives her the nickname "Leona" and it sort of sticks with her. (Based on the fact that, at least in Stew's [head?]canon, Whirlwind-tan was supposed to be the one who got human names for computers going as a way to humanize them more.) As well, Snow Leopard-tan is just Leopard's future self, so it's presumed they share the same name although she uses the alias of "Snow".

Also, that's really interesting about WITCH .... how she remained alive even without any running systems. Reminds me a little of SAGE actually....

*ponders a SAGE - WITCH, er, knife-and-or-magic-fight* o__O
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: alfonso_rd_30 on January 19, 2013, 02:59:24 pm
Quiet an Simple:
98 = Hachikyu
SE = Hachisai
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 19, 2013, 07:30:52 pm
l believe we had proposed some names for 98 & SE...

as for the heads of the programming language schools, i remember seeing a video somewhere that had program language girls. we could adapt these characters to be the program-tans. :\
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on January 19, 2013, 07:42:57 pm
>Programming Language Girls

There's a dangerous precedent for this, guys............ http://www.columbia.edu/~sss31/rainbow/prog.lang.html

As I said before, I'm only interested in making language-tans who personify languages that double as operating systems (I still need to make a FOCAL and BASIC-tan), though I'd also like to make a LISP Machine and GeneraOS-tan, who might as well be LISP Language-tans themselves. -w-

THEORY: HURD and Arch Linux-tan are bestest friends forever
Two words: Arch HURD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arch_Hurd). It's basically the only thing keeping HURD even vaguely relevant in this day and age.

And, well, their personalities are just too darned compatible! Both being really intelligent but also shy and somewhat socially-challenged in their daily lives and all that.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Chocofreak13 on January 19, 2013, 07:59:55 pm
the girls l mentioned were for languages like Java and such. all i'm saying is that they exist, so we don't need to make characters for them. :\
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on January 20, 2013, 03:54:37 am
Quote from: Bella on January 19, 2013, 11:43:57 am
Also, that's really interesting about WITCH .... how she remained alive even without any running systems. Reminds me a little of SAGE actually....

*ponders a SAGE - WITCH, er, knife-and-or-magic-fight* o__O

WITCH isn't actually too proficient a fighter at all. Her necromancy empowering makes her strong, but her magic isn't very well suited for it; and she's never had to deal with a proper combat situation before, so she's not really used to things like that.

Her best skill is in mindbreaking people and such, but seeing as SAGE is already insane that'd be a moot point...
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: alfonso_rd_30 on January 20, 2013, 03:48:41 pm
Quote from: Bella on January 19, 2013, 07:42:57 pm
>Programming Language Girls

There's a dangerous precedent for this, guys............ http://www.columbia.edu/~sss31/rainbow/prog.lang.html

As I said before, I'm only interested in making language-tans who personify languages that double as operating systems (I still need to make a FOCAL and BASIC-tan), though I'd also like to make a LISP Machine and GeneraOS-tan, who might as well be LISP Language-tans themselves. -w-


the idea doesn't conflict with your Ideas at all... for example let's say Basic-tan (A PL/OS tan) taught one of the Win tans, well, Basic and then using that knowledge  said Win-tan taught her family how to perform the basic-based sourcery, even "Improving" unto the school itself (Going from BASIC to Visual BASIC), this said for the PL that also are OS-tans themselves...

Quote from: Chocofreak13 on January 19, 2013, 07:59:55 pm
the girls l mentioned were for languages like Java and such. all i'm saying is that they exist, so we don't need to make characters for them. :\


hence they are those GrandMistresses I mentioned...

Quote from: NejinOniwa on January 20, 2013, 03:54:37 am
Quote from: Bella on January 19, 2013, 11:43:57 am
Also, that's really interesting about WITCH .... how she remained alive even without any running systems. Reminds me a little of SAGE actually....

*ponders a SAGE - WITCH, er, knife-and-or-magic-fight* o__O

WITCH isn't actually too proficient a fighter at all. Her necromancy empowering makes her strong, but her magic isn't very well suited for it; and she's never had to deal with a proper combat situation before, so she's not really used to things like that.

Her best skill is in mindbreaking people and such, but seeing as SAGE is already insane that'd be a moot point...


SAGE doesn't seem three pieces short of a puzzle to me... it's just that only her Mastery of the kind of Sourcery she has is... lacking... to say the least... given the bad way she managed to craft an OS-tan avatar for herself...
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: stewartsage on January 20, 2013, 07:14:05 pm
Can I just say the only reason I never post anything productive here is because I don't believe in 90% of it?

That's all.

So let me say again; SAGE is not a sorceress.  She doesn't wield 'magic'.  She did not create her own corporeal form.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: alfonso_rd_30 on January 20, 2013, 09:16:44 pm
no comment----
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: stewartsage on January 21, 2013, 01:40:00 am
No offense to you man, but it keeps coming up.

I'm just grumpily anti-magic.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on January 21, 2013, 02:16:45 am
The body of a Tan is not magically crafted by the Tan herself. It is a physical manifestation of her Code pool, powered by her Nodes (systems under her control) and eventual Descendant Nodes (nodes under control of her directly coded descendants or otherwise corporately connected ones). Just like a Tan cannot function without Nodes, her Nodes cannot function without her. The death of a Tan's nodes means the death of herself, but just as surely the death of the Tan means the death of the nodes and the system. This is the reason Necromancy was needed to revive Colossus - without Colossus herself, the system would not be functional no matter how well built-together it was.

