__/ [ Mark Kent ] on Saturday 26 August 2006 15:48 \__
> begin oe_protect.scr
> Linonut <linonut@xxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Hadron Quark belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>>
>>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>
>>>>>>| Instead, the research firm predicts, Microsoft will be forced to
>>>>>>| migrate Windows to a modular architecture tied together through
>>>>>>| hardware-supported virtualisation. "The current, integrated
>>>>>>| architecture of Microsoft Windows is unsustainable - for enterprises
>>>>>>| and for Microsoft," wrote Gartner analysts Brian Gammage, Michael
>>>>>>| Silver and David Mitchell Smith.
>>>
>>> Linux is a monolithic kernel.
>>
>> Sort of.
>>
>> In any case, the article mentioned architecture, not the kernel.
>>
>> The kernel is probably the best part of Windows. It's the drivers and
>> user space that aren't so well integrated.
>>
>
> By necessity, it must be the least complex and least multiply-dependent
> part of windows. Being best is relative in such a situation, of
> course...
We never spoke about µ-kernels here (that's just Andrew Tanenbaum's itch and
gripe with merely all of today's O/Sen). The level of abstraction in BSD and
Linux is good, if not admirable. When I programmed and developed an ARM
front-end, my Supervisor urged me to separate the presentation layer (GTK)
from all else It makes everything more manageable and versatile (prepared
for change, owing to transparency). It's hard to reverse wrong design
choices without breaking something (background-compatibility) or confusing
other people/components (possibly other team of programmers). Dependencies
at large scales are marbid.
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | Wintendo O/S gets malware on its tail
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Swap: 1036184k total, 479864k used, 556320k free, 40008k cached
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
|
|
