7 ms·

Well that was the intended wordplay. Although it is a shame that for end users Unix is still nowhere near the top of any popularity metric.

nine_k 10y ago
Unix kernel is hugely popular: think of the millions of Android devices. Unix userland, not so much, outside the software engineering community.
- milankragujevic 10y ago
  I don't like this argument, because Android is not developed openly and the kernel itself is a fork which lags behind the mainstream Linux development until Google implements the changes, which users see when they throw away their phone because Samsung/HTC/Xiaomi/Ulefone/Whatever doesn't want to update the phone or Verizon/ATT/Telenor/T-Mobile, etc., doesn't want to push the update because they branded the phone so that means its theirs but not their responsibility.
  - lisivka 10y ago
    Android can be run on vanilla kernel with few patches: http://forum.xda-developers.com/nexus-7-2013/general/android-running-vanilla-4-5-kernel-t3351816 http://forum.xda-developers.com/nexus-7-2013/general/android... . Android apps can be run on GNU/Linux without emulation when required libraries and daemons are available (on compatible architecture, of course).
    - squarefoot 10y ago
      True, but how many devices will allow you to install and use that system without being forced to add blobs?
      - lisivka 10y ago
        Very few, if any. Enthusiasts need to reverse engineer binary blobs and write open source drivers, as usual.
- lisivka 10y ago
  Linux is not UNIX. GNU/Linux is POSIX (common standard for UNIX'es) compatible, so it is UNIX compatible. Android/Linux is not POSIX compatible, however compatible library can be installed to Android/Linux to make it POSIX compatible, see http://stackoverflow.com/questions/27604455/is-android-posix-compatible http://stackoverflow.com/questions/27604455/is-android-posix... . *BSD, MacOS X, iOS are UNIX'es, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system) .
  - zokula 10y ago
    No current open source *BSD is anymore UNIX than Linux is.
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      I doubt the BSD developers that are part of BSD since the days before the lawsuit will agree with you.
      - AsyncAwait 10y ago
        They may not, but there's so little original UNIX code in *BSD these days that it does not matter, in fact that's one of the main reasons they won the lawsuit in the first place.
        lisivka 10y ago
        I just opened my Red Book and reread «Short history of UNIX». Berkley University bought license for AT&T UNIX[1] in 1977. They started to develop their own software for UNIX and distribute it, so this variant of UNIX is called BSD. Then they decide to remove and rewrite original AT&T code, due to license and associated costs, and released 4.3BSD[2], which then used by BSD flavors. So BSD is UNIX, but it contains no AT&T code today. [1] http://www.nordier.com/v7x86/index.html http://www.nordier.com/v7x86/index.html [2] https://virtuallyfun.superglobalmegacorp.com/category/4-3-bsd/ https://virtuallyfun.superglobalmegacorp.com/category/4-3-bs...
- hasenj 10y ago
  Don't iPhones and iPads also have a UNIX kernel?
  - lisivka 10y ago
    It's complicated. Original UNIX by AT&T was newer open-sourced. BSD (Berkley Software Distribution) was opensource distribution of user programs for UNIX (like TCP/IP stack, vi editor, etc.), used by original UNIX, with proportions 20% of AT&T code and 80% of BSD code. So technically, BSD is(0.8) not(0.2) UNIX. FreeBSD is branched from BSD code, so it is(0.8) not(0.2) UNIX too. Apple MacOS X is based on FreeBSD code (and lot of other code), and it certified as UNIX compatible, so MacOS X can be named as UNIX. iOS is based on MacOS X, so iOS is UNIX too.
    - JonathonW 10y ago
      If you want to get technical about it, the Mac kernel itself isn't a traditional UNIX or BSD kernel; XNU (which, conveniently enough, stands for "X is not UNIX") is a hybrid composed of the Mach microkernel, some FreeBSD components, and Apple's own driver model. The system as a whole is able to brand itself as UNIX compliant, though, because it complies with the Single UNIX Specification. That spec is concerned about userspace behavior, not kernel or implementation, and you don't have to include any actual UNIX source code to be able to brand your OS as a "UNIX" according to the spec and trademark guidelines.
      - lisivka 10y ago
        Yep, XNU is Mach microkernel + FreeBSD kernel. Some features of XNU are even ported back to FreeBSD kernel. IMHO, that is enough to draw direct connection from XNU to original UNIX (without ™), unlike Linux kernel.
        TickleSteve 10y ago
        Mach microkernel + FreeBSD userland.... not kernel. BSD is a 'personality' layer.
- deaddodo 10y ago
  Android doesn't run a Unix kernel. Hell, Linux isn't even all that compatible with Unix outside of POSIX. http://kernelbook.sourceforge.net/pdf/ch-intro.pdf http://kernelbook.sourceforge.net/pdf/ch-intro.pdf
