Re: LINUX is obsolete Linux Inside
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: LINUX is obsolete

 I tried to send these two posts from work, but I think they got eaten. If you
 have seen them already, sorry.
 
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 Andy Tanenbaum writes an interesting article (also interesting was finding out
 that he actually reads this group) but I think he is missing an important 
 point.
 
 He Wrote:
 >As most of you know, for me MINIX is a hobby, ...
 
 Which is also probably true of most, if not all, of the people who are involved
 in Linux. We are not developing a system to take over the OS market, we are
 just having a good time.
 
 >   What is going to happen
 >   is that they will gradually take over from the 80x86 line.  They will
 >   run old MS-DOS programs by interpreting the 80386 in software.
 
 Well when this happens, if I still want to play with Linux, I can just run it
 on my 386 simulator.
 
 >   MINIX was designed to be reasonably portable, and has been ported from the
 >   Intel line to the 680x0 (Atari, Amiga, Macintosh), SPARC, and NS32016.
 >   LINUX is tied fairly closely to the 80x86.  Not the way to go.
 
 That's fine for the people who have those machines, but it wasn't a free 
 lunch. That portibility was gained at the cost of some performance and some 
 features on the 386. Before you decide that LINUX is not the way to go, you
 should think about what it is going to be used for.  I am going to use it for
 running memory and computation intensive graphics programs on my 486. For me,
 speed and memory were more important then future state-of-the-artness and
 portability.
 
 >But in all honesty, I would
 >suggest that people who want a **MODERN** "free" OS look around for a 
 >microkernel-based, portable OS, like maybe GNU or something like that.
 
 I don't know of any free microkernel-based, portable OSes. GNU is still
 vaporware, and likely to remain that way for the forseeable future. Do 
 you actually have one to recomend, or are you just toying with me? ;-)
 
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 In article <12615@star.cs.vu.nl> ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) writes:
 >My point is that writing a new operating system that is closely tied to any
 >particular piece of hardware, especially a weird one like the Intel line,
 >is basically wrong.  An OS itself should be easily portable to new hardware
 >platforms.
 
 I think I see where I disagree with you now. You are looking at OS design
 as an end in itself. Minix is good because it is portable/Micro-Kernal/etc.
 Linux is not good because it is monolithic/tightly tied to Intel/etc. That
 is not a strange attitude for someone in the acedemic world, but it is not
 something you should expect to be universally shared. Linux is not being written
 as a teaching tool, or as an abstract exercise. It is being written to allow
 people to run GNU-type software _today_. The fact that it may not be in use
 in five years is less important then the fact that today (well, by April
 probably) I can run all sorts of software on it that I want to run. You keep
 saying that Minix is better, but if it will not run the software that I want
 to run, it really isn't that good (for me) at all.
 
 >                     When OS/360 was written in assembler for the IBM 360
 >25 years ago, they probably could be excused.  When MS-DOS was written
 >specifically for the 8088 ten years ago, this was less than brilliant, as
 >IBM and Microsoft now only too painfully realize.
 
 Same point. MSoft did not come out with Dos to "explore the frontiers of os
 research". They did it to make a buck. And considering the fact that MS-DOS
 probably still outsells everyone else put together, I don't think that you 
 say that they have failed _in their goals_. Not that MS-Dos is the best OS
 in terms of anything else, only that it has served their needs. 
 
 Michael
 
 
 -- 
 Michael Kaufman | I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on
  kaufman        | fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in
   @eecs.nwu.edu | the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be
                 | lost in time - like tears in rain. Time to die.     Roy Batty