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 123036
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Think different
by suryad on Wed 10th May 2006 15:36 UTC in reply to "Think different"
suryad
Member since:
2005-07-09

Then are you talking about an OS written in a'memory safe' language like Java? Are you talking about the Singularity project by Microsoft using C# and is variants?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Think different
by gousiosg on Wed 10th May 2006 21:10 in reply to "RE: Think different"
gousiosg Member since:
2006-03-02

Then are you talking about an OS written in a'memory safe' language like Java? Are you talking about the Singularity project by Microsoft using C# and is variants?

Yes, I am talking about operating systems not based on consepts (and misconseptions) discovered 40-50 years ago. I am bored of stupid conversations about how superior AmigaOS was 20 years ago (granted, it was) or whether microkernels are modular or slow (yes ,they are both). Isn't this a high time to move our thoughts forward and leave all this micro-mono-hybrid-kernel blah blah to the dust? People should just take a look in the Jnode OS code to get a feeling of inovation in practice (which of course has already happened in theory)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Think different
by renox on Wed 10th May 2006 21:34 in reply to "RE[2]: Think different"
renox Member since:
2005-07-06

>I am bored of stupid conversations about how superior AmigaOS was 20 years ago (granted, it was)

Depends on how you measure superiority, having one application crashing could crash the whole OS if memory serves, I hardly call this superior.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Think different
by Cloudy on Wed 10th May 2006 22:26 in reply to "RE[2]: Think different"
Cloudy Member since:
2006-02-15

Then are you talking about an OS written in a'memory safe' language like Java? Are you talking about the Singularity project by Microsoft using C# and is variants?

Yes, I am talking about operating systems not based on consepts (and misconseptions) discovered 40-50 years ago.


Burroughs wrote 'memory safe' operating systems in type safe languages forty years ago. They even designed processor architectures to support them.

Reply Parent Score: 4