Questões de Concurso
Sobre interpretação de texto | reading comprehension em inglês
Foram encontradas 13.083 questões
Ano: 2009
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
INMETRO
Prova:
CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2009 - INMETRO - Todos os Cargos - Parte I |
Q49186
Inglês
Texto associado
Based on the text, judge the items from 29 through 38.
Based on the text, judge the items from 29 through 38.
Globalization and trade have been facing problems due to market demands on developing countries.
Ano: 2009
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
INMETRO
Prova:
CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2009 - INMETRO - Todos os Cargos - Parte I |
Q49185
Inglês
Texto associado
Based on the text, judge the items from 29 through 38.
Based on the text, judge the items from 29 through 38.
Developed countries face globalization as a chance to increase their industrial base.
Ano: 2009
Banca:
CESGRANRIO
Órgão:
BNDES
Provas:
CESGRANRIO - 2009 - BNDES - Profissional Básico - Análise de Sistemas - Desenvolvimento
|
CESGRANRIO - 2009 - BNDES - Profissional Básico - Biblioteconomia |
Q47391
Inglês
From the fragment "But the software can only supplement human judgement - because people don't always mean what they say." (lines 66-68), we may infer that the author
Ano: 2009
Banca:
CESGRANRIO
Órgão:
BNDES
Provas:
CESGRANRIO - 2009 - BNDES - Profissional Básico - Análise de Sistemas - Desenvolvimento
|
CESGRANRIO - 2009 - BNDES - Profissional Básico - Biblioteconomia |
Q47389
Inglês
In the example given in paragraphs 5 and 6 (lines 39-63), the author explains that the
Ano: 2009
Banca:
CESGRANRIO
Órgão:
BNDES
Provas:
CESGRANRIO - 2009 - BNDES - Profissional Básico - Análise de Sistemas - Desenvolvimento
|
CESGRANRIO - 2009 - BNDES - Profissional Básico - Biblioteconomia |
Q47385
Inglês
"holiday hell" and "abuse helpline" (lines 36-37) are quoted in the text to illustrate cases in which the computers will
Ano: 2009
Banca:
CESGRANRIO
Órgão:
BNDES
Provas:
CESGRANRIO - 2009 - BNDES - Profissional Básico - Análise de Sistemas - Desenvolvimento
|
CESGRANRIO - 2009 - BNDES - Profissional Básico - Biblioteconomia |
Q47384
Inglês
Which of the following statements is NOT true about how the software processes emotional analysis?
Ano: 2009
Banca:
CESGRANRIO
Órgão:
BNDES
Provas:
CESGRANRIO - 2009 - BNDES - Profissional Básico - Análise de Sistemas - Desenvolvimento
|
CESGRANRIO - 2009 - BNDES - Profissional Básico - Biblioteconomia |
Q47383
Inglês
According to the text, the software developed by Pulman and Moilanen
Ano: 2009
Banca:
CESGRANRIO
Órgão:
BNDES
Provas:
CESGRANRIO - 2009 - BNDES - Profissional Básico - Análise de Sistemas - Desenvolvimento
|
CESGRANRIO - 2009 - BNDES - Profissional Básico - Biblioteconomia |
Q47382
Inglês
The best title for this text is
Ano: 2009
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
ANTAQ
Provas:
CESPE - 2009 - ANTAQ - Analista Administrativo - Informática
|
CESPE - 2009 - ANTAQ - Especialista em Regulação - Economia |
CESPE - 2009 - ANTAQ - Especialista em Regulação - Engenharia Ambiental ou Biologia |
Q46919
Inglês
Texto associado
Sharks in the water
In the last year, Somalia's pirates have attacked 120 vessels in the Gulf of Aden, choking commerce in a critical shipping lane (the transit route for 20 percent of the world's oil), blocking aid supplies and driving up transport costs.
The last few weeks have shown how hard it will be to defeat the pirates on the high seas, which seems like the international community's approach. When British Marines tried to board a captured fishing dhow on Nov. 11, they had to go in with guns blazing and killed one possible hostage in the process. A week later, an Indian warship opened fire on what it thought was a pirate mother ship. But the target turned out to be a Thai fishing vessel. When pirates seized their most valuable prize ever on Nov. 15 - the Sirius Star supertanker holding 2 million barrels of Saudi crude - everyone kept their distance.