- squarefoot 10y ago
  "Unix kernel is hugely popular: think of the millions of Android devices." You probably meant Linux, not Unix. Unix is an entire class of operating systems, not a kernel. Nitpicking aside, the huge problem here is that popularity means nothing if the user is not aware of what he/she is using, so I would rephrase that as "the Linux kernel is hugely widespread ...". There is still a big problem though: Android is mostly closed, at least all vital device drivers are, so that you have no chances to build a working non Android environment on newer devices or patch old ones, move an installation from a device to a different one etc. Having a Linux kernel does not help in this context since all benefits the FOSS community infused into the system were stripped away. I would dare to say that telling people that Android contains a Linux kernel is even dangerous to the Linux image.
  - emmelaich 10y ago
    > he huge problem here is that popularity means nothing if the user is not aware of what he/she is using I'd say that doesn't matter at all. The person running Internet Explorer or Microsoft Edge doesn't know they're using a VMS workalike/derivative/successor either.
- pjmlp 10y ago
  Have you ever used the NDK? Android is all about Java and there is only a very thin subset of native APIs that are available, including POSIX ones. https://developer.android.com/ndk/guides/stable_apis.html https://developer.android.com/ndk/guides/stable_apis.html Starting with Android 7, calling anything outside of that list will terminate the application. Google could replace the kernel for something else, while keeping those NDK APIs and only OEMs writing drivers would notice.
  - dispose13432 10y ago
    >Starting with Android 7, calling anything outside of that list will terminate the application. Google could replace the kernel for something else, while keeping those NDK APIs and only OEMs writing drivers would notice And they're planning on doing precisely that with Fuchsia
user5994461 10y ago
Unix or Linux? Unix is kinda dead by all metrics.
- elchief 10y ago
  ya no one uses mac or BSD
  - user5994461 10y ago
    Indeed, noone uses BSD. Is mac considered as a Unix? I think it'd be considered as its own thing by now.
    - riffic 10y ago
      Yes, macOS is (or OS X has) been considered a Unix: https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/1489/is-mac-os-x-unix https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/1489/is-mac-os-x-un...
    - 3131s 10y ago
      Pretty sure HN runs on FreeBSD.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
    - kgwgk 10y ago
      UNIX® Certified Products http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/ http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/
- devsatish 10y ago
  Unix and thus Linux!
cperciva 10y ago
How do you define "popularity"? UNIX is found in many devices end users don't think of as being "computers" at all. The best software is the software users don't even realize is there, because it just works.
- coldtea 10y ago
  Well, the meaningful way for UNIX (and Linux) to succeed as a popular product, according to the aspirations of its proponents, was on the desktop. It wasn't just about the server side back then (late 90s, early 00s) it was all about taking over Windows. If somebody uses some hardware product (e.g. set top box) and doesn't know its Linux, then it's no big win for the Linux community. And it's not just necessarily that users don't realize it's there because "it just works", either. The set top box, for example, can be buggy or crappy but just not provide neither a way to dive in and fix it, nor branding related to Linux.
  - cperciva 10y ago
    If somebody uses some hardware product (e.g. set top box) and doesn't know its Linux, then it's no big win for the Linux community. I have to disagree there. It may not be a marketing win, but that doesn't mean that there are no other benefits. The fact that the PlayStation 4 runs FreeBSD has resulted in a large number of improvements becoming available to us; whether Johnny knows that his games are running on a daemonic operating system is of very little relevance.
    - bluejekyll 10y ago
      > daemonic operating system I've never seen someone refer to it like that before. Awesome.
    - dTal 10y ago
      >the PlayStation 4 runs FreeBSD wait, what? Awesome.
    - JonnieCache 10y ago
      >The fact that the PlayStation 4 runs FreeBSD has resulted in a large number of improvements becoming available to us Is there a writeup of this anywhere? If stuff has been backported/upstreamed/whatever from the PS4 to the freeBSD kernel that would truly be living the dream!
kahrkunne 10y ago
Am I the only one who doesn't really consider that a shame? As a happy Linux desktop user here (considering switching to FreeBSD but switching is intimidating :|), I don't really care that much what other people use.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

