Old wives' tales.
Who was born at 1 january ? The celebration of a New year is USSR was at 1 january. It is not a Christmas and december 25 or january 7. It has a form of Christmas, but really it is an official secular holiday and not a Christmas. It is a holiday for any citizen, for tatars-muslims too. Santa Claus was newer in russian traditions. He could not became a Father Winter because there were no any Santa Clauses in Russia. Santa Claus is a foreign protestant tradition for orthodox christians by the way. And Stalin's daughter Svetlana was newer outside of Russia (USSR) while her father was alive. And her father newer was (Tehran+Potsdam were exceptions associated with WWII).

But all it is a сrap. Happy New Year !!!

"Russian Christmas"

https://shewalkssoftly.com/2010/01/08/santa-protects-russia-in-1945/
Ibid.
https://shewalkssoftly.com/2009/12/23/russian-space-santa/

about the Soviet New Year - the whole second part

In the book, "Anna Karenina," Tolstoy said: "Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way."
I can paraphrase that: "C programmers are all alike; every Forth programmer is unhappy in his own way."

"Gold" words!) Recently I'm meeted with one idea: that's really to make UNIX or LINUX on Forth?

KROL, you have to complete your buggy MS-DOS Forth first and to dream Forth OS about second. Если первое пока не по зубам, не по зубам и второе.

Я уже не философствую, ведь это можно делать до бесконечности. Про DOS я уже почитал и понял, что её поддержки уже скоро не будет, как и поддержки BIOS. Поэтому я сейчас изучаю UNIX(LINUX), но думаю, что если заменить в ней C на Forth, то будет система намного производительнее и гибче...
Нашёл интересный сайт: http://www.singlix.com/development.html
http://www.singlix.com/trdos/8086/
http://www.singlix.com/trdos/386/
http://www.singlix.com/trdos/archive/
Но что-нибудь делать буду в следующем месяце (у меня ещё 2 экзамена осталось).
P.s. Я просто до конца осазнал, что Форт-система - это ОС (точнее инструмент), только для программистов. А если её изменять, то получится уже совсем не Форт, а новый продукт.

This apparently is a Russian proverb. Google Translate turns it into nonsense. I don't know what your meaning is!

roughly,
Couldn't do first item, couldn't will second item

I understand: KROL attempted to write a Forth OS on top of the BIOS but didn't complete this. Now he wants to write a Forth shell on top of Linux and you guys doubt that he will succeed at this either.
Well, I don't know the history of what KROL has or hasn't done, so I have no opinion on this.
Writing a Forth shell for Linux should be easier than writing a Forth OS on top of the BIOS --- I hope that KROL succeeds at this!
I'm dubious that many people will be interested --- we already have the BASH shell that is very popular --- I'm not aware of anybody saying that BASH is inadequate and needs to be replaced.

My goal is a Forth language standard for 64-bit computers that supports cross-compilation of Forth targeting micro-controllers.
I did write the MFX cross-compiler for the MiniForth processor when I was employed at Testra, and MFX continues to be used today. So I do have some success at cross-compilation, and I know what is required to support cross-compilation.
I think that designing a Forth standard that supports cross-compilation is pretty easy --- I want to get a consensus though --- I don't want to impose my own ideas on everybody by fiat.
The purpose of a standard is that there can be multiple implementations that are compatible, so programs can be ported between implementations easily.
To have multiple implementations it is necessary to have multiple people in agreement --- not just me agreeing with myself.

No, he wants to use Forth instead of C to write an OS similar to Linux. Of course, writing Forth shell is much more easy than replace all code in the Linux kernel.

Well, Menuet was written in FASM --- so this kind of large project is possible --- not by me though, as that is way beyond my ability.
I'm not a big fan of Linux, and I hate MS-Windows --- so if KROL succeeds in writing a Forth OS for 64-bit x86 computers, I would be interested --- that is pretty ambitious though, so I'm not expecting it to happen any time soon.

I would be happy to design a Forth standard that is useful for cross-compilers.

I would also be happy to get my TOYF processor implemented in an FPGA --- Verilog is a big hurdle for me --- my TOYF is super-simple though, so it should be easier than any other design as a first project.

When someone looks at heavy barbell first time, it is normal to try to pull it up. At least to touch and feel how heavy it is. For students, it is very good to try new technologies and start as many programs as they able. However, others don't need to rely too much on successfully results. There are many declared ForthOS projects for last 20 years of RuFIG, and none were implemented as declared.

Existing OS products for x86 and ARM are very strong competitors for Forth OS. I see little reasons to replace them by any kind of Forth OS, except in the order of skill demonstration. This will not lead, by the way, to real contribution of such OS. Building a shell over existing OS or just application (or virtual machine) looks much more useful and has real perspective to solve actual tasks.

People get paid for micro-controllers --- desktop-computer software is generally given away for free, with an open-source GPL.

This is why the primary goal of my Forth standard is supporting cross-compilers --- if I'm going to lift a heavy barbell, I might was well get something in return, other than sore muscles.