And thanks for the Ubuntu Fanboys, we have wikipedia saturated with Ubuntu, on articles where it does not belong etc. And Ubuntu has gone over "Linux" on them. Even the normal user ask "Where I can get Linux" and stupid Ubuntu fans yells back for that "I is just a kernel you idiot!".
In few years you dont have device drivers for Linux, but for Ubuntu. You dont have commercial software available than few commercial distributions and Ubuntu. And all the n00bs keeps talking that "You can have Ubuntu or Linux, those are two different Operating Systems, Ubuntu altought is much better because the browser and office applications are integrated to operating system itself".
So thanks a lot Ubuntu users what you have done to promote the Linux, but no thanks for negative attitude against Linux community, just being so annoing and blind Ubuntu fans...
Re:I can't do with these new fangled inventions
on
The Mouse Turns 40
·
· Score: 1
I am not so happy... because it is possible that without mouse, we could have developed faster a working speech controlling, a multitouch controlling and of course, a mind controlling devices. Now we are "stuck" to mouse and the UI what is harder to use.
We have 12 Function keys... what we dont use so much anymore than the command line time on office application, what menus were controlled via those buttons and what they did in different situations.
Many office applications can be used very well with function keys and other key combinations. Especially if you need to type information to database only, where you jump from other box to another (of course such UI's should be design so that you can jump to different parts easily, without need to press TAB 10-20 times until you come to end, in this case the mouse can be better).
Not on my beta2... Ctrl+Tabs works just fine (I like the Ctrl+, or Ctrl+. like on konqueror, because I can move more easier to both sides than just forward and back with Ctrl+Tab and Ctrl+Shift+Tab.
One my friend is makeup artist too, she made herself look like a old guy with her friends who were made samething. And then they went to bar using old man business suites what they buyed with few euros from second hand. Only thing what actually revealed them, was their laugh and "pepsodent smile".
You can use makeup very well to hide your identity, so you could look same kind person than the person in photo. But you just cant change your smile.
I would suggest that they would force everyone to smile on ID photos. Then teach cops and other officers to tell dirty jokes to get person laugh and then check does the ID photo match to person.
What? They have copied the "one button mouse" idea from Apple!! Damn Copycats!! Thats why Apple needed to invent the Mighty Mouse so there would not be so many copies!
Seems that most of slashdotters miss the real point on this news.... Obama goes to gym... the Zune is just a sidenote on this news but still most of readers only looks that...
Internet Explorer is bundled with windows and integrated to NT operating system.
Safari is bundled with Mac OS X but not integrated to Darwin operating system
Firefox is preinstalled on most of Linux distributions but not integrated to Linux operating system.
Opera is preinstalled and bundled on many software platoforms on telephones and handheld machines (or even game consoles). Question is, is it integrated any of the devices?
Konqueror is integrated to KDE desktop environment but not integrated to Linux operating system. KDE comes usually bundled on many of Linux distributions.
So in the other words, now we got the Linux OS ported to iPhone, we can finally get a GNU/Linux developing platform to iPhone in no time and then we can get all the wanted applications working... but does it still be a phone or toy?
I dont know is the GNU/Linux developing platform needed at all, most important thing is just that Linux OS is ported and we can develop the needed applications on the PC/Mac and then just run them on the iPhone.
What I believe is that software business is overrated. Even that almost everything is going to digital format and will coming depending computers, there is too much developers actually to get a payment from what they do. This would not be the case if IT "world" would be closed at least as much as it was middle 90's. You can fight, use patents to stop others competitors and do everything what you just could, to "protect" your own work. But same time you slowed down the whole world development.
In Open Source, there are lots of hobby ideas etc, #1 idea is to get software for all. Mayby there will be a good balance where you get paid from software what you do, but because GPL license, anyone your client can give same application for free. Doing this, they will "harm" the community. But they will give the world a freedom to develop and take technology in use faster than few companies would be controlling it.