As this suggests, Somalia's seaborne bandits are making a mockery of all efforts to stop them. Pirates have only increased their efforts, ranging across an area bigger than the Mediterranean. The Sirius Star was taken 450 nautical miles southeast of Kenya, and with it, the Somalis now hold 300 hostages and 15 ships.
The Somalia's internationally recognized transitional government has invited foreign navies to do what's necessary to stop the pirates, even attacking them ashore if need be. The Security Council has affirmed that option. Moreover, nearly all of Somalia's pirates come from one region (Puntland), live in a single town (Boosaaso) and stash captured vessels in one of three ports (Eyl, Hobyo or Haradhere) - making interdiction that much easier. Andrew Linington of Nautilus UK, a seaman's union that has had many of its members taken hostage, says the international community "knows where the pirates are, they know the ports they use, they know the mother ships. Stopping them could be done," he says. But that would be expensive at a time when U.S. resources are tied up in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Rod Nordlant. Sharks in the water. Internet: (adapted).
According to the text, it is correct to affirm that
In the last year, Somalia's pirates have attacked 120 vessels in the Gulf of Aden, choking commerce in a critical shipping lane (the transit route for 20 percent of the world's oil), blocking aid supplies and driving up transport costs.
The last few weeks have shown how hard it will be to defeat the pirates on the high seas, which seems like the international community's approach. When British Marines tried to board a captured fishing dhow on Nov. 11, they had to go in with guns blazing and killed one possible hostage in the process. A week later, an Indian warship opened fire on what it thought was a pirate mother ship. But the target turned out to be a Thai fishing vessel. When pirates seized their most valuable prize ever on Nov. 15 - the Sirius Star supertanker holding 2 million barrels of Saudi crude - everyone kept their distance.
As this suggests, Somalia's seaborne bandits are making a mockery of all efforts to stop them. Pirates have only increased their efforts, ranging across an area bigger than the Mediterranean. The Sirius Star was taken 450 nautical miles southeast of Kenya, and with it, the Somalis now hold 300 hostages and 15 ships.
The Somalia's internationally recognized transitional government has invited foreign navies to do what's necessary to stop the pirates, even attacking them ashore if need be. The Security Council has affirmed that option. Moreover, nearly all of Somalia's pirates come from one region (Puntland), live in a single town (Boosaaso) and stash captured vessels in one of three ports (Eyl, Hobyo or Haradhere) - making interdiction that much easier. Andrew Linington of Nautilus UK, a seaman's union that has had many of its members taken hostage, says the international community "knows where the pirates are, they know the ports they use, they know the mother ships. Stopping them could be done," he says. But that would be expensive at a time when U.S. resources are tied up in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Rod Nordlant. Sharks in the water. Internet:
According to the text, it is correct to affirm that
Judge the following items according to the text.
All of Somalia's pirates come from one region, what makes their interdiction quite easy.
All of Somalia's pirates come from one region, what makes their interdiction quite easy.
Ano: 2009
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
ANTAQ
Provas:
CESPE - 2009 - ANTAQ - Analista Administrativo - Qualquer Área de Formação
|
CESPE - 2009 - ANTAQ - Analista Administrativo - Informática |
CESPE - 2009 - ANTAQ - Especialista em Regulação - Economia |
CESPE - 2009 - ANTAQ - Analista Administrativo - Ciências Contábeis |
CESPE - 2009 - ANTAQ - Analista Administrativo - Arquivologia |
CESPE - 2009 - ANTAQ - Especialista em Regulação - Engenharia Civil |
CESPE - 2009 - ANTAQ - Especialista em Regulação - Engenharia Naval ou Engenharia Mecânica |
CESPE - 2009 - ANTAQ - Especialista em Regulação - Estatística |
CESPE - 2009 - ANTAQ - Especialista em Regulação - Qualquer Área de Formação |
CESPE - 2009 - ANTAQ - Especialista em Regulação - Engenharia Ambiental ou Biologia |
Q46918
Inglês
Texto associado
Sharks in the water
In the last year, Somalia's pirates have attacked 120 vessels in the Gulf of Aden, choking commerce in a critical shipping lane (the transit route for 20 percent of the world's oil), blocking aid supplies and driving up transport costs.
