[ILUG-BOM] A Full Aubuntu.

[Vihan Pandey]

> > to put it in one line - would you rather start teaching computer
> > programming with BASIC or PL/1 ?
>
> I would rather learn with C than BASIC or PL/1

and how many others say the same?

> > > IIRC, M$'s own kernel ( Win2k or Win2k3 ) resembles a microkernel. yes,
> > > they too are apparent aware of the positive aspects of the microkernel.
> >
> > Oh, and where did you get info from, please do post a link.
>
> Find it yourself! Its on MSDN or Technet or google or somewhere!! :P

If are you talking about Singularity - yes its good to see them
looking at design seriously. i hope they do the same for honest
business as well.

> > then why the ranting against AST?
>
> Because I'm a Linus fan boiii, get it? :)

:-)

> > given time and effort there WILL be more contenders. To assume there
> > would be none is VERY dogmatic.
>
> Given enough time and effort pigs will fly and we'll have perpetual
> motion machines.

*sigh*

> Go back and read my posts, I never said that Linux is _the_ kernel for
> GNU. Yes, eventually, there _will_ be a better replacement for the Linux
> kernel or maybe Linux may evolve into a true microkernel. Who knows? I
> never discounted the possibility, did I?
> > but you discounted the probability of a microkernel based future entirely.
>
> No I didnt.

<quote>
The way people talk about microkernels being the salvation of the
modern operating
systems drives me up the wall.
</quote>

> > By giving stupid comparisons you HAVE tried to trivialize AST which is
> > unforgivable.
>
> Oh so sue me! :/ I've my opinions, just like you have and I have full
> right to express them.

trivializing on basesless points is malicious and it is my right to counter it.

>Just cuz you worship AST doesnt mean that the
> rest of the universe does too...

i don't worship AST, but i don't agree your Linus - Spanish Inquesition either.

> > Would anyone be dumb enough to say : ``Don Knuth is a genius at
> > algorithms and created TeX but since its not being practically used as
> > much Micro$oft Office that makes him mearly a theory guy".
>
> This is a really flawed analogy.

you were insisting on the popularity bit hence the analogy

>Both TeX and M$ Office are _working_
> and _matured_ products. TeX is far far older, agreed. While a true,
> working microkernel is still a long way from reality.

QNX - On Cisco routers

reference : http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?site=lightreading&doc_id=53319

Integrity - One of the leading operating systems in the military and
aerospace markets, where reliability is absolutely critical

PikeOS - a microkernel-based real-time system widely used in defense,
aerospace, automotive, and industrial applications.

Singularity - A M$ funded project by Galen Hunt and Jim Larus, who
well understand that Windows is a mess and a new approach is needed.

K42 - About 10 years ago IBM began developing a new high-performance
operating system from scratch for its very large customers. An
explicit design goal was to move system functionality from the kernel
to servers and application programs, similar to a microkernel. This
system, called K42, has now been deployed at the DoE and elsewhere.

> Its in the making but as I said _repeatedly_, todays technology makes it
> exponentially difficult for us to write a microkernel. Why do think
> theres no "commercial" microkernel? I'm very well aware of its benefits
> but despite that we dont see one around, do we? :/

QNX, Integrity, PikeOS, Singularity, and K42

> > i'm still not understanding why you feel like that?
>
> Stop trying to understand my "feelings" :P

Done.

Regards,

- vihan