So it is always a race. If you want to get money for your software, develop it faster, make new ideas and do not try to sit on it forever. Mayby a two years is the max time what you can use same kind product getting money. After that you need to have a totally new innotative (how do you spell that:-D) technology what you could sell again.
Open Source will not be so competitive on all IT areas, like on games and other very long term business. It could be, but because the project is transparent and you can always catch the snapshot from it and check how it is going. It will give a feel that it does not develop so fast.
Example of Total Annihilation Spring game engine. You have lots of games using Spring Engine and TA mods using it. But still only a few games/mods are different enough to be a "good". Otherwise that project is halted someway to micromanagement without actually doing so great things (last one was great water bump-mapping effect what looks really good when comparing newest games on all platforms). Mayby the problem is that Open Source has lots of potential to develop whole world even faster rate than now it is doing. But it miss lots of great management persons who like to sit on payroll jobs getting money.
I know next good CEO... how about Bill Gates... he is "retired" or get a Steve Ballmer there... Microsoft needs better CEO so he could be free. Even better, get a Steve Jobs and we could get yMail, yBrowser, ySearch etc. But because Yahoo! is a internet search (etc) company, without multimedia and computers, Steve would not leave Apple....
For some people it is then a different application if you rebrand it.
Same thing is some people believe that already compiled binary version is different application that application what is in source format.
Example, you have three different applications if you compile mozilla-firefox.tar.gz source files to two.deb packages for Ubuntu and Debian. And then one as.rpm for Linux-distribution like Mandriva.
And some people say that Firefox is different application in Windows and Linux or even on different Linux-distributions.
Apple pushED the Safari via iTunes and QuickTime updates, but Apple has not done it long time now.
Safari is possible to install via Apple Update but you need to select it first from secondary downloads list to get it. It does not come automatically.
If CDDL gives too much rights, it actually rip rights off from the end-users. Thats why the GPL can be better than other licenses.
- A license software with BSD, B takes it and modifies it and sells it for C. B does not give source files for C, and A or C does not get any idea what has done. B controls A and C.
- A license software with GPL, B takes it and modifies it and sells it for C. B cant stop C for demanding source. C gets source and A and C gets what B has done.
Later with the second version, the A or C (or D, E, F etc) gets new idea, they implent it and they share the code again. B can take it again and sell it for others. And others can use it too. Everyone gains from sharing.
On first version, B can stop the software natural development right there. It is a very egoistic thing to do. BSD is good only for those who are willing always to share everything what they have done. But because world is not nice and good willing, the GPL is better because it takes care that bigger ones does not step over smaller ones toes and "kill them".
Thats why it is good that Linus toke GPL as Linux OS license and it keeps it such way. I dont take part of GPLv2 vs GPLv3 but best thing is just Linux OS is on GPL and not on BSD. What is the proof? Linux is more widely used than OpenBSD, FreeBSD or NetBSD....
Linux is just fine OS. You can build software systems what you want top of it. Now we have over 400 such systems. Some people say that over 400 distributions are too much and those should be limited for 3-5.
Those who like to play with other OS's than just Windows and Linux (Who says two is enought?), they can get then this OpenSolaris or one of three BSD's.
But question is, who would like to get OS from OpenSolaris, when it is not so different of Linux distributions what use Gnome desktop environment?
OpenSolaris is like Ubuntu but the OS is "just" switched from Linux to SunOS. Both systems includes GNU tools and different system configuration tools (package manager etc) depending about Linux-distribution etc.
I have used OpenSolaris as my main system on laptop on last 3 months and problems are that there are few important drivers missing. Now I want to try this new release if at last, OpenSolaris would get sounds working.
So question is, if you are Windows user and Happy for it. Stick with it. If you ain't happy, think do you want to try Linux as your OS and if answer is "yes", then check what Distribution is best for you. Just forget the OpenSolaris and few *BSD OS's if you ain't ready to play the helpdesk for yourself.
The idea of monolith structured OS is older than microkernel, what is way to build a OS in first place when they came. There is older microkernel based OS's than monmolith, if you calculate by the developing time of OS. But by calculating the OS strucute by the idealogy timeline, the monolith is older.
And it is not *my* idea to call a monolith kernel as OS. I have received this definition in universities (on two countries, in Finland and on Sweden) and so has all my friends on different schools (and countries). It is the technical definition, a scientific one. Not the twisted term by political or marketing people.
And if Linux starts a Init as first userspace program what then starts automatically (as configured in settings) other userspace programs, then a Linux is a OS as in *your* definition too. Monolith kernel = OS.
The microkernel is alone in kernelspace where the OS servers what userland programs needs, are located too on userspace, so the kernel is not alone a OS, but just a part of OS. Microkernel + OS servers = OS.
"In particular, the early designers goal of putting speed above all else led to monolithic designs with the entire operating system running as a single binary program in kernel mode."
"In our view, the only way to improve operating system reliability is to get rid of the model of the operating system as one gigantic program running in kernel mode, with every line of code capable of compromising or bringing down the system. Nearly all the operating system functionality, and especially all the device drivers, have to be moved to user-mode processes, leaving only a tiny microkernel running in kernel mode."
You should use Linux as your OS for netbook, you have wide range of different distributions of it where you can easily choose what kind software system you like. Example, select a minimal system and what installer can be started from USB stick. Then install OS + basic system to get a commandline and install all needed software from network. Of course you need to compile your OS self (Linux kernel) to get all power savings etc if it has not done for you.
For distributions I would suggest just a one, not Ubuntu or any other than Mandriva what 2009 release includes support for all netbook machines. The OS is compiled for such machines and system includes LXDE, a very small desktop environment and Mandriva has even designed it's system tools for netbook monitors (1024x600). I have tried Ubuntu 8.04.1 and Mandriva 2009 on Acer Aspire One and Asus EeePC 901 models and Mandriva was best system for those machines. Ubuntu needs too much tweakin and even compiling OS yourself untill you get it in good state and override those sound and wireless bugs what it has by default, even that you would use the Ubuntu "made" for netbooks.
I liked the Linpus Linux distribution but because it was based to Fedora and I have never be such big fan of Fedora, I wanted to replace it. Just because I wanted easy way to get all mobile phones connected to network.
I did not say that Windows NT microkernel was about 6 million LoC, but the Windows NT OS. Windows NT OS use microkernel, so the OS is the kernel + OS servers in userland. The Windows NT microkernel might have 50 000 - 200 000 LoC while the whole Windows XP Software System has over 40 million LoC
50 000 - 200 000 Microkernel LoC ~6 million OS LoC 40 million Software System LoC
Linux OS has now over 6 million lines, it includes all drivers etc. The kernel itself, without any drivers etc, might be lots of smaller itself. But the whole Linux OS distribution like Fedora, has over 200 million LoC
~6 million OS(monolith kernel) LoC 150 - 250 Million Software System LoC
And Linux is cery seriously a Monolith, but it is modular and not macrokernel.
Windows NT (the OS, so called "Hybrid kernel" (what use a microkernel!)) has about 6 million LoC
Linux (The OS, a monolith kernel) has now over 6 million LoC
Windows NT5.1 software system (Windows NT5.1 = XP) is over 40 million lines of code.
Linux software system (Any distribution) can be over 40 million lines of code very easily, the KDE project is alone almost that!
Problem is that we should only count code what are in OS's (Linux vs NT) and not on whole software systems. It is easy to do count for Microsoft own code, without counting all the software what is available for Windows NT. But usually on distributions what use Linux OS, you get counted all the applications from FOSS side too, like Mozilla Firefox, Mozilla Thunderbird, KDE (alone a HUGE!), Gnome etc. All the applications what are compiled for those distributions.
