To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
MOS6510,
"Why not put in the effort in to Linux instead?"
I target linux myself because of it's market potential, but I'd be remorseful if we lost alternatives all together.
Linux works because it's got tons of man hours going into it, but that doesn't mean it's always the greatest approach. Plan-9 was an OS designed with much more care going into well designed interfaces. The FreeBSDs are often leading the curb as well. Sometimes it is linux. I like the variety and wouldn't want to end up having only a few mainstream operating systems.
Speaking of hurd specifically, I concede that I'm not familiar with it
but that doesn't necessarily mean it doesn't have merit in some way for those who have worked with it.
I'm sure someone somewhere can find some merit for it, but I wonder how many people can and what kind of basis does this merit have.
If it's based on "I like it, just feels nicer, dunno" I don't give this kind of merit much merit.
You listed a couple of valid choices, but it's just hard to imagine Hurd taking up a valid place amongst them. Considering how long it has already taken I seriously doubt anyone could seriously have much faith in a happy marriage when going for Hurd.
I don't know anyone using Minix, but even that is a complete and working system.
If people like to work on Hurd then good for them, but it's a sizable project and I just wonder it the time and energy spend isn't better spend on something like Linux. Linux users are, probably, their target audience anyway, but I don't see Linux users leaving a mature and working system for Hurd.
Point one is valid, I guess, even though OpenBSD and even Linux are or can be made pretty secure.
Not sure what value point two has, it sounds more like preference than technical advantage.
An operating system can have its advantages and cool features, but you also need software and hardware support. A game console without games is pretty useless.
Linux, to pick one, has hardware support, software, documentation, "community" and a bunch of qualified experts. A company can implement Linux and be pretty sure it will work and if it breaks can find someone to fix it.
If Hurd comes alive my feeling is it will be much more difficult to make it useful and find experts on it. The ones you can find will probably be pretty expensive.
Is it worth all that trouble for the extra security and not being a UNIX clone? Organizations that require above average security usually have a lot of money. Why spend that on a "hobby" project and not get some hardcore Linux guru's and use Linux, which has proven itself over the years.





Member since:
2011-05-12
Seriously, why bother?
Hurd would be in the same pool as Linux, but Linux is light years ahead. Even if Hurd becomes mature enough to be useful, why pick it instead of Linux? I'm afraid Hurd will have more developers than users.
Why not put in the effort in to Linux instead?