[HN Gopher] Aftermath of the Kernel Wars
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Aftermath of the Kernel Wars
        
       Author : ingve
       Score  : 32 points
       Date   : 2023-05-01 06:13 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (deprogrammaticaipsum.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (deprogrammaticaipsum.com)
        
       | ch_123 wrote:
       | > Operating Systems were at the heart of that war. Back in 1980,
       | they were a relatively new concept. From the 1950s to the 80s, we
       | had been using countless computers without anything resembling an
       | operating system.
       | 
       | The fact that many of the operating systems we still use to this
       | day have origins in systems created during the 60s and 70s is one
       | of the many problems I have with this statement.
        
       | erwan577 wrote:
       | the conclusion feels a little abrupt to me. What about the
       | differences between web 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0? What about the failed
       | W3C standards? What about the limitations of web apps compared to
       | native mobile apps? What about the closed gardens that
       | Facebook/Meta and newer social networks are trying to build? And
       | lastly, countries are restricting web access to their own
       | jurisdiction. The wars are just beginning.
        
         | erwan577 wrote:
         | Also the language wars are related to the platform/OS wars but
         | are much more diverse.
        
         | MisterTea wrote:
         | Whole article feels abrupt. The hasty pace feels like its
         | trying to get the reader to the end as fast as possible while
         | saying as little as possible. Not sure what the point even is
         | other than a very brisk walk down memory lane.
        
         | garbagecoder wrote:
         | I think he also missed the fact that Windows NT came from VMS,
         | not unix. The article needed an editor for sure.
         | 
         | I think your point rings true, there are always these platform
         | wars. But there is much more ease of interoperability now. Even
         | reading a 5.25" disk on a different system was sometimes
         | impossible, lots of things like that. Keyboards and monitors
         | had different connectors.
         | 
         | When Apple went to USB it was like a miracle. Circa.. 1995?
         | Maybe with the iMac.
        
           | p_l wrote:
           | iMac was the one with usb replacing serial, parallel, ADB and
           | floppy with built in cdrom and usb.
           | 
           | This meant some issues that were quite complained about,
           | because at its release in 1998 the only way to export data
           | was over network (or IrDA). USB Mass Storage was supported
           | starting next year, and pendrives debuted in 2000.
        
       | winter_blue wrote:
       | This article is really shallowly and poorly-written, like one of
       | those cheap "pop science" magazines. I wish Computer Science
       | wasn't affected by this sort of bottom-of-the-barrel journalism.
       | 
       | The author embellishes, makes sweeping inaccurate statements
       | (that users only care about price and buying the cheapest
       | product? that's patently untrue in any field), and dismisses
       | technical excellence (like strong _static_ typing) as
       | meaningless. Terrible.
       | 
       | In my opinion, LWN is the gold standard of good technical
       | journalism ( _on fairly-advanced topics_ , like operating
       | system).
       | 
       | Hope more folk emulate LWN.
        
         | debo_ wrote:
         | LWN is great. I also enjoyed this; I didn't take it very
         | seriously, and I enjoyed the presentation of this history as a
         | variant of the Iliad. I laughed quite a few times.
        
         | giantrobot wrote:
         | I felt like I was experiencing the writer's ADHD trying to read
         | the article. There was no real coherent narrative, just a bunch
         | of quick cuts and asides.
         | 
         | I've got my own ADHD, I don't need somebody else's as well.
        
       | chrisbrandow wrote:
       | As a mere casual observer of the time period discussed, I found
       | this delightful.
        
       | asldkfjaslkdj wrote:
       | open article. Ctrl+F "tainted". zero matches.
       | 
       | I didn't bother reading the article because of that.
       | 
       | Big Enterprise won the kernel wars. After Balmer freaking out and
       | paying a hit piece calling "Linux a cancer", everyone managed to
       | work around GPL and be able to inject non-free parts in the
       | kernel. Linux compromised with the "tainted kernel" and later
       | just gave up. Result: Android is a linux, and is the most closed
       | source system on earth. Thousands of people throw away perfectly
       | good android phones just because the owner of the source code
       | refuses to release a update.
       | 
       | Linux lost. Well, at least the spirit of it.
        
       | djha-skin wrote:
       | Reminds me of a line from the Common Lisp Cookbook[1]:
       | 
       | > Keep in mind that it was written at a time where Lisp Machines
       | were at their peak. On these boxes Lisp was your operating
       | system!
       | 
       | Common Lisp OS interfacing is not part of the standard, because
       | there were no "operating systems" back when Common Lisp Standard
       | started out other than Lisp itself. It, too, was a casualty of
       | the OS wars, but it lives on in user space, where it now lurks,
       | and bides its time.
       | 
       | 1: https://lispcookbook.github.io/cl-cookbook/os.html
        
         | gumby wrote:
         | > there were no "operating systems" back when Common Lisp
         | Standard started out other than Lisp itself.
         | 
         | This isn't really true, of course.
         | 
         | Sure, Commonlisp was mainly the standardization of MIT Lipsm
         | lisp (based on MACLISP), influenced by good ideas from PARC's
         | D-Machine Interlisp-D (based on Interlisp). Both ran on the
         | bare iron of their respective machines.
         | 
         | But their predecessors MACLISP and BBN Interlisp both ran on
         | PDP-10s under Tenex, Twenex (and those latter two's official
         | OSes) and MACLISP also on PDP-10 ITS (its original home)
         | Multics (both hardware and an OS). Other MACLISP-ish Lisps such
         | as VAXLISP (VMS) and franz lisp (Unix on PDP-11s and Vaxes)
         | contributed as well. These were all user space environments.
        
           | gumby wrote:
           | By the way the PDP-6 (and thus its dependent the PDP-10) was
           | explicitly designed to be a "Lisp machine" -- a machine word
           | was a cons and many fundamental lisp operations like car and
           | cdr were single machine instructions.
        
       | heywhatupboys wrote:
       | > Android won the second, although some regions of the world
       | remain under the control of iOS
       | 
       | this author has no clue what operative system is. There is more
       | sense in the Stallmann GNU/linux copypasta.
        
         | erwan577 wrote:
         | the author considers an "operating system" as the ecosystem
         | where the user live and find a convenient application "store".
         | Same store = same OS. Different store = different OS.
         | 
         | So with this reasoning maybe soon Windows = Linux but Android
         | != Linux.
        
         | arp242 wrote:
         | Try doing some useful work after installing the Linux kernel -
         | and just the kernel - on a device.
         | 
         | You can't. You need more than just a kernel, quite a bit more,
         | and that's an operating system. "GNU plus Linux" or whatever
         | you want to call it, or Android, or whatever. In that sense
         | Stallman is correct that "the Linux kernel is just one piece of
         | the operating system" (although his insistence on GNU/Linux is
         | still rather wrongheaded IMO, but I don't feel like repeating
         | that discussion).
        
           | GauntletWizard wrote:
           | There's plenty of people who do - see the
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unikernel stuff and Firecracker
           | VMs and simplified runtimes like Lambda - But agreed, a
           | useful consumer computer requires a whole suite of programs
           | and tools that comprise a "OS" to be useful.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-05-02 23:02 UTC)