The last few weeks have shown how hard it will be to defeat the pirates on the high seas, which seems like the international community's approach. When British Marines tried to board a captured fishing dhow on Nov. 11, they had to go in with guns blazing and killed one possible hostage in the process. A week later, an Indian warship opened fire on what it thought was a pirate mother ship. But the target turned out to be a Thai fishing vessel. When pirates seized their most valuable prize ever on Nov. 15 - the Sirius Star supertanker holding 2 million barrels of Saudi crude - everyone kept their distance.
As this suggests, Somalia's seaborne bandits are making a mockery of all efforts to stop them. Pirates have only increased their efforts, ranging across an area bigger than the Mediterranean. The Sirius Star was taken 450 nautical miles southeast of Kenya, and with it, the Somalis now hold 300 hostages and 15 ships.
The Somalia's internationally recognized transitional government has invited foreign navies to do what's necessary to stop the pirates, even attacking them ashore if need be. The Security Council has affirmed that option. Moreover, nearly all of Somalia's pirates come from one region (Puntland), live in a single town (Boosaaso) and stash captured vessels in one of three ports (Eyl, Hobyo or Haradhere) - making interdiction that much easier. Andrew Linington of Nautilus UK, a seaman's union that has had many of its members taken hostage, says the international community "knows where the pirates are, they know the ports they use, they know the mother ships. Stopping them could be done," he says. But that would be expensive at a time when U.S. resources are tied up in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Rod Nordlant. Sharks in the water. Internet: (adapted).
According to the text, it is correct to affirm that
In the last year, Somalia's pirates have attacked 120 vessels in the Gulf of Aden, choking commerce in a critical shipping lane (the transit route for 20 percent of the world's oil), blocking aid supplies and driving up transport costs.
The last few weeks have shown how hard it will be to defeat the pirates on the high seas, which seems like the international community's approach. When British Marines tried to board a captured fishing dhow on Nov. 11, they had to go in with guns blazing and killed one possible hostage in the process. A week later, an Indian warship opened fire on what it thought was a pirate mother ship. But the target turned out to be a Thai fishing vessel. When pirates seized their most valuable prize ever on Nov. 15 - the Sirius Star supertanker holding 2 million barrels of Saudi crude - everyone kept their distance.
As this suggests, Somalia's seaborne bandits are making a mockery of all efforts to stop them. Pirates have only increased their efforts, ranging across an area bigger than the Mediterranean. The Sirius Star was taken 450 nautical miles southeast of Kenya, and with it, the Somalis now hold 300 hostages and 15 ships.
The Somalia's internationally recognized transitional government has invited foreign navies to do what's necessary to stop the pirates, even attacking them ashore if need be. The Security Council has affirmed that option. Moreover, nearly all of Somalia's pirates come from one region (Puntland), live in a single town (Boosaaso) and stash captured vessels in one of three ports (Eyl, Hobyo or Haradhere) - making interdiction that much easier. Andrew Linington of Nautilus UK, a seaman's union that has had many of its members taken hostage, says the international community "knows where the pirates are, they know the ports they use, they know the mother ships. Stopping them could be done," he says. But that would be expensive at a time when U.S. resources are tied up in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Rod Nordlant. Sharks in the water. Internet:
According to the text, it is correct to affirm that
Judge the following items according to the text.
Although the international community may know where the pirates are or the ports they use, interdicting them would be quite expensive for the U.S. at this moment.
Although the international community may know where the pirates are or the ports they use, interdicting them would be quite expensive for the U.S. at this moment.
Q46749
Inglês
The quote in the title, "I had never thought of archiving websites." can be attributed to
Q46746
Inglês
According to Cheryl Lederle, the web archiving program has proved that
Q46745
Inglês
The sentence "Students and teachers alike found the program eye-opening." (lines 30-31) means that
Q46744
Inglês
In terms of reference, it is correct to affirm that
Q46743
Inglês
Websites are considered 'time capsules' because
Q46742
Inglês
The main purpose of this article is to
Ano: 2009
Banca:
FCC
Órgão:
MPE-SE
Prova:
FCC - 2009 - MPE-SE - Analista do Ministério Público – Especialidade Análise de Sistemas |
Q42866
Inglês
Texto associado
Title:_____________
January 26, 2009
By John C. Dvorak
It's no coincidence that the computer industry peaked around the year 2000, went into a serious decline, stabilized at the low point a couple of years ago, and has since collapsed again.