Linux was long time a macrokernel, including all drivers etc in kernel itself and loaded always in memory. After 2.2 it became a modular (in both cases it was monolith) so you could compile drivers etc as module. And then those modules were stored to disk, and not loaded to memory when the OS gets loaded to memory in start, what could lead very small memory usage, like only a few megs. And then when drivers etc are needed, they are read from disk to memory and be used. Bad thing was that every module was compiled to specific kernel version and the integration is very tight. And if you compile kernel, you need to compiler all the modules too. If one module or any other driver or OS part crashed, it brought the whole OS and software system down. So you needed to be sure that all the code what OS has, is checked and bug free. Now think that Linux has over 6 million lines of code (and how much are in drivers, what is most certain place to have a reason for crash!) so the OS is very HUGE.
But I think you are wanting OS what has a microkernel structure, where kernel itself is very small and all other OS parts are scattered to userland off from kernel, as OS servers, from there you could swap and compile all OS servers as they would be normal applications. Without need to compile kernel or other OS servers in same time. And if one OS server (driver, filesystem or network protocol) was compromised, you just could restart/replace that one without doing so for whole OS or whole software system. Because bug in driver affected just for the device driver itself, and not having possibilities to bring OS or whole software system down.
But you can always start wars with wich one is better OS structure, a Monolith kernel or a Microkernel based OS. Microsoft has used a microkernel structure in Windows NT and it continues using a microkernel structured OS in MinWin and on Singularity. So the OS should be very stable but we know that driver can bring the OS or the whole software system down very easily, even it should not be possible (in theory only?).
Slashdot Mirror
And thanks for the Ubuntu Fanboys, we have wikipedia saturated with Ubuntu, on articles where it does not belong etc. And Ubuntu has gone over "Linux" on them. Even the normal user ask "Where I can get Linux" and stupid Ubuntu fans yells back for that "I is just a kernel you idiot!".
In few years you dont have device drivers for Linux, but for Ubuntu. You dont have commercial software available than few commercial distributions and Ubuntu. And all the n00bs keeps talking that "You can have Ubuntu or Linux, those are two different Operating Systems, Ubuntu altought is much better because the browser and office applications are integrated to operating system itself".
So thanks a lot Ubuntu users what you have done to promote the Linux, but no thanks for negative attitude against Linux community, just being so annoing and blind Ubuntu fans...
I am not so happy... because it is possible that without mouse, we could have developed faster a working speech controlling, a multitouch controlling and of course, a mind controlling devices. Now we are "stuck" to mouse and the UI what is harder to use.
We have 12 Function keys... what we dont use so much anymore than the command line time on office application, what menus were controlled via those buttons and what they did in different situations.
Many office applications can be used very well with function keys and other key combinations. Especially if you need to type information to database only, where you jump from other box to another (of course such UI's should be design so that you can jump to different parts easily, without need to press TAB 10-20 times until you come to end, in this case the mouse can be better).
Not on my beta2... Ctrl+Tabs works just fine (I like the Ctrl+, or Ctrl+. like on konqueror, because I can move more easier to both sides than just forward and back with Ctrl+Tab and Ctrl+Shift+Tab.
Altough the Alt+0-9 does not work on me...
One my friend is makeup artist too, she made herself look like a old guy with her friends who were made samething. And then they went to bar using old man business suites what they buyed with few euros from second hand. Only thing what actually revealed them, was their laugh and "pepsodent smile".
You can use makeup very well to hide your identity, so you could look same kind person than the person in photo. But you just cant change your smile.
I would suggest that they would force everyone to smile on ID photos. Then teach cops and other officers to tell dirty jokes to get person laugh and then check does the ID photo match to person.
What? They have copied the "one button mouse" idea from Apple!! Damn Copycats!! Thats why Apple needed to invent the Mighty Mouse so there would not be so many copies!
Seems that most of slashdotters miss the real point on this news.... Obama goes to gym... the Zune is just a sidenote on this news but still most of readers only looks that...
Obama does represent all the Americans... not just majority, because last time I checked, he will be next president of United States of America.
Internet Explorer is bundled with windows and integrated to NT operating system.
Safari is bundled with Mac OS X but not integrated to Darwin operating system
Firefox is preinstalled on most of Linux distributions but not integrated to Linux operating system.
