From: buhr@umanitoba.ca (Kevin Andrew Buhr) Subject: Re: NT vs Linux (was: Re: truth or dare) Date: 10 Jul 1993 00:21:06 GMT
In article <1993Jul8.041711.24937@muug.mb.ca> rgallen@muug.mb.ca
(Rennie Allen) writes:
|
| Linux is a monolithic kernel essentially
| no different from the OS's of the early 70's. UNIX's excuse is that it was
| developed in the early 70's; what's Linuxs' ?
That it's a Unix clone, perhaps? Face it. The vast majority of
computer systems in use today are running monolithic kernels.
DOS/Windows 3.1, MacOS 7, SunOS (and most flavours of Unix), Netware
4.0---these are all monolithic operating systems, right?
Maybe Tanenbaum misled me, but it seems that the newest crop of PC
operating systems are all monolithic, too. OS/2 2.1 is monolithic.
And if you take a drawing of a monolithic kernel, pencil in lines for
layers, and label various parts "subsystems", you'll have a schematic
of Win NT. The only message-passing microkernel I can think of that
anyone's using is Minix, and I don't even know that first hand.
What does NeXTStep look like under the hood?
| There is more to quality software than code that will pass through lint
| without a burp. There is *design*. Linux has no *design* it is simply a
| clone of what has gone before, it does nothing to advance the state of the
| art in OS design. If the Linuxs' of the world become popular, that will be
| a sad day indeed.
Linux has a design: it is designed to be a small, efficient,
monolithic Unix clone. Ta da! It advances the state of operating
system design in the sense that it is a free, tightly-written flavour
of an operating system that is usually overpriced and poorly slapped
together, evidently without shame.
| I have never had any problem with people using Linux to further
| their understanding of OS basics, or to hone their coding skills by
| working on it, but to suggest that it be a replacement for a well
| though out architecturaly engineered operating system is well;
| pushing it a little to far.
This would be a weightier argument if there actually *were* a lot of
well designed, architecturally sound operating systems lying around,
wouldn't it? Have I missed them all? Or am I the only one who thinks
a monolithic kernel with all the parts carefully labelled is still a
monolithic kernel?
| Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R2V 4B2
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Nice weather we've been having, eh? ;)
Kevin Buhr <buhr@ccu.UManitoba.CA>