A confluence of reasons is responsible for this, but when it comes to the industry bringing this on itself, one major event may have taken down the entire business.
I'm speaking about the announcement of the Itanium processor. This continues to be one of the great fiascos of the last 50 years, and not because Intel blew too much money on its development or that the chip performed poorly and will never be widely adopted. It was the reaction and subsequent consolidation in the industry that took place once this grandiose chip was preannounced.
We heard that HP, IBM, Dell, and even Sun Microsystems would use these chips and discontinue anything else they were developing. This included Sun making noise about dropping the SPARC chip for this thing - sight unseen. I say "sight unseen" because it would be years before the chip was even prototyped. The entire industry just took Intel at its word that Itanium would work as advertised in a PowerPoint presentation.
Because this chip was supposed to radically change the way computers work and become the driving force behind all systems in the future, one promising project after another was dropped. Why? Because Itanium was the future for all computing. Why bother wasting money on good ideas that didn't include it?
The failure of this chip to do anything more than exist as a niche processor sealed the fate of Intel - and perhaps the entire industry, since from 1997 to 2001 everyone waited for the messiah of chips to take us all to the next level.
It did that all right. It took us to the next level. But we didn't know that the next level was below us, not above.
(Adapted from PCMAG.COM)
January 26, 2009
By John C. Dvorak
It's no coincidence that the computer industry peaked around the year 2000, went into a serious decline, stabilized at the low point a couple of years ago, and has since collapsed again.
A confluence of reasons is responsible for this, but when it comes to the industry bringing this on itself, one major event may have taken down the entire business.
I'm speaking about the announcement of the Itanium processor. This continues to be one of the great fiascos of the last 50 years, and not because Intel blew too much money on its development or that the chip performed poorly and will never be widely adopted. It was the reaction and subsequent consolidation in the industry that took place once this grandiose chip was preannounced.
We heard that HP, IBM, Dell, and even Sun Microsystems would use these chips and discontinue anything else they were developing. This included Sun making noise about dropping the SPARC chip for this thing - sight unseen. I say "sight unseen" because it would be years before the chip was even prototyped. The entire industry just took Intel at its word that Itanium would work as advertised in a PowerPoint presentation.
Because this chip was supposed to radically change the way computers work and become the driving force behind all systems in the future, one promising project after another was dropped. Why? Because Itanium was the future for all computing. Why bother wasting money on good ideas that didn't include it?
The failure of this chip to do anything more than exist as a niche processor sealed the fate of Intel - and perhaps the entire industry, since from 1997 to 2001 everyone waited for the messiah of chips to take us all to the next level.
It did that all right. It took us to the next level. But we didn't know that the next level was below us, not above.
(Adapted from PCMAG.COM)
No texto, a expressão it would be years before the chip was even prototyped significa que
Ano: 2009
Banca:
FCC
Órgão:
MPE-SE
Prova:
FCC - 2009 - MPE-SE - Analista do Ministério Público – Especialidade Análise de Sistemas |
Q42865
Inglês
Texto associado
Title:_____________
January 26, 2009
By John C. Dvorak
It's no coincidence that the computer industry peaked around the year 2000, went into a serious decline, stabilized at the low point a couple of years ago, and has since collapsed again.
A confluence of reasons is responsible for this, but when it comes to the industry bringing this on itself, one major event may have taken down the entire business.
I'm speaking about the announcement of the Itanium processor. This continues to be one of the great fiascos of the last 50 years, and not because Intel blew too much money on its development or that the chip performed poorly and will never be widely adopted. It was the reaction and subsequent consolidation in the industry that took place once this grandiose chip was preannounced.
We heard that HP, IBM, Dell, and even Sun Microsystems would use these chips and discontinue anything else they were developing. This included Sun making noise about dropping the SPARC chip for this thing - sight unseen. I say "sight unseen" because it would be years before the chip was even prototyped. The entire industry just took Intel at its word that Itanium would work as advertised in a PowerPoint presentation.
