Linked by Andrew Hudson on Mon 20th Jun 2011 17:19 UTC
Permalink for comment 477837
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2007-03-26
I spent a few hours the other day browsing the source code and I was really impressed with it's design. It's kernel is of a hybrid design that is up to par with (if not better than) modern OS's like Windows NT and OS X. Fully integrated GUI, and pretty much designed from the ground up to kick ass. The same cannot be said of GNU Linux, which is nothing more than a hack job built on top of an outdated monolithic kernel design.
I know it's still several years away, but when the multi-user and server versions of Haiku are ready, I'll switch all my Linux/BSD stuff to it in a heartbeat.
By that definition, all modern kernels are hack jobs:
* NT is constantly undergoing source chopping of outdated / redundant features (aka the MinWin project) * XNU (OS X's kernel) runs heavily hacked versions of Mach and BSD.
* SVR4 (of which Solaris has evolved from) was built from a need to unify the different UNIXs - so has code hacked from all over the shop.
It's impossible to maintain a working kernel without having to hack bits from time to time - and this is more so the case in open source where projects will share schedulers (et al) from one and another.
In fact, I'd be more worried if a modern kernel hadn't seen it's fair share of hacking.