Talk:MenuetOS

message: Just a few objective (in my opinion) phrases that I feel should be altered. Some could say that these phrases are fact, so I thought I'd make sure by asking a few others. Should be fairly quick to clean up and set straight though.
86.2.11.128 15:36, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I've taken a stab at it and removed the NPOV tag. ERobson 02:38, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Objectivity

message: Would someone who is an expert on this subject please contribute to the Menuet entry on the AMD64 page?  Thank you! Jeh 23:31, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: AMD64

message: Windowed hello world program source code available at http://www.menuetos.net/e64.asm. --Easyas12c 07:20, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hello world 

message: I'm suggesting a split to the original MenuetOS and the new 64-bit MenuetOS. There are multiple reasons for this. Most importantly the other is free software, while the other is not. --Easyas12c 20:42, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No it is not. Kernel source code is still missing. Which is a violation of freedom 1, from The Free Software Definition. --Easyas12c 21:21, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Freeware and opensource are two different things but both are free to download and use.--Frozenport 22:04, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And free software is a third thing that gives you the rights listed in The Free Software Definition.--Easyas12c 07:35, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

text: No, I wouldn't. There is no point because they are both non-free software and essentially the same product. Also note that MenuetOS is written in FASM which is an assembly language that can't just be recompiled to another architecture, but often requires some serious rewriting. --Easyas12c 21:21, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Does this matter? Both versions atempt to support the same type of application and have very very similiar source codes... Not to say that the topic should not be seperated with headers but if the topic is seperated tottaly it would make information about both versions of the same OS harder to find.--Frozenport 22:04, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It complicates writing the article and makes the article prone to errors. It also prevents the 32-bit version from being  put in :Category:Free_software. --Easyas12c 07:39, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why is it necessary to split a topic just to make it fit in the :Category:Free_software catagory? I believe that this will further obscure an OS that needs as much publicity as it can get.--Frozenport 20:58, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split 

message: From http://www.menuetos.net/m64l.txt
Menuet64 Copyright (c) 2005-2007 Ville Turjanmaa
0) Free for personal and educational use.
1) Contact menuetos.net for commercial use.
2) Redistribution prohibited without permission.
That falls under the classification of a propietary license. I think that Wikipedia readers, who go to the link and don't know what to make of it, should instead be warned about it in the box, thus having "License: Propietary". --W2bh 17:52, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Menuet License 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on MenuetOS. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070114203948/http://kamidake.other-space.com/ to http://www.menuetos.net/m64l.txt
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:41, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified