Why can't TempleOS run on modern x86_64 machines?

Question

TempleOS is certainly Intel x86_64, but shy of that there are no guidelines to what machines can run it on the bare metal,

In the FAQ, under "How come it's in the public domain and not GPL?" you can find,

It can run on some bare-metal 64-bit PC's from about 2005-2010 with no layering, libraries, tools, or anything from other sources.

Presumably then there is something about modern x64 bit machines TempleOS can not handle. If so, what are they? What kind of specs does TempleOS require, or what difficulties does it have running on a modern x64 architecture? I know Intel tends to maintain reverse comparability, and I'm not aware of any breaking changes in the architecture.

The README also mentions this, but says it only needs,

• CD/DVD drive
• 64-bit
• 512 megs of ram
• Manual I/O port addressing

Solution

The reason can be found in the TempleOS document Why Not More

I don't stand a chance working on native hardware, anymore. I could install and run natively on hardware from about 2005-2010. It requires BIOS's being nice enough to write USB mode PS/2 legacy keyboard/mouse support. As it turns-out, sometimes the BIOS has PS/2 drivers but purposely disables them, just to be mean. The CIA and whole industry is trying to mess everything up, on purpose. Perhaps, at a point of sale in a store, a thief could hack a credit card machine. Therefore, the BIOS companies actually want it difficult to make drivers and purposely make it broken.

It seems that TempleOS requires PS/2 Emulation for USB devices, or a PS/2 Mouse and Keyboard and that this is what Terry is referring too.

Comments

[Giacomo1968]

This question and answer are pretty interesting. The PS/2 claim especially piqued my interest. So much so I started a new thread on the Security SE site asking if anyone knows where such a claim—that PS/2 devices are more risky—might be coming from.

[OrangeDog]

It's the CIA's fault apparently. Hmm.

[trlkly]

But don't a lot of newer computers still have PS/2 ports? My understanding is that gamers still like them.

[Jörg W Mittag]

@OrangeDog: I find the claim in the quote somewhat dubious. Information Security is the mandate of the NSA, not the CIA. Credit Card Fraud is the mandate of the Secret Service. Maybe the FBI is also involved. The CIA is pretty much the only three-letter agency that has nothing to do with this. Also, the majority of the "whole industry" is in Asia and as such not subject to any US government agency.

[OrangeDog]

@JörgWMittag this may explain it: "Development for TempleOS began in 2003 after Davis suffered from a series of manic episodes that left him briefly hospitalized for mental health issues. According to Davis, TempleOS is of 'Divine' intellect due to the inspired nature of the code."

[Giacomo1968]

@OrangeDog Oh, wow… “According to Davis, God said to create the operating system with 640x480, 16 colors display and a single audio voice.”

[Margaret Bloom]

@JörgWMittag The whole OS is falling apart from a security point of view. Just read the introduction page. It makes no sense to take seriously any hint about security.

[Peter Cordes]

@MargaretBloom: The guy who writes it might be a talented programmer, but Terry doesn't even know everything about x86-64 asm. I replied to him re: his x86-64 asm quiz that he posted in a comment on software.intel.com/en-us/articles/introduction-to-x64-assemb‌​ly. Turns out he doesn't believe that x86-64 can encode [fs: abs disp32] addressing modes. The assembler he wrote can't, and even after several emails showing him the exact byte encoding he refused to even try it. I stopped trying after he called me the N-word (which is weird because I'm not black, but still off-putting).

[Evan Carroll]

He clearly struggles with his own mental problems and caution should be taken when dealing with Terry directly. While no one deserves nor has to tolerate being called the N-word, I think he's doing the best with what he has. It's truly a moral gray area: what's the right thing to do when someone is verbally abusive because of a verifiable mental condition? Insofar as I can see, it's to ignore it as you would any problem of condition and not volition.

[Evan Carroll]

And, I doubt anyone has the x86_64 skills that @PeterCordes has anyway. =)

[Peter Cordes]

@EvanCarroll: At the time I didn't know he had mental problems, but now that you point it out (and now that I've read the intro to TempleOS that Jake and OrangeDog quoted / linked), apparently I was blaspheming against his divine inspiration. He wrote his own assembler, which is why I thought it was really weird that he didn't know all the addressing modes supported by x86-64. That's hardly unique knowledge that only I have! It's well documented in Intel's manual. Using NASM instead of Temple reminds you of that point all the time, though, because default abs is the default, not rel.

[forest]

@PeterCordes He calls everyone the N-word. He's mentioned before that he's not racist, but when he does not take his meds, he has a strong urge to use that word (and a particular fear of "CIA India N-words" which he thinks are out to get him). He's apologized about his use of that before whenever he is not having a psychotic episode. And I believe he hates x86-64 and only wants to use regular x86.