>>11487823Companies are from my experience a bit to impassive to reasoning other than "picking the person with the correct degree." Not that they wont consider you, but it's less likely that they will if there's four other people applying and they all have far more "desirable" degrees and qualifications to the company.
>>11487845Computer manufacturers don't sell that kind of product because from a feasibility standpoint, we can make the best operating system by dividing the effort across specialised labour in a large collaborative effort, and if it's ineffective for a certain task we have the producing capital and labour to try optimise it as much as possible. It also allows high-level application development and distribution to be sustainable and have co-functionality regardless of the system purpose or operations. So therefore, it's just the better product to invest in to. To be more specific, the further away you move the low-level functionality of computers the less commonality between them. Very easily causes enormous issues in practical use.
Boot -> terminal was a decade and a half worth of effort. And you definitely want a BIOS, I can only tell you that. Imagine the instruction sets they had to manually dot in somehow to the first ROM carts, loaded in to make a system that could even start writing a more sophisticated BIOS. Nowadays you may ask questions because when you look at a computer, you see it layer from binary language to assembly language to some miscellaneous stack of high level crap, but the reality is that it's all binary in the end. It gets compiled, and executed back. All that really matters is how optimal the binary code it produces is.
I don't know why I spent so long answering this. I wrote a lot more but I deleted it and gave up.
