The next leap, I think will be when internet service providers are bought out by the hardware makers. Or vice versa? Everything tech will come in a bundle - and it will be global/multi-language and come with content. One ring to rule them all type stuff.
Then again, with the Agentic Economy, who knows, there could be a currency-based consolidation. Not sure what that all means for the OS. Maybe look at the payment and finance systems first and work backwards. You do some work for someone, how are they going to pay you and how are you going to spend the money?
The next big OS leap is a capabilities based security with a microkernel. The old model of assuming you wanted to share your authority with everything you run is unsustainable. It should have been a thing at least 20 years ago.
>>Please elaborate. How does this resonate with the average user who doesn't know anything about infosec?
Elaboration, with too much pop culture... ;-)
When you use cash, for example, you're using capabilities. You can hand out exactly $3.50 to the Loch Ness Monster[1], and no matter what, he's not going to be able to leverage that into taking out your entire bank balance, etc.
The current "ambient authority" system is like handing the Loch Ness Monster your wallet, and HOPING he only takes $3.50.
Another metaphor is power outlets, which limit how much of the power from the grid makes it to your device. The current system is much like the electric - i - cal, at the Douglass house in Green Acres.[2]
The point is, you can run any program you want, and give it only the files you want, and nothing else, by default in such a system. For the user, it really doesn't have to seem that different, they already use dialog boxes to select files to open and save things, they could use a "power box"[3] instead, which looks the same, except then the OS enforces their choices.
Nope, that sounds like a small iteration on UX, not a revolution, so it is not worth the massive cultural change to make it happen. After all, despite what tech folk think, most people really dislike change.
So we'll probably stick with what we've got until AI is truly empowered to change things, which we are probably a decade away from. At that point, it is far more likely that AI will be taking in full audio, video, and data from your environment, and will know you well enough that the mundane tasks will just happen, without need for any UX at all. Maybe a small device for you to tweak things and control non-standard tasks.
But again, that is a decade off, if not two. We're currently headed into the first downturn of the AI-driven world, when the hype dies, people really spell out the problems, platforms realize that most people don't want generative AI, and all of this quiets down, taking a back burner for 7-10 years while the research advances to move beyond today's problems and evolves into what people might actually want.
Does anyone actually ask for this? What problem is it solving other than following the hype?
One of the main things I've gotten out of the whole OpenClaw/Moltbot/Clawdbot situation is that the general public has a dangerously low grasp on information security. There's usefulness to that type of assistant, but I have yet to see a compelling, general consumer take on it.
I think that, for the first time in tech history, we have the tools to step away from ineffective app installs and menu cluttering and memorization and that is a rather big thing.
If you don't agree, take a step back and tell me how many people prefer navigating a terminal window using a keyboard instead of a graphic interface using a mouse.
The future belongs to a more frictionless, no keyboard, voice activated UI, IMHO.
Many professionals, not even necessarily in IT prefer the "green screen", because it enables them to do things faster with a few key-strokes, instead of having to click around in laggy menues.
I guess, maybe because you don't know it any better(systems and device form factors), you're trying to correct an already dumbed down(for mass acceptance) interface paradigm, with one which is even more indirect and imprecise.
I can't tell how this is developing, and which parts will be adopted by the masses, if offered at all, and which wont, and how that will change what the few remaining professionals do.
I'm just thinking it's not as clear-cut as you make it to be, as the past shows, multiple times. For whichever, maybe technically unrelated reasons.
Also "use it or lose it" and "learned helplessness" comes to mind.
Or maybe the next big OS leap is decentralization along with data sovereignity. Each person being their own server without so many dependencies to clouds and huge processing/database power inside their own pockets.
From that perspective the operating system are a few apps on the browser since that is that users see and get their dopamine rush.
In my opinion users won't choose a future where sovereignity matters. It is a future forced upon them, because they will simply pick whatever methods are still available for communicating.
We used to see this only in a few edge countries like NK and Cuba. Now it is becoming the norm on Russia, Iran, China, Japan and more recently even Europe if you follow the most recent developments. What was once an open garden is becoming quite fenced.
Nope, because we already could have had that with VR/AR glasses, and while there are some (even impressive) options now, they aren't mainstream. Neither are the 'apps', nor the content interoperable, exchangable.