nine_k 10y ago

Unix kernel is hugely popular: think of the millions of Android devices. Unix userland, not so much, outside the software engineering community.

milankragujevic 10y ago
I don't like this argument, because Android is not developed openly and the kernel itself is a fork which lags behind the mainstream Linux development until Google implements the changes, which users see when they throw away their phone because Samsung/HTC/Xiaomi/Ulefone/Whatever doesn't want to update the phone or Verizon/ATT/Telenor/T-Mobile, etc., doesn't want to push the update because they branded the phone so that means its theirs but not their responsibility.
- lisivka 10y ago
  Android can be run on vanilla kernel with few patches: http://forum.xda-developers.com/nexus-7-2013/general/android-running-vanilla-4-5-kernel-t3351816 http://forum.xda-developers.com/nexus-7-2013/general/android... . Android apps can be run on GNU/Linux without emulation when required libraries and daemons are available (on compatible architecture, of course).
  - squarefoot 10y ago
    True, but how many devices will allow you to install and use that system without being forced to add blobs?
    - lisivka 10y ago
      Very few, if any. Enthusiasts need to reverse engineer binary blobs and write open source drivers, as usual.
lisivka 10y ago
Linux is not UNIX. GNU/Linux is POSIX (common standard for UNIX'es) compatible, so it is UNIX compatible. Android/Linux is not POSIX compatible, however compatible library can be installed to Android/Linux to make it POSIX compatible, see http://stackoverflow.com/questions/27604455/is-android-posix-compatible http://stackoverflow.com/questions/27604455/is-android-posix... . *BSD, MacOS X, iOS are UNIX'es, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system) .
- zokula 10y ago
  No current open source *BSD is anymore UNIX than Linux is.
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    I doubt the BSD developers that are part of BSD since the days before the lawsuit will agree with you.
    - AsyncAwait 10y ago
      They may not, but there's so little original UNIX code in *BSD these days that it does not matter, in fact that's one of the main reasons they won the lawsuit in the first place.
      - lisivka 10y ago
        I just opened my Red Book and reread «Short history of UNIX». Berkley University bought license for AT&T UNIX[1] in 1977. They started to develop their own software for UNIX and distribute it, so this variant of UNIX is called BSD. Then they decide to remove and rewrite original AT&T code, due to license and associated costs, and released 4.3BSD[2], which then used by BSD flavors. So BSD is UNIX, but it contains no AT&T code today. [1] http://www.nordier.com/v7x86/index.html http://www.nordier.com/v7x86/index.html [2] https://virtuallyfun.superglobalmegacorp.com/category/4-3-bsd/ https://virtuallyfun.superglobalmegacorp.com/category/4-3-bs...
hasenj 10y ago
Don't iPhones and iPads also have a UNIX kernel?
- lisivka 10y ago
  It's complicated. Original UNIX by AT&T was newer open-sourced. BSD (Berkley Software Distribution) was opensource distribution of user programs for UNIX (like TCP/IP stack, vi editor, etc.), used by original UNIX, with proportions 20% of AT&T code and 80% of BSD code. So technically, BSD is(0.8) not(0.2) UNIX. FreeBSD is branched from BSD code, so it is(0.8) not(0.2) UNIX too. Apple MacOS X is based on FreeBSD code (and lot of other code), and it certified as UNIX compatible, so MacOS X can be named as UNIX. iOS is based on MacOS X, so iOS is UNIX too.
  - JonathonW 10y ago
    If you want to get technical about it, the Mac kernel itself isn't a traditional UNIX or BSD kernel; XNU (which, conveniently enough, stands for "X is not UNIX") is a hybrid composed of the Mach microkernel, some FreeBSD components, and Apple's own driver model. The system as a whole is able to brand itself as UNIX compliant, though, because it complies with the Single UNIX Specification. That spec is concerned about userspace behavior, not kernel or implementation, and you don't have to include any actual UNIX source code to be able to brand your OS as a "UNIX" according to the spec and trademark guidelines.
