Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 16th Apr 2006 15:36 UTC
OSNews, Generic OSes Right in between a car crash and Easter, I knew I had to write a Sunday Eve Column. So here I am, digesting vast quantities of chocolate eggs (and I don't even like chocolate), craving for coffee (for me about as special as breathing), with the goal of explaining to you my, well, obsession with microkernels. Why do I like them? Why do I think the microkernel paradigm is superior to the monolithic one? Read on.
Permalink for comment 115347
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
ivans
Member since:
2005-12-03

NT has sophisticated IPC mechanisms (such as APC and LPC) and most non-essential services live outside the kernel.

But you're missing the point (i didn't say that NT doesn't have IPC, it's just NOT USED for communication between different kernel components, because they live in the same address space - the upper 2 gigs) - in microkernel "nonessential services" are anything but the scheduler/IPC.

YOU CANNOT SEPARATE ANY EXECUTIVE NT KERNEL COMPONENT INSIDE A USER-MODE PROCESS.

The desktop is NOT integrated into the kernel...

I didn't claim it was. You seem to be constantly proving something I didn't say, in order to apper correct in other things.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi

Anyway, I would like to hear in just which ways is NT more microkernelish than, say Linux? :-)

Reply Parent Score: 5