Furthermore I see nothing wrong with the desktop metaphor, it's just that we mostly only had a miserable magnifying glass, giving only a small viewport into a crammed childs toy, instead of real large high-resolution screens as can be had now, or sensible virtual desktops for more common sizes. To be expanded by "Metisse", an early 2.5D extension for FVWM, and later "User Interface Faćades". Maybe with some Zoomable UI sprinkled on top, like in https://eaglemode.sourceforge.net/ or whatever the clandestine weirdos from https://arcan-fe.com/ may come up with. (IF. EVER.)
AR/VR development in this space is a massive timesink for all the wrong reasons.
Hardware vendors absolutely suck here. Everyone is openly or quietly dreaming of the vertically integrated 'app-store tax' being their real source of revenue rather than selling devices.
This means that if you don't want to fuzz around with half-baked proprietary SDKs that break more often than they do what they're supposed to, you get to sit around reverse engineering. As fun as that can be, it's much less so when that is not what you set out to be doing. Half my electronics 'donation boards bin' is discarded HMDs and input devices by now.
Even in the quirky missed opportunities like Tilt5 you have this situation.
There are other 'glasses' systems in industrial use, giving engineers/technicians plans overlaid into their augmented reality. Usually voice activated. So that exists. Less cumbersome than that Apple or Metaverse stuff. Because industrial users won't have any of that. (mostly)
Why does everyone think people want to talk to their computers? There are so many places where talking isn’t appropriate.
The next leap, I think will be when internet service providers are bought out by the hardware makers. Or vice versa? Everything tech will come in a bundle - and it will be global/multi-language and come with content. One ring to rule them all type stuff.
Then again, with the Agentic Economy, who knows, there could be a currency-based consolidation. Not sure what that all means for the OS. Maybe look at the payment and finance systems first and work backwards. You do some work for someone, how are they going to pay you and how are you going to spend the money?
The next big OS leap is a capabilities based security with a microkernel. The old model of assuming you wanted to share your authority with everything you run is unsustainable. It should have been a thing at least 20 years ago.
>>Please elaborate. How does this resonate with the average user who doesn't know anything about infosec?
Elaboration, with too much pop culture... ;-)
When you use cash, for example, you're using capabilities. You can hand out exactly $3.50 to the Loch Ness Monster[1], and no matter what, he's not going to be able to leverage that into taking out your entire bank balance, etc.
The current "ambient authority" system is like handing the Loch Ness Monster your wallet, and HOPING he only takes $3.50.
Another metaphor is power outlets, which limit how much of the power from the grid makes it to your device. The current system is much like the electric - i - cal, at the Douglass house in Green Acres.[2]
The point is, you can run any program you want, and give it only the files you want, and nothing else, by default in such a system. For the user, it really doesn't have to seem that different, they already use dialog boxes to select files to open and save things, they could use a "power box"[3] instead, which looks the same, except then the OS enforces their choices.
[1] https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-Loch-Ness-monster-want-3-...
[2] https://youtu.be/EnGyq2JYrHk?si=c2iTB9BYxB0VwZ9u&t=184
[3] https://wiki.c2.com/?PowerBox
Please elaborate. How does this resonate with the average user who doesn't know anything about infosec.
Good stuff, tks
Nope, that sounds like a small iteration on UX, not a revolution, so it is not worth the massive cultural change to make it happen. After all, despite what tech folk think, most people really dislike change.
So we'll probably stick with what we've got until AI is truly empowered to change things, which we are probably a decade away from. At that point, it is far more likely that AI will be taking in full audio, video, and data from your environment, and will know you well enough that the mundane tasks will just happen, without need for any UX at all. Maybe a small device for you to tweak things and control non-standard tasks.
But again, that is a decade off, if not two. We're currently headed into the first downturn of the AI-driven world, when the hype dies, people really spell out the problems, platforms realize that most people don't want generative AI, and all of this quiets down, taking a back burner for 7-10 years while the research advances to move beyond today's problems and evolves into what people might actually want.
Ok
Does anyone actually ask for this? What problem is it solving other than following the hype?
One of the main things I've gotten out of the whole OpenClaw/Moltbot/Clawdbot situation is that the general public has a dangerously low grasp on information security. There's usefulness to that type of assistant, but I have yet to see a compelling, general consumer take on it.
I think that, for the first time in tech history, we have the tools to step away from ineffective app installs and menu cluttering and memorization and that is a rather big thing.
If you don't agree, take a step back and tell me how many people prefer navigating a terminal window using a keyboard instead of a graphic interface using a mouse.
The future belongs to a more frictionless, no keyboard, voice activated UI, IMHO.
And, BTW, according to Henry Ford, if he listened to his customers, he would have gone after faster horses.
Most people don't see innovation until it is materialized in front of them.
