thomtl wrote:
Building an operating system like ctOS is practically impossible to build for one person
I have never played the game, but I have looked up something about it, and I would say you are being too generous here. Building a "Hollywood Operating System" of that sort is impossible, period. Windmills don't... sorry, I mean
computers don't work that way.
While that sort of pervasive 'master control program' which has been ported to all sorts of devices isn't as absurd as, say, the LCARS system in
Star Trek, or the many, many talking AIs in all sorts of films and games, it just isn't realistic. Even when you look at the nigh-ubiquitous Linux kernels, there are serious limits as to which kinds of devices it will run on, and the different versions are often quite different from each other.
thomtl wrote:
and an iot operating system still requires a lot of knowledge. I would advise you to first create a normal 32bit x86 Protected mode os and then maybe move on to an iot os.
While I would say that an OS for a single-board computer (Raspberry Pi being the obvious choice - despite the flaws which Zaval will be sure to point out as soon as this gets posted - simply through dint of its extensive documentation and support) would be closer to the OP's intentions, I have to agree that the sheer volume of information and support available for PCs compared to pretty much any other hardware has to be taken into consideration.
However, one has to use their judgement here, as there is also a lot more
bad and/or outdated information about PCs, compared to newer and less ubiquitous platforms.
I would also argue that one has to balance the amount of documentation for PCs with the facts that
- hardly any IoT hardware is based on x86 CPUs;
- The x86 ISA is (IMAO) a particularly difficult one to work with, especially compared to (for example) ARM, MIPS, or the up-and-coming RISC-V designs;
- PC hardware is much more complex than an SBC, simply by dint of being a class of hardware systems from a variety of manufacturers, rather than a single product line from a specific company;
- the original PC design it is rooted in was from an earlier era when a lot of things we now consider bad design were common;
- even in its day, the PC design was considered a poor one by hardware designers;
- in the intervene 37 years since it was introduced, the PC platform has accumulated a vast amount of baggage which a newer, cleaner design won't have.
In some ways, an SBC might be a better choice after all.
But then, I really, really hate a lot about the PC platform in general, and the x86 ISA in particular. Take my opinions on it with a grain of salt.