Operating Systems and Kittler

"Digitality" means simply to not exist. Everything that is anything has a mass, takes up an amount of space equal to its shape and weight. To be digital, is to be something, without actually being something. How is this possible? How can something exist but not really exist? It is the way that our bodies transmit thoughts and sensations, electrical impulses that shoot in every which way. Do our thoughts exist? They exist only in the subatomic particles that are used as stimuli to nodes in the brain. This is how a computer's hardware functions. For Kittler to say that "the bulk of written texts do not exist anymore in perceivable time and space" (There is no Software p.2) is precisely to say that they are beyond existence. They do not live, they do not die, they are eternal as long as they are understood by the hardware of machines. Interfaces are the links for humans to the physical electrical components of these machines. For the common individual interacting directly with the computer's hardware is impossible, that is where software comes in. It is the invisible harness that allows the "average Joe" to utilize the machine. The most important interface on any computer is the operating system. It is the control system that allows the user to have complete manipulation over the currents and pathways, the circuitry and the signals of the hardware. All other software's fall under the operating systems software. What are software's hiding? And are software's a never ending cycle of repetition and confusion?

Kittler states that software is an attempt at hiding the workings of the machine from the user. "On the contrary, the so-called philosophy of the computer community tends to systematically obscure hardware by software, electronic signifiers by interfaces between formal and everyday languages." (TINS p.2) So essentially, software converts the natural reactions of atoms into common language to be understood. With operating systems, let's say Macintosh's OS X, the functionality is reliant upon two things, the users knowledge and the machines capabilities. The OS is completely freeing to the normal user, allowing them to do what they please without many constraints. The needs of the users vary, which means the demands of the software shall too vary. However, the issue of compatibility remains constant with competing systems, Windows and Macintosh, the cross-demands between users requires softwares to be written for both OS's. The OS exists as a platform for every other working of the computer. In this sense it is the ultimate interface because the user interacts with a software, the software rests on other softwares and eventually through the OS is transmitted to the hardware. We the users don't see those interactions, in fact we see nothing other than the excited pixels on our displays. We remain dumb and oblivious.

With Mac OS X, the interface is completely useless in and of itself without software. Software brings the OS to life. It is merely a platform that allows other softwares to exist. It is actually a strange relationship between the platform, the tools (software) and the hardware. Essentially there are different layers to interfaces, information passes through multiple levels in order to be fully deciphered into commands. Again, it is a reoccurring theme, that of complete oblivion to the functioning of the systems. The interfaces are seemingly transparent to what we desire to accomplish. With Mac OS X the suite of softwares that come with it (iLife) is the starting point for any function of the computer. It is a confusing vortex of softwares, one software is dependent on another, which is then dependent on another, and so on and so forth. However, the engineers are good at what they do because to the normal user it is seamless.

What is this box in front of me? I don't understand the first thing about the workings of my laptop's hardware. This doesn't matter, I am able to do what I need with it. I ask nothing more of it except maybe to be a bit quicker at times. Does this mean that I don't need the body? Or is the body just invisible to me as a physical thing? Kittler states, "identifying physical hardware with the algorithm forged for its computation has finally got rid of hardware itself. " (TINS p. 3) Yet without the hardware software is literally nothing. Kittler talks about how in Germany there was a legal dispute over whether or not software should be considered a mental property. They concluded that software is material because it relies on material to function. Just as our mental functions rely on our physical bodies survival, so to does the software rely on the hardware. So to completely negate the importance of this box in front of me, to be blind to its functions is precisely to forget the very thing that allows me the freedom of the virtual world. My interface wants me to be oblivious, because in the fast paced modern world it is unnecessary to understand the electrical signals for everyday use.

"Software, if it existed would just be a billion dollar deal based on the cheapest elements on earth." (TINS p.4) The doors to nearly everything imaginable is just a click away. All that happens is digital information transfer through wireless routers into my hard drive. To think that something that isn't tangible can be worth so much is mind boggling. Just as in 'Second Life' when people sell the virtual property to others for real money, how can one own a space in a virtual world? This also raises questions of whether or not software creators should have some rights to money acquired through their softwares. Even writers who use Word and then sell a million copies of their books, should the programmers have some rights to the revenue? As we progress more into a digital age, these are the questions that will confront. As the softwares values increase, so to will money making ploys, security, control/freedom, and transparency.