Because this chip was supposed to radically change the way computers work and become the driving force behind all systems in the future, one promising project after another was dropped. Why? Because Itanium was the future for all computing. Why bother wasting money on good ideas that didn't include it?
The failure of this chip to do anything more than exist as a niche processor sealed the fate of Intel - and perhaps the entire industry, since from 1997 to 2001 everyone waited for the messiah of chips to take us all to the next level.
It did that all right. It took us to the next level. But we didn't know that the next level was below us, not above.
(Adapted from PCMAG.COM)
January 26, 2009
By John C. Dvorak
It's no coincidence that the computer industry peaked around the year 2000, went into a serious decline, stabilized at the low point a couple of years ago, and has since collapsed again.
A confluence of reasons is responsible for this, but when it comes to the industry bringing this on itself, one major event may have taken down the entire business.
I'm speaking about the announcement of the Itanium processor. This continues to be one of the great fiascos of the last 50 years, and not because Intel blew too much money on its development or that the chip performed poorly and will never be widely adopted. It was the reaction and subsequent consolidation in the industry that took place once this grandiose chip was preannounced.
We heard that HP, IBM, Dell, and even Sun Microsystems would use these chips and discontinue anything else they were developing. This included Sun making noise about dropping the SPARC chip for this thing - sight unseen. I say "sight unseen" because it would be years before the chip was even prototyped. The entire industry just took Intel at its word that Itanium would work as advertised in a PowerPoint presentation.
Because this chip was supposed to radically change the way computers work and become the driving force behind all systems in the future, one promising project after another was dropped. Why? Because Itanium was the future for all computing. Why bother wasting money on good ideas that didn't include it?
The failure of this chip to do anything more than exist as a niche processor sealed the fate of Intel - and perhaps the entire industry, since from 1997 to 2001 everyone waited for the messiah of chips to take us all to the next level.
It did that all right. It took us to the next level. But we didn't know that the next level was below us, not above.
(Adapted from PCMAG.COM)
Segundo o autor do texto, a razão principal do fiasco do processador de Itanium deve-se a fato de
Ano: 2009
Banca:
FCC
Órgão:
MPE-SE
Prova:
FCC - 2009 - MPE-SE - Analista do Ministério Público – Especialidade Análise de Sistemas |
Q42864
Inglês
Texto associado
Title:_____________
January 26, 2009
By John C. Dvorak
It's no coincidence that the computer industry peaked around the year 2000, went into a serious decline, stabilized at the low point a couple of years ago, and has since collapsed again.
A confluence of reasons is responsible for this, but when it comes to the industry bringing this on itself, one major event may have taken down the entire business.
I'm speaking about the announcement of the Itanium processor. This continues to be one of the great fiascos of the last 50 years, and not because Intel blew too much money on its development or that the chip performed poorly and will never be widely adopted. It was the reaction and subsequent consolidation in the industry that took place once this grandiose chip was preannounced.
We heard that HP, IBM, Dell, and even Sun Microsystems would use these chips and discontinue anything else they were developing. This included Sun making noise about dropping the SPARC chip for this thing - sight unseen. I say "sight unseen" because it would be years before the chip was even prototyped. The entire industry just took Intel at its word that Itanium would work as advertised in a PowerPoint presentation.
Because this chip was supposed to radically change the way computers work and become the driving force behind all systems in the future, one promising project after another was dropped. Why? Because Itanium was the future for all computing. Why bother wasting money on good ideas that didn't include it?
The failure of this chip to do anything more than exist as a niche processor sealed the fate of Intel - and perhaps the entire industry, since from 1997 to 2001 everyone waited for the messiah of chips to take us all to the next level.
It did that all right. It took us to the next level. But we didn't know that the next level was below us, not above.
(Adapted from PCMAG.COM)
January 26, 2009
By John C. Dvorak
It's no coincidence that the computer industry peaked around the year 2000, went into a serious decline, stabilized at the low point a couple of years ago, and has since collapsed again.
A confluence of reasons is responsible for this, but when it comes to the industry bringing this on itself, one major event may have taken down the entire business.
I'm speaking about the announcement of the Itanium processor. This continues to be one of the great fiascos of the last 50 years, and not because Intel blew too much money on its development or that the chip performed poorly and will never be widely adopted. It was the reaction and subsequent consolidation in the industry that took place once this grandiose chip was preannounced.
