I think the guy is pretty bright, and he has some really useful ideas...but they are far from practical.
Minix was a teaching tool, nothing more. Due to its design, it was impossible to be a "serious" OS. Amoeba is interesting, and I tried to install it once. Great idea, but I really don't have 5 PCs to spare to make this thing work properly!
That's two strikes right there. Great concepts, limited appeal.
Tannenbaum's biggest complaint against Linux was the fact it was monolithic...while that may be a great computer science argument, but has very little to do with real life. Which reminds me of a saying: "In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, however..." Anyway, NT was originally a microkernel design...and it migrated to be more monolithic as time wore on. Why? Microkernels, while a great idea, tend to be far less efficient because of the way people have implemented them. I have yet to hear of a truly compelling reason why any OS should be written as a true microkernel design.
Linux was Linus' toy. He didn't start out wanting a super-os which would push the boundaries of computer science, so he designed a system which was simple and stable....a monolithic kernel.
Redhat 6 Release Date?
on
ZD on Red Hat
·
· Score: 1
Its out now. There is a redhat-6.0 directory on ftp.redhat.com, but it only has i386 and sparc arch directories in it:(
Patiently waiting for a mirror with alpha;)
Redhat 6 Release Date?
on
ZD on Red Hat
·
· Score: 1
Well, earlier this morning it said "...Monday..." on the bottom of the commerce page.
Hmm...technical problem, or are they getting ready for a change?
Slashdot Mirror
I think the guy is pretty bright, and he has some really useful ideas...but they are far from practical.
Minix was a teaching tool, nothing more. Due to its design, it was impossible to be a "serious" OS. Amoeba is interesting, and I tried to install it once. Great idea, but I really don't have 5 PCs to spare to make this thing work properly!
That's two strikes right there. Great concepts, limited appeal.
Tannenbaum's biggest complaint against Linux was the fact it was monolithic...while that may be a great computer science argument, but has very little to do with real life. Which reminds me of a saying: "In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, however..." Anyway, NT was originally a microkernel design...and it migrated to be more monolithic as time wore on. Why? Microkernels, while a great idea, tend to be far less efficient because of the way people have implemented them. I have yet to hear of a truly compelling reason why any OS should be written as a true microkernel design.
Linux was Linus' toy. He didn't start out wanting a super-os which would push the boundaries of computer science, so he designed a system which was simple and stable....a monolithic kernel.
Patiently waiting for a mirror with alpha ;)
Hmm...technical problem, or are they getting ready for a change?