Re: LINUX is obsolete Linux Inside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

Re: LINUX is obsolete

 ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) writes:
 
 >In article <1992Feb5.145630.759@wpi.WPI.EDU> entropy@wintermute.WPI.EDU (Lawrence C. Foard) writes:
 >>Actually my main problem with OS theorists is that they have never tested
 >>there ideas! 
 >I'm mortally insulted.  I AM NOT A THEORIST.  Ask anybody who was at our
 >department meeting yesterday (in joke).
 
 >Actually, these ideas have been very well tested in practice.  
 
 The problem is that to really do an unbiased test you would need two
 *identical* teams, and ask them to make two OS's, for the same
 destination machine, one using a microkernel architecture, and the other
 using the monolithic approach. This is in practice not feasable and the
 publications on the subject can only shout: "look: I've got a good 
 performance using a microkernel", "we've got very good performance using
 a monolithic aproach" or "it only took us X months to implement this OS"
 
 If people did benchmark their OS's they wrote the OS for one architecture,
 and adapted it to test the other. This adaptation will naturally degrade
 performance, and show that the designers were right in the first place.
 
 Anyway, anybody have an opinion about the fact that code for printf
 is included three times in the Minix OS when it runs (once in the 
 kernel, MM and FS)
 
 							Roger
 
 -- 
 If the opposite of "pro" is "con", what is the opposite of "progress"? 
 	(stolen from  kadokev@iitvax ==? technews@iitmax.iit.edu)
 EMail:  wolff@duteca.et.tudelft.nl   ** Tel  +31-15-783644 or +31-15-142371