Many professionals, not even necessarily in IT prefer the "green screen", because it enables them to do things faster with a few key-strokes, instead of having to click around in laggy menues.
I guess, maybe because you don't know it any better(systems and device form factors), you're trying to correct an already dumbed down(for mass acceptance) interface paradigm, with one which is even more indirect and imprecise.
Yup. Many like tens of thousands out of billions. Makes sense.
Trillions of flies eat shit. Makes sense?
You cannot be seriously thinking that the future lies in memorizing commands and typing words one stroke at a time on a keyboard.
We are already seeing traditional coding evaporate overnight, let alone have people memorize commands and type it like we were in the 19th century.
I can't tell how this is developing, and which parts will be adopted by the masses, if offered at all, and which wont, and how that will change what the few remaining professionals do.
I'm just thinking it's not as clear-cut as you make it to be, as the past shows, multiple times. For whichever, maybe technically unrelated reasons.
Also "use it or lose it" and "learned helplessness" comes to mind.
Tks for sharing your views on this
Or maybe the next big OS leap is decentralization along with data sovereignity. Each person being their own server without so many dependencies to clouds and huge processing/database power inside their own pockets.
I have difficulty to see that, as it requires proper packaging and distribution for mainstream adoption.
Plus the average user doesn't care about data sovereignty, what they care about is UX and dopamine.
How many users you know of that are concerned with data collection by big tech? How much does that account for percent wise?
From that perspective the operating system are a few apps on the browser since that is that users see and get their dopamine rush.
In my opinion users won't choose a future where sovereignity matters. It is a future forced upon them, because they will simply pick whatever methods are still available for communicating.
We used to see this only in a few edge countries like NK and Cuba. Now it is becoming the norm on Russia, Iran, China, Japan and more recently even Europe if you follow the most recent developments. What was once an open garden is becoming quite fenced.
Nope, because we already could have had that with VR/AR glasses, and while there are some (even impressive) options now, they aren't mainstream. Neither are the 'apps', nor the content interoperable, exchangable.
Furthermore I see nothing wrong with the desktop metaphor, it's just that we mostly only had a miserable magnifying glass, giving only a small viewport into a crammed childs toy, instead of real large high-resolution screens as can be had now, or sensible virtual desktops for more common sizes. To be expanded by "Metisse", an early 2.5D extension for FVWM, and later "User Interface Faćades". Maybe with some Zoomable UI sprinkled on top, like in https://eaglemode.sourceforge.net/ or whatever the clandestine weirdos from https://arcan-fe.com/ may come up with. (IF. EVER.)
There's been a closed version of https://arcan-fe.com/2021/04/12/introducing-pipeworld/ that was VR centric as well as wilder 'layouters' to https://arcan-fe.com/2018/03/29/safespaces-an-open-source-vr... that is still around in my piles here somewhere.
For a handful of reasons (abusive and hostile actors being at the top) we focus elsewhere (https://www.divergent-desktop.org/blog/2026/01/26/a12web/ and https://arcan-fe.com/2025/01/27/sunsetting-cursed-terminal-e...).
AR/VR development in this space is a massive timesink for all the wrong reasons. Hardware vendors absolutely suck here. Everyone is openly or quietly dreaming of the vertically integrated 'app-store tax' being their real source of revenue rather than selling devices.
This means that if you don't want to fuzz around with half-baked proprietary SDKs that break more often than they do what they're supposed to, you get to sit around reverse engineering. As fun as that can be, it's much less so when that is not what you set out to be doing. Half my electronics 'donation boards bin' is discarded HMDs and input devices by now.
Even in the quirky missed opportunities like Tilt5 you have this situation.
Who said people want to wear goggles? I mean, seriously, what on earth is Apple Vision Pro??
Voice is natural, it is fluid, it conveys emotion, intent.
You cannot seriously be comparing metaverse immersion BS with voice commanded devices.
There are other 'glasses' systems in industrial use, giving engineers/technicians plans overlaid into their augmented reality. Usually voice activated. So that exists. Less cumbersome than that Apple or Metaverse stuff. Because industrial users won't have any of that. (mostly)
Yeah. I see that working.
But one thing is seeing the content and another thing is interacting with the UI to accomplish an office task, for instance.
I see it as a rather logical step with the advances in voice first AI wearables.
Think about it. Not everyone wants to be recorded as a bystander. Privacy will be an issue.
The technology for audio signature already exists and works fine.
It will be a matter of opt-in/opt-out from users, not an OS decision.