Opera is preinstalled and bundled on many software platoforms on telephones and handheld machines (or even game consoles). Question is, is it integrated any of the devices?
Konqueror is integrated to KDE desktop environment but not integrated to Linux operating system. KDE comes usually bundled on many of Linux distributions.
So in the other words, now we got the Linux OS ported to iPhone, we can finally get a GNU/Linux developing platform to iPhone in no time and then we can get all the wanted applications working... but does it still be a phone or toy?
I dont know is the GNU/Linux developing platform needed at all, most important thing is just that Linux OS is ported and we can develop the needed applications on the PC/Mac and then just run them on the iPhone.
What I believe is that software business is overrated. Even that almost everything is going to digital format and will coming depending computers, there is too much developers actually to get a payment from what they do. This would not be the case if IT "world" would be closed at least as much as it was middle 90's. You can fight, use patents to stop others competitors and do everything what you just could, to "protect" your own work. But same time you slowed down the whole world development.
In Open Source, there are lots of hobby ideas etc, #1 idea is to get software for all. Mayby there will be a good balance where you get paid from software what you do, but because GPL license, anyone your client can give same application for free. Doing this, they will "harm" the community. But they will give the world a freedom to develop and take technology in use faster than few companies would be controlling it.
So it is always a race. If you want to get money for your software, develop it faster, make new ideas and do not try to sit on it forever. Mayby a two years is the max time what you can use same kind product getting money. After that you need to have a totally new innotative (how do you spell that :-D) technology what you could sell again.
Open Source will not be so competitive on all IT areas, like on games and other very long term business. It could be, but because the project is transparent and you can always catch the snapshot from it and check how it is going. It will give a feel that it does not develop so fast.
Example of Total Annihilation Spring game engine. You have lots of games using Spring Engine and TA mods using it. But still only a few games/mods are different enough to be a "good". Otherwise that project is halted someway to micromanagement without actually doing so great things (last one was great water bump-mapping effect what looks really good when comparing newest games on all platforms). Mayby the problem is that Open Source has lots of potential to develop whole world even faster rate than now it is doing. But it miss lots of great management persons who like to sit on payroll jobs getting money.
Does they really think that spider wants to make a web when there is no mosquitos or flyes etc there?
Mayby thats why the spider dropped off from that trip and went to havana for getting a suntan.
I know next good CEO... how about Bill Gates... he is "retired" or get a Steve Ballmer there... Microsoft needs better CEO so he could be free. Even better, get a Steve Jobs and we could get yMail, yBrowser, ySearch etc. But because Yahoo! is a internet search (etc) company, without multimedia and computers, Steve would not leave Apple....
For some people it is then a different application if you rebrand it.
Same thing is some people believe that already compiled binary version is different application that application what is in source format.
Example, you have three different applications if you compile mozilla-firefox.tar.gz source files to two .deb packages for Ubuntu and Debian. And then one as .rpm for Linux-distribution like Mandriva.
And some people say that Firefox is different application in Windows and Linux or even on different Linux-distributions.
Apple pushED the Safari via iTunes and QuickTime updates, but Apple has not done it long time now.
Safari is possible to install via Apple Update but you need to select it first from secondary downloads list to get it. It does not come automatically.
If CDDL gives too much rights, it actually rip rights off from the end-users. Thats why the GPL can be better than other licenses.
- A license software with BSD, B takes it and modifies it and sells it for C. B does not give source files for C, and A or C does not get any idea what has done. B controls A and C.
- A license software with GPL, B takes it and modifies it and sells it for C. B cant stop C for demanding source. C gets source and A and C gets what B has done.
Later with the second version, the A or C (or D, E, F etc) gets new idea, they implent it and they share the code again. B can take it again and sell it for others. And others can use it too. Everyone gains from sharing.
On first version, B can stop the software natural development right there. It is a very egoistic thing to do. BSD is good only for those who are willing always to share everything what they have done. But because world is not nice and good willing, the GPL is better because it takes care that bigger ones does not step over smaller ones toes and "kill them".
