Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 9th May 2006 21:25 UTC, submitted by luzr
OSNews, Generic OSes Torvalds has indeed chimed in on the micro vs. monolithic kernel debate. Going all 1992, he says: "The whole 'microkernels are simpler' argument is just bull, and it is clearly shown to be bull by the fact that whenever you compare the speed of development of a microkernel and a traditional kernel, the traditional kernel wins. The whole argument that microkernels are somehow 'more secure' or 'more stable' is also total crap. The fact that each individual piece is simple and secure does not make the aggregate either simple or secure. And the argument that you can 'just reload' a failed service and not take the whole system down is equally flawed." My take: While I am not qualified to reply to Linus, there is one thing I want to say: just because it is difficult to program, does not make it the worse design.
Thread beginning with comment 122815
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Gotta Love Linus
by segedunum on Tue 9th May 2006 22:12 UTC
segedunum
Member since:
2005-07-06

He can rub people up the wrong way at times, but you've got to admire him for his plain speaking and speaking his mind. Some of this stuff made me laugh:

"And anybody who tells you that distributed algorithms are "simpler" is just so full of sh*t that it's not even funny."

"As to the whole "hybrid kernel" thing - it's just marketing. It's "oh, those microkernels had good PR, how can we try to get good PR for our working kernel? Oh, I know, let's use a cool name and try to imply that it has all the PR advantages that that other system has"

This has happened with Windows in many ways. The whole userspace audio thing in Vista was just a PR response where they'll say something like "Making our systems more robust, resilient and fault tolerant". In the next version of Windows things will probably get brought back into the kernel "For the purposes of maximising performance for customer benefit". You just can't win with it. It's all fluff.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Gotta Love Linus
by twenex on Tue 9th May 2006 22:29 in reply to "Gotta Love Linus"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

Stole my thunder! I was about to ask Linux to tell us what he REALLY thinks! :-)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Gotta Love Linus
by hobgoblin on Wed 10th May 2006 08:20 in reply to "RE: Gotta Love Linus"
hobgoblin Member since:
2005-07-06

ask the kernel? and do kernel's have gender's?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Gotta Love Linus
by diegocg on Tue 9th May 2006 23:04 in reply to "Gotta Love Linus"
diegocg Member since:
2005-07-08

This has happened with Windows in many ways. The whole userspace audio thing in Vista was just a PR response where they'll say something like "Making our systems more robust, resilient and fault tolerant". In the next version of Windows things will probably get brought back into the kernel "For the purposes of maximising performance for customer benefit". You just can't win with it. It's all fluff.


What they did in windows vista was not to move audio divers to userspace, but move parts of the audio stack which were in kernel space even if they shouldn't, to userspace. Software mixing, etc - real drivers keep in kernelspace. Basically, they had too much crap in the kernel (the libalsa equivalent) and they're moving it back to userspace. Which is a good thing, BTW

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Gotta Love Linus
by haugland on Wed 10th May 2006 11:20 in reply to "Gotta Love Linus"
haugland Member since:
2005-07-07

In my opinion Linus was just at the right place at the right time. Tell me again: What is so fantastic about Linux as a kernel?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Gotta Love Linus
by rcsteiner on Wed 10th May 2006 15:43 in reply to "RE: Gotta Love Linus"
rcsteiner Member since:
2005-07-12

(1) It works.

(2) It's free (both libre and gratis)

(3) There aren't many other alternatives which fit #1 and #2.

Reply Parent Score: 1