The Tan is the Soul of the Machine.
Quote from: stewartsage on January 20, 2013, 07:14:05 pm
Can I just say the only reason I never post anything productive here is because I don't believe in 90% of it?

That's all.

So let me say again; SAGE is not a sorceress.  She doesn't wield 'magic'.  She did not create her own corporeal form.

Could you detail yourself a bit? Do you reject the entire system of Code, and in that case what do you have in its place? I'm curious.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on January 21, 2013, 12:26:42 pm
@Stew: You need to end the confusion and write down some details about SAGE's (non)powers. *pokes furiously with wiki-editing fingers*

@Genpop: My personal theories on OS-tans and magic is varied. Basically...

-I don't believe that straight-up hardware-tans have any magical powers to speak of. I envision them as fairly run-of-the-mill "artificial human"-types. While they do have super-human powers, they tend to be physical and/or mental - for instance, great strength or physical agility (System/360-kun, PDP-10-tan) or heightened intellectual ability (particularly in scientific / mathematical / logic-based fields).

-The magical ability of software-hardware hybrids is somewhat varied. Some take after their hardware sides, so to speak (for instance, Commodore 64- and VIC-20-tan are software-hardware hybrids but they've never been depicted with magical abilities to the best of my knowledge). Other hardware-software hybrids are highly magical (LISP Machine-tan).

-In my personal OS-tan canon / headcanon, magical ability was originally uncommon even among OS-tans. MCP-tan (circa 1961) is supposed to be the first "proper" sorceress in my canon. CTSS-tan was powerless, but her daughter, Multics-tan, was purposefully designed with a high level of magical ability. Multics' descendants - the Unices, Linuces, and various Multics-like OS-tans - are supposed to be the most powerful sorceresses.

-On that note, the MIT OS-tans are supposed to be more magically-disposed than the majority of their other academic system peers (hence the lack of outward magical ability among the MTS, UMES, MUSIC/SP, OS^3-tan and others I can't recall at the moment). The DEC-tans have several magic-wielders in their ranks, however their abilities tend to be less powerful. DTSS-tan and BTSS-tan also have magical powers, although they're quite specialized in scope. Emacs-kun is the only confirmed male, software-tan magic-wielder, however he's a marked exception.

-As for birth / creation - again, I envision them as biological and human-like in almost every way (i.e., they need nutrition, sleep, can become injured, etc.), however they aren't biologically human since they don't have human DNA. Instead, the "instruction set" that controls the development / continued  existence is "(source) code", which is pretty much analogous to DNA except artificially-created and carrying with it the ability to imbue data-manipulation abilities (which is simply what OS-tan "magic" is). Humans are the ones who oversee their creation - sometimes a -tan is made from scratch, other times they are derived from the code of one or more OS-tans.

-The only OS-tans who use a code pool, in my stories, are the Unices and Linuces to a lesser extent. The rest of the OS-tans generate their own magical ability / life force.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Penti-chan on January 21, 2013, 12:40:37 pm
With magic in my stories, it depends on the character. Most, like 2k, typically rely on technology and more traditional weapons, while some (Neptune, for instance) do have supernatural powers. It just depends on what I feel works for the character in question
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on January 21, 2013, 03:55:49 pm
Quote from: PentiumMMX on January 21, 2013, 12:40:37 pm
With magic in my stories, it depends on the character. Most, like 2k, typically rely on technology and more traditional weapons, while some (Neptune, for instance) do have supernatural powers. It just depends on what I feel works for the character in question


Yes. This. Pretty much.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: alfonso_rd_30 on January 21, 2013, 04:14:34 pm
Quote from: Bella on January 21, 2013, 03:55:49 pm
Quote from: PentiumMMX on January 21, 2013, 12:40:37 pm
With magic in my stories, it depends on the character. Most, like 2k, typically rely on technology and more traditional weapons, while some (Neptune, for instance) do have supernatural powers. It just depends on what I feel works for the character in question


Yes. This. Pretty much.


yup... I only interjected because it made no sense to me the theory of Kami SAGE being an invent of SAGE... not to start a War about Sourcery...
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on January 21, 2013, 04:41:27 pm
Don't feel at fault, there's always been a debate over the nature of OS-tans and their powers. It's nothing new and nothing to be bothered by, IMO - everyone should be able to interpret the OS-tan universe as they see fit. That's why this is a "theories" thread - not a "facts" one. :)
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on January 21, 2013, 07:10:20 pm
@Bella: For the characters who don't use code pools, is their life force still dependent on the existence of compatible hardware to draw their power from? The code pool the Unices and Linuces have is their a large, shared set of code they can draw from, correct? Just want to make sure I'm not getting this mixed up.

I thought as a reference to the history of their hardware:

-Apple I-tan's health declining had a sudden onset, corresponding to when many Apple I users traded in their Apple Is for an Apple II at a discount in 1978; those traded in Apple Is were destroyed.

-In C-Chan's original concept, Lisa-tan's melancholy state also had a sudden onset, corresponding to the dumping of thousands of unsold Lisa units in 1989.

-Commodore 264-tan (originally just Plus/4-tan, but also represents the C16 and C116) is physically frail because the Plus/4's video chip has a high failure rate.

