If an OS does not support memory, processor, device and file management should it be still considered an OS? What is the minimum features should an OS have to be considered an OS (there is no right answer to this question, and is constantly debated in the industry). Be sure to support your response.
An operating system can be thought of as the link between the computer hardware and the software that is used to perform various tasks. Without an operating system the software applications and computer hardware itself cannot function.
Each operating system usually consists of several features, among them memory, processor, device and file management but there are also networking features, security and I/O functions to be considered. Due to the similar nature of computer hardware then many operating systems will require most, if not all of those functions. However, from a technical perspective if we examine the interaction between the core computer hardware and the system applications then it is possible to narrow down those functions that can be deemed essential.
The core of the operating system, usually known as the kernel, provides the most basic level of control over the hardware. We can assume that the hardware would consist at the very least of a CPU, Memory and various Devices and the kernel would be responsible for managing each of these as required by any user interaction or application request. While this may be a functioning operating system, practically File management would be required and increasingly security and network functions can be considered as mandatory given the modern utilisation of applications and operating systems.