Linked by Andrew Hudson on Mon 20th Jun 2011 17:19 UTC
BeOS & Derivatives Haiku Alpha 3 has been in development for more than 14 months. In that time more than 800 bugs have been identified and fixed, major sections have been updated, applications have been added and updated, and great progress has been made in supporting additional hardware. Here is a summary of updates, more details can be found here. Also inside, interviews with some core Haiku developers.
Thread beginning with comment 478091
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by zizban
by zizban on Wed 22nd Jun 2011 02:17 UTC
Member since:

Is this monolithic vs microkernel debate boring anyone else?

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by zizban
by demetrioussharpe on Wed 22nd Jun 2011 15:12 in reply to "Comment by zizban"
demetrioussharpe Member since:

****** RANT ALERT!!! ******

Is this monolithic vs microkernel debate boring anyone else?

Yes! And the sad thing about it is that it's been debated by far superior minds than you'd find here & even they can't agree. It's hard to imagine that someone sitting at their computer arguing on OSNews has the solution. The reason? Because there's no solution. There's no right or wrong way. Various tasks call for various solutions. At the end of the day, there's no such thing as hybrids, the specifics of either monolithic or ukernel are rather simple -either the system components are in kernel space or they're not. Calling something a hybrid is really the implementer of one type of kernel trying to to use features from the other type of kernel without caving in. However, it doesn't matter if you call your implementation a hybrid kangaroo; if it's non-kernel system components live in kernel space, then it's monolithic. If there drivers & other functionality that's normally in kernel space actually resides in userspace & you've been rather bullyish about pushing stuff out of the kernel & out into the upper levels, then it's a ukernel. But, which one you decide to implement doesn't matter! There are plenty of ukernels that are successes & do what their implementers want them to do (obviously QNX, not so obviously MINIX). Then again, there are plenty that haven't proven themselves a success (HURD). Also, there are plenty of monolithic kernels that were successes (Windows, Unix, every version of MacOS that's ever shipped). Also, there are tons of monolithic kernels that have been failures & I'm not even going to list those, because for many (& myself) the memories are too painful to relive. The point is, this is an argument that can't be won within the confines of the comment list for an OSNews item. If any of you reading this post disagree, then prove me wrong by producing one of these OS's yourself. Whether you're successful or not, at least it'll keep you busy by giving you something better to do than trolling about which design's the best.

Reply Parent Score: 1