Thats why it is good that Linus toke GPL as Linux OS license and it keeps it such way. I dont take part of GPLv2 vs GPLv3 but best thing is just Linux OS is on GPL and not on BSD. What is the proof? Linux is more widely used than OpenBSD, FreeBSD or NetBSD....
Microkernel != OS
Microkernel + OS servers in userland == OS
Monolithkernel == OS
OS+Devel-tools == Development platform
OS+Other software == Software system
Mac OS X use Darwin
Darwin == OS
Linux is just fine OS. You can build software systems what you want top of it. Now we have over 400 such systems. Some people say that over 400 distributions are too much and those should be limited for 3-5.
Those who like to play with other OS's than just Windows and Linux (Who says two is enought?), they can get then this OpenSolaris or one of three BSD's.
But question is, who would like to get OS from OpenSolaris, when it is not so different of Linux distributions what use Gnome desktop environment?
OpenSolaris is like Ubuntu but the OS is "just" switched from Linux to SunOS. Both systems includes GNU tools and different system configuration tools (package manager etc) depending about Linux-distribution etc.
I have used OpenSolaris as my main system on laptop on last 3 months and problems are that there are few important drivers missing. Now I want to try this new release if at last, OpenSolaris would get sounds working.
So question is, if you are Windows user and Happy for it. Stick with it. If you ain't happy, think do you want to try Linux as your OS and if answer is "yes", then check what Distribution is best for you. Just forget the OpenSolaris and few *BSD OS's if you ain't ready to play the helpdesk for yourself.
http://www.topology.org/human/?a=/linux/lingl.html
The idea of monolith structured OS is older than microkernel, what is way to build a OS in first place when they came. There is older microkernel based OS's than monmolith, if you calculate by the developing time of OS. But by calculating the OS strucute by the idealogy timeline, the monolith is older.
And it is not *my* idea to call a monolith kernel as OS. I have received this definition in universities (on two countries, in Finland and on Sweden) and so has all my friends on different schools (and countries). It is the technical definition, a scientific one. Not the twisted term by political or marketing people.
And if Linux starts a Init as first userspace program what then starts automatically (as configured in settings) other userspace programs, then a Linux is a OS as in *your* definition too. Monolith kernel = OS.
The microkernel is alone in kernelspace where the OS servers what userland programs needs, are located too on userspace, so the kernel is not alone a OS, but just a part of OS. Microkernel + OS servers = OS.
"In particular, the early designers goal of putting speed above all else led to monolithic designs with the entire operating system running as a single binary program in kernel mode."
"In our view, the only way to improve operating system reliability is to get rid of the model of the operating system as one gigantic program running in kernel mode, with every line of code capable of compromising or bringing down the system. Nearly all the operating system functionality, and especially all the device drivers, have to be moved to user-mode processes,
leaving only a tiny microkernel running in kernel mode."
The monolith kernel is the OS. Microkernel tries to make more stable OS by moving as much OS parts to userland as possible.
http://www.usenix.org/publications/login/2006-04/openpdfs/herder.pdf
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0130313580/ref=sib_dp_pt/103-7158569-1619062#reader-link
Monolith kernel is the old way building a OS. Microkernel is the "new" way for building a OS.
But you might be those who believe that OS is that what has desktop, icons, wallpapers etc. And openoffice, Firefox and Gimp are parts of OS?
You should use Linux as your OS for netbook, you have wide range of different distributions of it where you can easily choose what kind software system you like. Example, select a minimal system and what installer can be started from USB stick. Then install OS + basic system to get a commandline and install all needed software from network. Of course you need to compile your OS self (Linux kernel) to get all power savings etc if it has not done for you.
