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 123233
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

Not true. The real world is both synchronous and reactive. All reactions are synchronized by a universal clock because the fundamental interval (at the Planck level) is the same for all processes/interactions. The universe is ONE, as its name implies.

This is the wrong forum for debunking quack quantum mechanics, but the uncertainty principle pretty much guarentees on a quantum level that the universe isn't synchronous.

But that doesn't matter, because behavior at a quantum level is not emergent at a macro level, and it's pretty easy to demonstrate that at a macro level the universe remains asynchronous.

If you don't think so, I've got a bluetooth package for you to debug.

Reply Parent Score: 1