-Because of vast amount of hardware support QNX acquired (largely in the form of automobiles, medical devices and nuclear power plants), QNX-tan became one of the most powerful living OS-tans.

-Assuming that IMSAI 8080-tan also represents the IMSAI Series Two line (made in the 2000's as a hobbyist revival), she has become more powerful magically than she ever was. Although she can never get her political power back, her gains give her something to boast about to her past rivals. :P

======

I see C64-tan as having a good amount of innate magical ability, since the C64's hardware specs were good for its time. She would also have a lot of spell-books, because of the C64's huge software library, and could do a lot of elaborate spells because of the C64's amazing demoscene. She would use those demoscene spells just for show. I think despite her magic abilities, she would take more pride in the various gadgets and hardware mods she built; in fanon, C64-tan likes to tinker with old hardware.

The VIC-20 was an underpowered machine even upon debut, so VIC-20-tan is physically and magically frail, making up for it with fierce training and hot-blooded determination. She would also have several spellbooks, but needs assistance using most her spells (the better VIC-20 software requires the 16K RAM extension).

C65-tan is very powerful by design, the most magically powerful of the 8-bit Commodore-tans, or even the most magically powerful of the 8-bit computer-tans. She is never able to reach that potential, being a cancelled and unreleased system. Somehow she is still alive, having cheated death for several years now.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: stewartsage on January 22, 2013, 01:16:50 am
Quote from: NejCould you detail yourself a bit? Do you reject the entire system of Code, and in that case what do you have in its place? I'm curious.


No no, I don't subscribe to it for most of the vintage OSs from the early 1960s back.  That's pretty much it.

SAGE runs off belief and strawberry Yoohoo.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on January 22, 2013, 04:27:37 am
Quote from: Bella on January 21, 2013, 12:26:42 pm
@Stew: You need to end the confusion and write down some details about SAGE's (non)powers. *pokes furiously with wiki-editing fingers*

@Genpop: My personal theories on OS-tans and magic is varied. Basically...

-I don't believe that straight-up hardware-tans have any magical powers to speak of. I envision them as fairly run-of-the-mill "artificial human"-types. While they do have super-human powers, they tend to be physical and/or mental - for instance, great strength or physical agility (System/360-kun, PDP-10-tan) or heightened intellectual ability (particularly in scientific / mathematical / logic-based fields).

-The magical ability of software-hardware hybrids is somewhat varied. Some take after their hardware sides, so to speak (for instance, Commodore 64- and VIC-20-tan are software-hardware hybrids but they've never been depicted with magical abilities to the best of my knowledge). Other hardware-software hybrids are highly magical (LISP Machine-tan).

-In my personal OS-tan canon / headcanon, magical ability was originally uncommon even among OS-tans. MCP-tan (circa 1961) is supposed to be the first "proper" sorceress in my canon. CTSS-tan was powerless, but her daughter, Multics-tan, was purposefully designed with a high level of magical ability. Multics' descendants - the Unices, Linuces, and various Multics-like OS-tans - are supposed to be the most powerful sorceresses.

-On that note, the MIT OS-tans are supposed to be more magically-disposed than the majority of their other academic system peers (hence the lack of outward magical ability among the MTS, UMES, MUSIC/SP, OS^3-tan and others I can't recall at the moment). The DEC-tans have several magic-wielders in their ranks, however their abilities tend to be less powerful. DTSS-tan and BTSS-tan also have magical powers, although they're quite specialized in scope. Emacs-kun is the only confirmed male, software-tan magic-wielder, however he's a marked exception.

-As for birth / creation - again, I envision them as biological and human-like in almost every way (i.e., they need nutrition, sleep, can become injured, etc.), however they aren't biologically human since they don't have human DNA. Instead, the "instruction set" that controls the development / continued  existence is "(source) code", which is pretty much analogous to DNA except artificially-created and carrying with it the ability to imbue data-manipulation abilities (which is simply what OS-tan "magic" is). Humans are the ones who oversee their creation - sometimes a -tan is made from scratch, other times they are derived from the code of one or more OS-tans.

-The only OS-tans who use a code pool, in my stories, are the Unices and Linuces to a lesser extent. The rest of the OS-tans generate their own magical ability / life force.

First, I feel like I have to clarify what I mean with code pool. A code pool is the amount of lifeforce/magic/code available to a Tan at any given moment. While some groups of Tans put their pools together by one means or another, making a "collective" code pool and practically guaranteeing them to never actually "run out" per se - which is the mechanism I believe you refer to as "code pool" - every Tan has one. Much like every human has a stock of carbohydrates and fat in their body to burn for energy, every Tan has a code pool.

The idea you're running with earlier Tans being less magical in nature is pretty much in line with what I have in mind as well. For one thing, the concept of codespace, Open or Closed, doesn't even really exist until the advent of networking, in my opinion. For example, Colossus-tan is a talented codebreaker and calculator, skilled at subterfuge and single combat thanks to her great physical strength. Her actual magical skills, such as altering her body size and hacking into Closed Space, don't come into play until later - after her resurrection. "Magic" wasn't used as a term until very late in the game. I'll be extrapolating a lot more on this difference between early and late Tans and their abilities in future chapters of Beyond Ultra Secret and related OMEGA materials.

Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on January 22, 2013, 05:34:06 pm
D'oh! Thanks for clarifying that Nej, for some reason I was thinking that "code pool" referred to the combined power of a bloodline. (For instance, Unix-tan drawing life force/sustenance from of her children.) Also, I can get behind the idea of networking = code-space, since I was kind of working on that assumption as well.