For distributions I would suggest just a one, not Ubuntu or any other than Mandriva what 2009 release includes support for all netbook machines. The OS is compiled for such machines and system includes LXDE, a very small desktop environment and Mandriva has even designed it's system tools for netbook monitors (1024x600). I have tried Ubuntu 8.04.1 and Mandriva 2009 on Acer Aspire One and Asus EeePC 901 models and Mandriva was best system for those machines. Ubuntu needs too much tweakin and even compiling OS yourself untill you get it in good state and override those sound and wireless bugs what it has by default, even that you would use the Ubuntu "made" for netbooks.
I liked the Linpus Linux distribution but because it was based to Fedora and I have never be such big fan of Fedora, I wanted to replace it. Just because I wanted easy way to get all mobile phones connected to network.
I did not say that Windows NT microkernel was about 6 million LoC, but the Windows NT OS. Windows NT OS use microkernel, so the OS is the kernel + OS servers in userland. The Windows NT microkernel might have 50 000 - 200 000 LoC while the whole Windows XP Software System has over 40 million LoC
50 000 - 200 000 Microkernel LoC
~6 million OS LoC
40 million Software System LoC
Linux OS has now over 6 million lines, it includes all drivers etc. The kernel itself, without any drivers etc, might be lots of smaller itself. But the whole Linux OS distribution like Fedora, has over 200 million LoC
~6 million OS(monolith kernel) LoC
150 - 250 Million Software System LoC
And Linux is cery seriously a Monolith, but it is modular and not macrokernel.
You ain't comparing Windows NT OS to Linux Kernel.
You are comparing Windows NT's Software System to Linux OS.
http://tinyurl.com/mum9x
http://tinyurl.com/3uaq48
Windows NT (the OS, so called "Hybrid kernel" (what use a microkernel!)) has about 6 million LoC
Linux (The OS, a monolith kernel) has now over 6 million LoC
Windows NT5.1 software system (Windows NT5.1 = XP) is over 40 million lines of code.
Linux software system (Any distribution) can be over 40 million lines of code very easily, the KDE project is alone almost that!
Problem is that we should only count code what are in OS's (Linux vs NT) and not on whole software systems. It is easy to do count for Microsoft own code, without counting all the software what is available for Windows NT. But usually on distributions what use Linux OS, you get counted all the applications from FOSS side too, like Mozilla Firefox, Mozilla Thunderbird, KDE (alone a HUGE!), Gnome etc. All the applications what are compiled for those distributions.
The Comparison is not fair at all.
(And yes, the Monolith kernel is the OS, not just a kernel http://tinyurl.com/3uaq48 http://tinyurl.com/mum9x)
Linux was long time a macrokernel, including all drivers etc in kernel itself and loaded always in memory. After 2.2 it became a modular (in both cases it was monolith) so you could compile drivers etc as module. And then those modules were stored to disk, and not loaded to memory when the OS gets loaded to memory in start, what could lead very small memory usage, like only a few megs. And then when drivers etc are needed, they are read from disk to memory and be used. Bad thing was that every module was compiled to specific kernel version and the integration is very tight. And if you compile kernel, you need to compiler all the modules too. If one module or any other driver or OS part crashed, it brought the whole OS and software system down. So you needed to be sure that all the code what OS has, is checked and bug free. Now think that Linux has over 6 million lines of code (and how much are in drivers, what is most certain place to have a reason for crash!) so the OS is very HUGE.
But I think you are wanting OS what has a microkernel structure, where kernel itself is very small and all other OS parts are scattered to userland off from kernel, as OS servers, from there you could swap and compile all OS servers as they would be normal applications. Without need to compile kernel or other OS servers in same time. And if one OS server (driver, filesystem or network protocol) was compromised, you just could restart/replace that one without doing so for whole OS or whole software system. Because bug in driver affected just for the device driver itself, and not having possibilities to bring OS or whole software system down.
But you can always start wars with wich one is better OS structure, a Monolith kernel or a Microkernel based OS. Microsoft has used a microkernel structure in Windows NT and it continues using a microkernel structured OS in MinWin and on Singularity. So the OS should be very stable but we know that driver can bring the OS or the whole software system down very easily, even it should not be possible (in theory only?).