Charlotte is saying that the OS should provide ONLY a hardware interface, and TopQuark is saying that would cost millions, since they'd have to strip out all the applications MS currently piles on top.
In estimating costs, you are production-oriented and think only of what it would take to produce something, in this case a piece of code. This is a small portion of the cost, probably the smallest. When computing the price, one has to divide the total cost + proofit target by the customer base. What I said was that, the more specialized preferences are --- Charlotte's or someone else's --- the smaller the customer base and the higher the price.
Qeestion: What, are the "the applications MS currently piles on top?"
Question: What, are the "the applications MS currently piles on top?"
OK. I can live with your answer. I'm not sure I'd agree with it, but I understand your point of view.
The applications are virtually everything--IE, Windows Explorer, Disk defragmenter, calculator, the GUI itself, every program in the "programs" folder when you click the start button. Essentially, the applications that make it user-friendly. Those are applications--not OS.
To be fair, just about every "OS" piles applications on top of their product. But they are still applications. And they are still disparate from the OS itself.