Quote from: Aurora Borealis on January 21, 2013, 07:10:20 pm
@Bella: For the characters who don't use code pools, is their life force still dependent on the existence of compatible hardware to draw their power from? The code pool the Unices and Linuces have is their a large, shared set of code they can draw from, correct? Just want to make sure I'm not getting this mixed up.


Refer to my answer to Nej on the first point. You're correct about the Linuces and Unices having some sort of shared life-force, although in their cases, I imagine their matriarchs benefit the most from this shared life-force. This goes back to the reaaaaaallly old theory that Unix-tan is being kept alive mostly by her children (which has become slightly less relevant with the discovery of the existence of emulated research Unix systems / modern research Unix versions), however it's never been "retconned" from the Unix-tans' backstory.

Quote-Apple I-tan's health declining had a sudden onset, corresponding to when many Apple I users traded in their Apple Is for an Apple II at a discount in 1978; those traded in Apple Is were destroyed.

-In C-Chan's original concept, Lisa-tan's melancholy state also had a sudden onset, corresponding to the dumping of thousands of unsold Lisa units in 1989.

-Commodore 264-tan (originally just Plus/4-tan, but also represents the C16 and C116) is physically frail because the Plus/4's video chip has a high failure rate.

-Because of vast amount of hardware support QNX acquired (largely in the form of automobiles, medical devices and nuclear power plants), QNX-tan became one of the most powerful living OS-tans.

-Assuming that IMSAI 8080-tan also represents the IMSAI Series Two line (made in the 2000's as a hobbyist revival), she has become more powerful magically than she ever was. Although she can never get her political power back, her gains give her something to boast about to her past rivals. :P


That's good to know! Now that I think of it, I can name some instances of character change being brought about by real-world system changes.

-Multics-tan's health got better with the introduction of commercial Multics systems (1971) and declined with the end of system development (1985).

-Unix-tan's health declined with the onset of the Unix Wars.

-Linux-tan has gotten stronger and stronger as GNU/Linux systems have taken over more and more markets (first in the 1990s with servers and supercomputers, more recently with mobile devices).

There are other I could name, but these are the ones that popped up off the top of my head.


QuoteI see C64-tan as having a good amount of innate magical ability, since the C64's hardware specs were good for its time. She would also have a lot of spell-books, because of the C64's huge software library, and could do a lot of elaborate spells because of the C64's amazing demoscene. She would use those demoscene spells just for show. I think despite her magic abilities, she would take more pride in the various gadgets and hardware mods she built; in fanon, C64-tan likes to tinker with old hardware.

The VIC-20 was an underpowered machine even upon debut, so VIC-20-tan is physically and magically frail, making up for it with fierce training and hot-blooded determination. She would also have several spellbooks, but needs assistance using most her spells (the better VIC-20 software requires the 16K RAM extension).

C65-tan is very powerful by design, the most magically powerful of the 8-bit Commodore-tans, or even the most magically powerful of the 8-bit computer-tans. She is never able to reach that potential, being a cancelled and unreleased system. Somehow she is still alive, having cheated death for several years now.


Huh, I didn't know any of that. Has this info been jotted down in their wiki articles?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on February 21, 2013, 09:39:02 pm
SO GUYS. I NEED INPUT ON SOMETHING.

Recently I've been working on making a GeneraOS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genera_OS)-tan and Lisp Machine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisp_machine)-tan. Which is all well and good, except I keep running into a very big problem: These two characters are heavily involved in ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (http://foldoc.org/artificial+intelligence), a field which has never been properly "translated" into OS-tan Universe terms.

This is the FOLDOC definition of artificial intelligence:
QuoteThe subfield of computer science concerned with the concepts and methods of symbolic inference by computer and symbolic knowledge representation for use in making inferences. AI can be seen as an attempt to model aspects of human thought on computers. It is also sometimes defined as trying to solve by computer any problem that a human can solve faster.


So, uh, how can that translate to OS-tan terms? Considering that OS-tans - who ARE the computers of their universe, only living, breathing creatures instead of inanimate machines - are already sufficiently humanoid in thought process? Personally, I'm leaning toward AI being the study of artificial intelligence as its known in the OS-tan universe - that is to say, the scientific study of OS-tans themselves, but that comes off as a bit weak to me and I'll gladly hear other theories.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on February 21, 2013, 10:39:22 pm
Hummmmm.

This point needs to be broached at some point when it's not 4:38AM and I'm just about to go to bed... >_>

It has interesting possibilities, to say the least.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on February 21, 2013, 10:45:10 pm
No worries Nej, I'll be here tomorrow. (´・ω・)

In the meantime: Any other takers?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Simonorged on February 22, 2013, 10:48:44 am
Interesting. :)
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Penti-chan on February 22, 2013, 11:25:55 am
An interesting thought.

The best I can come up with at the moment is maybe an AI is to OS-tans as androids are to us. Maybe that's a tad corny, but aside from that, I'm drawing a blank
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Tsubashi on February 22, 2013, 11:33:47 am
I think neuroscience is actually a great idea for translation of AI research. The fields are closely related and comparably progressed. I imagine this could easily be integrated into any number of -tan's designs without becoming cliché.

On the flip side, you could always just translate it as research into biological intelligence, as if it were a stretch for -tan's to conceive of non-artificial intelligence. (The downside being that if Bio-intelligence is a foreign idea, what are users?)

Anyway, that is my two bits.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on February 22, 2013, 11:42:52 am
A WILD TSUBASHI APPEARED

That actually sounds like a good idea, though. AI-science studying the structure of a -tan's brain and the relations between it and its Code and whatnot...

A pretty out-there science indeed, but then again, so is AI science.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on February 22, 2013, 05:18:35 pm
Quote from: Tsubashi on February 22, 2013, 11:33:47 am
I think neuroscience is actually a great idea for translation of AI research. The fields are closely related and comparably progressed. I imagine this could easily be integrated into any number of -tan's designs without becoming cliché.


Ooooh, I really like this idea. It jives quite well with what I was considering - more or less. (That is to say, I was thinking that AI might equal "OS-tan psychology/biology" - which your idea is quite compatible with.)

QuoteOn the flip side, you could always just translate it as research into biological intelligence, as if it were a stretch for -tan's to conceive of non-artificial intelligence. (The downside being that if Bio-intelligence is a foreign idea, what are users?)


That's also an interesting concept, although it wouldn't work in my story canon (and a few others), since humans and OS-tans frequently interact.

Quote from: PentiumMMX on February 22, 2013, 11:25:55 am
The best I can come up with at the moment is maybe an AI is to OS-tans as androids are to us. Maybe that's a tad corny, but aside from that, I'm drawing a blank


Do you mean to say, AI (in the intelligent robot sense of the word, not the scientific discipline) are the androids of the OS-tan universe?
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Penti-chan on February 22, 2013, 05:37:27 pm
Yeah; that's pretty much what I meant. An AI would be like an android in the OS-tan universe
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on February 23, 2013, 03:23:53 pm
Quote from: PentiumMMX on February 22, 2013, 05:37:27 pm
Yeah; that's pretty much what I meant. An AI would be like an android in the OS-tan universe


Hm. I see what you mean, though I am speaking of artificial intelligence, the scientific discipline, not artificial intelligence, the thinking robots. ^^;

Of course, all the OS-tans are technically AI in that they're non-humans who behave like humans .... that said, I think artificial intelligence would work well as the neuroscience / biology / scientific study of OS-tans in the OS-tanverse.


Somebody has to post in /More IBM-tans so I can post my new concepts there. u.u
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on March 02, 2013, 12:34:03 pm
I think I've reached a logical impasse where things won't make sense if I don't introduce the existence of programming language-tans.

Also I'm totes using that "if programming languages were women" list for inspiration / drawing those designs.

*GROANS LOUDLY AND SLIPS OUT OF CHAIR*
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on March 02, 2013, 03:12:51 pm
If PL-tans were to exist, they would - to me - be much more ethereal and strange than the OS-tans themselves, more closely related to Code and their magic than anything else. Spirits, almost.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on March 02, 2013, 04:39:15 pm
Quote from: NejinOniwa on March 02, 2013, 03:12:51 pm
If PL-tans were to exist, they would - to me - be much more ethereal and strange than the OS-tans themselves, more closely related to Code and their magic than anything else. Spirits, almost.


ARE YOU READING MY MIND, GOOD SIR? Because that is exactly what I was thinking! Ovo

Or, to go into more detail - I was thinking of programming language-tans as being the (quasi?) physical manifestations of their respective languages (and whatever sorcery that entails) and treated as something akin to gods of their respective languages / forms of magic. As far as I can tell, they'd have no other role besides overseeing and personifying their languages, so they wouldn't be like OS- and computer-tans, who have proper jobs and routinely interact with human beings and The Real World. Of course, this would probably be on a spectrum - BASIC-tan, who doubles as a sort of operating environment as well as language, would probably have a more corporeal form, whereas straight-up PL-tans would be more ethereal and inaccessible to all but the most devoted / skilled of hackers, programmers and OS-tans.

...

Honestly, there are good arguments to be made for and against PL-tans - in the against column, you have the fact that programming languages are a pretty abstract thing to personify, even in OS-tan universe context (since it's a personification of a language, not a physical piece of hardware, complex application or the bundle of software + kernel that makes up an OS), as well as the whole stickiness involving HOW PL-tans would interact with OS-tans, especially if you already choose to believe that programming languages = various forms of magic for OS-tans (which, IMO, is a pretty sensible way of fitting PL's into the OS-tan universe).

However, if you're for making PL-tans, you can argue that all technological items can be personified in the OS-tan universe - I mean, there's already HDD-tans (http://ostan-collections.net/imeeji/displayimage.php?pos=-7523), drum memory (http://ostan-collections.net/wiki/index.php?title=FASTRAND)- and tape drive-kuns (http://ostan-collections.net/wiki/index.php?title=IBM_728), as well as at least one compiler (http://ostan-collections.net/wiki/index.php?title=TREE-META) - all of which are fairly "abstract" things to personify - so it's not a huge logical leap to suggest that programming languages should be humanized as well. There's also the matter of programming languages that double as simplistic operating systems/operating environments or exist as bootable software - BASIC is the best example of this, there's also MUMPS-11, FOCAL, FORTH and a number of others I'm forgetting or not aware of. There has been talk before of making a BASIC, MUMPS-11 and FOCAL-tan - if we choose to accept bootable programming languages as humanization material, why shouldn't we accept all PL's as such?

Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on March 02, 2013, 07:14:04 pm
The less tangible an object, the less corporeal and "present" in the Open world they will be if they are personalized. I would even go as far as to say that they are only partly real, and only part of the time. They are legends, spirits and ghosts - the spectral backside of the OS-tans' world, and not even the OS-tans themselves are sure if they exist or not.

Besides, I think it's already been established that our view on most theorycrafting done here is basically a hivemind anyway, so I'm not very surprised :)
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on March 02, 2013, 09:58:29 pm
Quote from: NejinOniwa on March 02, 2013, 07:14:04 pm
The less tangible an object, the less corporeal and "present" in the Open world they will be if they are personalized. I would even go as far as to say that they are only partly real, and only part of the time. They are legends, spirits and ghosts - the spectral backside of the OS-tans' world, and not even the OS-tans themselves are sure if they exist or not.


Sounds about right to me. It's interesting you should mention them being almost mythical to the OS-tans, since I was considering the same thing - that they might be a subject of lore to most -tans, though there are surely some exceptions. I imagine BASIC-tan makes herself known quite readily - given her status as DTSS-tan's assistant and beginner-friendly (one might even say beginner-tempting) nature. Lisp-tan is another odd case, since I imagine she has some sort of relationship with Lisp Machine-tan, though I haven't worked out the exact details of it yet. x.x

QuoteBesides, I think it's already been established that our view on most theorycrafting done here is basically a hivemind anyway, so I'm not very surprised :)


At this point, neither am I. :D
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on May 01, 2013, 06:06:28 pm
YO NEJ. This is probably a dumb question, but does Colossus-tan have a human name yet? I can't recall if it was ever mentioned in-story and she doesn't have a wiki article for me to refer to, so...

If not, can I suggest the name Coleen Flowers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Flowers)?

Also, recent reading about DEC has made me want to -tan literally every major PDP release, even the obscure boring ones like the PDP-9 (basically the PDP-7 II), PDP-15 (PDP-7 III), PDP-14 (the PDP-8's slow-witted industrial-controller cousin) and PDP-16 (the possibly-schizophrenic one who didn't know what to do with its life so it did a little of everything without become especially good at anything).

Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: NejinOniwa on May 02, 2013, 03:35:32 am
She doesn't, but I always intended for her not to have one...

We'll see about that.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on May 05, 2013, 09:54:43 pm
But it works so welllllllll. ;0;
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Simonorged on May 15, 2013, 10:12:04 am
Might I suggest that for the wiki Linux XP has a doppleganger darker color scheme.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on May 15, 2013, 11:00:57 am
Quote from: Simonorged on May 15, 2013, 10:12:04 am
Might I suggest that for the wiki Linux XP has a doppleganger darker color scheme.


Go for it. :)

Did you want me to add it to the wiki, or are you planning on doing so yourself? (You'll have to ask one of the Admins for wiki editing permission, since members here aren't by default giving editing permission.)
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Gussy Keniji on May 22, 2013, 01:17:08 pm
Whoooah, now I feel kinda poopy for not being around to be a part of this big move. Looks like theres tons of content to slog through but, from what I've skimmed through we've got some great concepts floating around. I'm gonna read through -errything- and see if I can do some stuff, it's about time I like...I dunno, stopped being dead for a change, anyway.

:V
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Simonorged on May 22, 2013, 02:23:08 pm
@Bella: I not very good so I'll try to draw it out but likely the former.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on May 22, 2013, 09:20:53 pm
Quote from: Gussy Keniji on May 22, 2013, 01:17:08 pm
Whoooah, now I feel kinda poopy for not being around to be a part of this big move. Looks like theres tons of content to slog through but, from what I've skimmed through we've got some great concepts floating around. I'm gonna read through -errything- and see if I can do some stuff, it's about time I like...I dunno, stopped being dead for a change, anyway.

:V


GUSSY-SAN!! GET IN THE CAR! *points at Official OSC Vehicle*

Glad you're liking what you're seeing here! Have you checked on the wiki recently, btw? I haven't been editing much over there lately, but over the past fall / winter I did quite a few renovations.

Quote from: Simonorged on May 22, 2013, 02:23:08 pm
@Bella: I not very good so I'll try to draw it out but likely the former.


Okay!
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Simonorged on May 23, 2013, 02:43:05 pm
Copy pasta recolor.

Color scheme Idea for Linux XP-tan

I did an original drawing as well, just gotta find a scanner.

Used this for color ideas
(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQljYToZ-HVa7CZE8153M3faR2-AgNLfusTcpp1HP9-Cb1xfTZM)
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Halian on March 30, 2019, 02:47:36 am
Random quotes from the Discord server about IRIX-hime headcanons/theories:

Quote from: undefined[2:17 AM] Halian: fills time and wastes space by imagining IRIX-hime dressed casually. Probably jeans and a white/purple baseball tee with the SGI logo, oh and the shades. How heretical.
[2:18 AM] Halian: Then again for someone as vain aesthetically-minded as her, whose everyday outfit is a ball gown, "casual" is probably far less casual than I'm thinking of

[2:26 AM] Halian: I mean as powerful as Solaris-tan and UNIX-sama are, it would be entirely plausible for IRIX-hime to be a low-grade reality warper under the guise of graphical sourcery