We heard that HP, IBM, Dell, and even Sun Microsystems would use these chips and discontinue anything else they were developing. This included Sun making noise about dropping the SPARC chip for this thing - sight unseen. I say "sight unseen" because it would be years before the chip was even prototyped. The entire industry just took Intel at its word that Itanium would work as advertised in a PowerPoint presentation.
Because this chip was supposed to radically change the way computers work and become the driving force behind all systems in the future, one promising project after another was dropped. Why? Because Itanium was the future for all computing. Why bother wasting money on good ideas that didn't include it?
The failure of this chip to do anything more than exist as a niche processor sealed the fate of Intel - and perhaps the entire industry, since from 1997 to 2001 everyone waited for the messiah of chips to take us all to the next level.
It did that all right. It took us to the next level. But we didn't know that the next level was below us, not above.
(Adapted from PCMAG.COM)
One could summarize the first paragraph by saying that the computer industry
Ano: 2009
Banca:
FCC
Órgão:
MPE-SE
Prova:
FCC - 2009 - MPE-SE - Analista do Ministério Público – Especialidade Análise de Sistemas |
Q42863
Inglês
Texto associado
Title:_____________
January 26, 2009
By John C. Dvorak
It's no coincidence that the computer industry peaked around the year 2000, went into a serious decline, stabilized at the low point a couple of years ago, and has since collapsed again.
A confluence of reasons is responsible for this, but when it comes to the industry bringing this on itself, one major event may have taken down the entire business.
I'm speaking about the announcement of the Itanium processor. This continues to be one of the great fiascos of the last 50 years, and not because Intel blew too much money on its development or that the chip performed poorly and will never be widely adopted. It was the reaction and subsequent consolidation in the industry that took place once this grandiose chip was preannounced.
We heard that HP, IBM, Dell, and even Sun Microsystems would use these chips and discontinue anything else they were developing. This included Sun making noise about dropping the SPARC chip for this thing - sight unseen. I say "sight unseen" because it would be years before the chip was even prototyped. The entire industry just took Intel at its word that Itanium would work as advertised in a PowerPoint presentation.
Because this chip was supposed to radically change the way computers work and become the driving force behind all systems in the future, one promising project after another was dropped. Why? Because Itanium was the future for all computing. Why bother wasting money on good ideas that didn't include it?
The failure of this chip to do anything more than exist as a niche processor sealed the fate of Intel - and perhaps the entire industry, since from 1997 to 2001 everyone waited for the messiah of chips to take us all to the next level.
It did that all right. It took us to the next level. But we didn't know that the next level was below us, not above.
(Adapted from PCMAG.COM)
January 26, 2009
By John C. Dvorak
It's no coincidence that the computer industry peaked around the year 2000, went into a serious decline, stabilized at the low point a couple of years ago, and has since collapsed again.
A confluence of reasons is responsible for this, but when it comes to the industry bringing this on itself, one major event may have taken down the entire business.
I'm speaking about the announcement of the Itanium processor. This continues to be one of the great fiascos of the last 50 years, and not because Intel blew too much money on its development or that the chip performed poorly and will never be widely adopted. It was the reaction and subsequent consolidation in the industry that took place once this grandiose chip was preannounced.
We heard that HP, IBM, Dell, and even Sun Microsystems would use these chips and discontinue anything else they were developing. This included Sun making noise about dropping the SPARC chip for this thing - sight unseen. I say "sight unseen" because it would be years before the chip was even prototyped. The entire industry just took Intel at its word that Itanium would work as advertised in a PowerPoint presentation.
Because this chip was supposed to radically change the way computers work and become the driving force behind all systems in the future, one promising project after another was dropped. Why? Because Itanium was the future for all computing. Why bother wasting money on good ideas that didn't include it?
The failure of this chip to do anything more than exist as a niche processor sealed the fate of Intel - and perhaps the entire industry, since from 1997 to 2001 everyone waited for the messiah of chips to take us all to the next level.
It did that all right. It took us to the next level. But we didn't know that the next level was below us, not above.
(Adapted from PCMAG.COM)
Um título adequado para o texto acima seria
Conheça nossos planos