[2:33 AM] Halian: Unrelatedly, I headcanon IRIX-hime's shades to be the source of her powers, and perhaps she gets migraines & eventually seizures (or just faints crashes) if she tries to do sourcery without (or perhaps simply if she goes without for prolonged periods of wakeful time), since software acceleration can't hang
[2:39 AM] Halian: wonders how IRIX-hime might have changed after 2006, when SGI dropped support for IRIX, and especially after the buyouts by Rackable & HP Enterprise
[2:40 AM] Halian: especially since her shades can no longer be replaced if something happens (TBH she probably hoards any other examples SGI made for that very reason)

[2:50 AM] Halian: Consider also that SGI's former headquarters are now owned by Google, so IRIX-hime might have Opinions about that
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on March 30, 2019, 10:47:46 am
Quote from: Halian on March 30, 2019, 02:47:36 amRandom quotes from the Discord server about IRIX-hime headcanons/theories:


I agree with all of those headcanons! IRIX isn't an OS I know much about, and I learned some more about it from you, but having a degree of reality warper powers is a fitting way to express her graphical capabilities. The drawbacks to her power also fitting since software acceleration can't hang.

The most casual outfits I can imagine her wearing are ones that still have a futuristic vibe to them, or some 1980's style outfits because they'd go well with her shades. I'd imagine she could wear a basic t-shirt and jeans if she were on a dare!

Not being able to have her shades replaced would probably force her to be very cautious about using her powers, and when to use them. She'd probably be forced to avoid fights too. If she likes to show off, and I assume she does, it'd be a difficult choice.

Having her support dropped and the buyouts would've hurt her morale. OSes that come from long-spanning families where daughters or younger sisters are the successors to the next in the same company, such as the Windows and Mac families all know that it's inevitable that their support will be dropped, usually in a few years. The Unixes are different since almost all of them are from different companies from another, and could each remain current OSes for many years to come. For them to have their support be dropped, it can be a shock to them.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: VolareVia on March 30, 2019, 12:20:23 pm
Quote from: Aurora Borealis on March 30, 2019, 10:47:46 amIf [IRIX-tan] likes to show off, and I assume she does, it'd be a difficult choice.

The only thing I know about IRIX is that the fsn file manager (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fsn_(file_manager)) is a thing, so I can assume that she's a showoff.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Halian on March 31, 2019, 01:19:25 am
Quote from: Aurora Borealis on March 30, 2019, 10:47:46 amI agree with all of those headcanons! IRIX isn't an OS I know much about, and I learned some more about it from you, but having a degree of reality warper powers is a fitting way to express her graphical capabilities. The drawbacks to her power also fitting since software acceleration can't hang.
Nice! ^_^ I also think IRIX-hime being a reality warper makes undue amounts of sense when you look at the names of some of SGI's graphics chipsets (e.g. Infinite Reality).

Quote from: Aurora Borealis on March 30, 2019, 10:47:46 amThe most casual outfits I can imagine her wearing are ones that still have a futuristic vibe to them, or some 1980's style outfits because they'd go well with her shades. I'd imagine she could wear a basic t-shirt and jeans if she were on a dare!
Which makes perfect sense, since she originally came out in 1988 -- either that and/or early 90s outfits, since that time was the zenith of her popularity. Jeans and a T-shirt would be the "oh shit I need to leave the house and all my Real Outfits are in the washer/at the cleaners" absolute last resort. (Also, now I'm imagining IRIX-hime in a kimono on a dare from Windows 95-tan.)

Quote from: Aurora Borealis on March 30, 2019, 10:47:46 amNot being able to have her shades replaced would probably force her to be very cautious about using her powers, and when to use them. She'd probably be forced to avoid fights too. If she likes to show off, and I assume she does, it'd be a difficult choice.
I imagine nowadays she mostly, if not exclusively, uses her graphical sourcery for peaceful ends (and/or brings bodyguards). So her formal job title might well be something to do with A/V or music festivals or etc.

Quote from: Aurora Borealis on March 30, 2019, 10:47:46 amHaving her support dropped and the buyouts would've hurt her morale. OSes that come from long-spanning families where daughters or younger sisters are the successors to the next in the same company, such as the Windows and Mac families all know that it's inevitable that their support will be dropped, usually in a few years. The Unixes are different since almost all of them are from different companies from another, and could each remain current OSes for many years to come. For them to have their support be dropped, it can be a shock to them.

Quote from: VolareVia on March 30, 2019, 12:20:23 pmThe only thing I know about IRIX is that the fsn file manager (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fsn_(file_manager)) is a thing, so I can assume that she's a showoff.
IRIX and associated tools (e.g. Maya, whose manufacturer was owned by SGI for a while) were used a lot to make special effects for films, and were also used for N64 development (as SGI had a hand in developing that console). Her current wiki article reflects this as such with her vanity aesthetic-mindedness (see also: the eye-candy case designs of SGI machines and little things like IRIX' isometric vector icons), so I imagine being a showoff would go hand-in-hand with that. However, I also get the feeling that she's stoic if not emotionless from her straight faces in all three works of art that depict her, so who knows.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Halian on March 31, 2019, 03:18:39 am
Additionally, I like to think that IRIX-hime sometimes wears green (Indigo²), teal (Octane), indigo (IRIS Indigo), purple (Onyx, Indigo², Tezro), black (Onyx), or even red (IRIS Crimson, Fuel).

Additionally additionally, Japanese name idea: Ayame Shoki (書記菖蒲). Ayame means "iris flower", and Shoki means "scribe" (i.e. a literal translation of the surname Clark). Given that IRIX-hime is very likely an artist in her own right, I've headcanoned the punny noms de plume Airiki (藍力 "strength of indigo" or 藍利器 "sharp weapon/useful talent of indigo").
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Bella on April 29, 2019, 02:15:40 pm
A while back I learned that OpenVMS is being maintained by a group of former DEC employees under their own company. I also learned there's an ongoing effort to port VMS to x86.

I believe the story implications for this are VMS-tan being rescued by, and reuniting with, the DEC-tans. Since she's effectively no longer beholden to any company, surrounded by people who know her history, AND not in imminent threat of being displaced again, I imagine she has lost the mask and is generally in a much more relaxed place mentally.

I'm less certain what the implications of VMS on x86 hold for VMS-tan.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Halian on April 30, 2019, 01:51:10 am
I would imagine OpenVMS-tan has Opinions about x86 (and other architectures) thanks to their displacement of VAX and its successor, Alpha.

(I also imagine her running a bait shop and/or marina for some reason.)
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Aurora Borealis on May 05, 2019, 10:28:38 am
Quote from: Bella on April 29, 2019, 02:15:40 pmA while back I learned that OpenVMS is being maintained by a group of former DEC employees under their own company. I also learned there's an ongoing effort to port VMS to x86.

I believe the story implications for this are VMS-tan being rescued by, and reuniting with, the DEC-tans. Since she's effectively no longer beholden to any company, surrounded by people who know her history, AND not in imminent threat of being displaced again, I imagine she has lost the mask and is generally in a much more relaxed place mentally.

I'm less certain what the implications of VMS on x86 hold for VMS-tan.

I don't have anything about the implications of VMS on x86, but what happened to OpenVMS is surprising, but the implications mean that VMS-tan can finally feel a sense of freedom that she hasn't in a long time. Her time spent post-DEC having to for the companies that conquered hers must have been humiliating for her, but as a proprietary OS, the dropping of company support would've been a scary and uncertain fate, and seem even worse. As tough and stoic as VMS-tan is, knowing that company support was going to be dropped still would've been scary for her. In the present day, would she still be the leader of the CIOST, since she set up to support other OS-tans who wanted to keep their independence?


Some other theories that were discussed:

Multics-tan is the only OS-tan who has been established as being resurrected after death, but MTS-tan and CTSS-tan may have also been resurrected after emulators for their OSes were successfully developed. The emulator for MTS was released 1 or 2 years ago, CTSS became open source in 2004, and a successful emulator was developed around 2009. The precedent for deceased OS-tans to be resurrected if working emulators can be built for them is there.

Could Apple I-tan also eventually be resurrected? She could, based on this precedent, but what about the story implications? Would her resurrection could cheapen the loss that Apple II-tan, Lisa-tan and Apple III-tan suffered early in their lives, and the sadness that System 1-tan felt over not being able to meet her. I've known about there being Apple I emulators for many years, but Apple I-tan was deceased and died early for story purposes.

AMIX-tan (Amiga Unix) could've been one of Linux-tan's early mentors: Components of AMIX were open source. They weren't free software because of the proprietary licensing of the rest of AMIX's code, but AMIX-tan could be an early advocate for open sourcery among the Unix-tans, and she looked to mentor anyone who would agree, and was shunned by most of the Unix Family. AMIX-tan was presumed to have died shortly after Commodore's bankruptcy in 1994, so she didn't live to see open source OSes become as prominent as they are now. The last version of AMIX was released in 1992, so near the end of AMIX-tan's life, she wasn't on duty much within the Commodore Fleet that she could've spent a lot of time searching for students she could mentor.

Linux-tan has to be careful to not become what she sought to fight against: In 2006 when the Annex Project continuity was being founded, the Linux OSes were gaining a lot of popularity, but were still underdogs. The Linux Family was growing in power and influence, but had some ways to go. Linux has now become a lot more mainstream, being widely used in servers, mobile devices, and now Windows 10 has the Windows Subsystem for Linux (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Subsystem_for_Linux) compatibility layer. Linux-tan can't see herself and the most prominent members of her family as underdogs so much because of these gains, and risks becoming what she sought to fight against. Despite the schisms that happened within the Linux Family due to the systemd controversy, the branches are still powerful in their own right.

It's been suggested that Unix has been carefully watching Linux-tan's leadership and trying to guide her away from being corrupted by the power she gained. Unix doesn't want to see Linux-tan become the way she used to be, and for the Linux Family to suffer from infighting severe enough to start a war akin to the Unix Wars.
Title: Re: OS-tan Theory Revival
Post by: Penti-chan on May 05, 2019, 01:17:21 pm
So, something I brought up in the Discord, that I feel should be archived here, would be a headcanon I had involving 2k-tan.

During her youth, she used to idolize OS/2 Warp-tan; noting how the NT 5.0 startup sound (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z66OiG73ccI) feels like a mixing of elements from the the one for Warp 4.0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCFdTOaILng) and the one for NT 4.0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXW2mP6BQk8). However, at some point, she became aware of the negative light in which OS/2 Warp-tan views the Windows-tans, and it lead to a desire to differentiate herself; this is signified in the final release of Windows 2000 having a different startup sound altogether (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFkry3zzutI).