    - lisivka 10y ago
      Yep, XNU is Mach microkernel + FreeBSD kernel. Some features of XNU are even ported back to FreeBSD kernel. IMHO, that is enough to draw direct connection from XNU to original UNIX (without ™), unlike Linux kernel.
      - TickleSteve 10y ago
        Mach microkernel + FreeBSD userland.... not kernel. BSD is a 'personality' layer.
deaddodo 10y ago
Android doesn't run a Unix kernel. Hell, Linux isn't even all that compatible with Unix outside of POSIX. http://kernelbook.sourceforge.net/pdf/ch-intro.pdf http://kernelbook.sourceforge.net/pdf/ch-intro.pdf
squarefoot 10y ago
"Unix kernel is hugely popular: think of the millions of Android devices." You probably meant Linux, not Unix. Unix is an entire class of operating systems, not a kernel. Nitpicking aside, the huge problem here is that popularity means nothing if the user is not aware of what he/she is using, so I would rephrase that as "the Linux kernel is hugely widespread ...". There is still a big problem though: Android is mostly closed, at least all vital device drivers are, so that you have no chances to build a working non Android environment on newer devices or patch old ones, move an installation from a device to a different one etc. Having a Linux kernel does not help in this context since all benefits the FOSS community infused into the system were stripped away. I would dare to say that telling people that Android contains a Linux kernel is even dangerous to the Linux image.
- emmelaich 10y ago
  > he huge problem here is that popularity means nothing if the user is not aware of what he/she is using I'd say that doesn't matter at all. The person running Internet Explorer or Microsoft Edge doesn't know they're using a VMS workalike/derivative/successor either.
pjmlp 10y ago
Have you ever used the NDK? Android is all about Java and there is only a very thin subset of native APIs that are available, including POSIX ones. https://developer.android.com/ndk/guides/stable_apis.html https://developer.android.com/ndk/guides/stable_apis.html Starting with Android 7, calling anything outside of that list will terminate the application. Google could replace the kernel for something else, while keeping those NDK APIs and only OEMs writing drivers would notice.
- dispose13432 10y ago
  >Starting with Android 7, calling anything outside of that list will terminate the application. Google could replace the kernel for something else, while keeping those NDK APIs and only OEMs writing drivers would notice And they're planning on doing precisely that with Fuchsia

user5994461 10y ago

Unix or Linux? Unix is kinda dead by all metrics.

elchief 10y ago
ya no one uses mac or BSD
- user5994461 10y ago
  Indeed, noone uses BSD. Is mac considered as a Unix? I think it'd be considered as its own thing by now.
  - riffic 10y ago
    Yes, macOS is (or OS X has) been considered a Unix: https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/1489/is-mac-os-x-unix https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/1489/is-mac-os-x-un...
  - 3131s 10y ago
    Pretty sure HN runs on FreeBSD.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
  - kgwgk 10y ago
    UNIX® Certified Products http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/ http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/
devsatish 10y ago
Unix and thus Linux!

cperciva 10y ago

How do you define "popularity"? UNIX is found in many devices end users don't think of as being "computers" at all. The best software is the software users don't even realize is there, because it just works.

coldtea 10y ago
Well, the meaningful way for UNIX (and Linux) to succeed as a popular product, according to the aspirations of its proponents, was on the desktop. It wasn't just about the server side back then (late 90s, early 00s) it was all about taking over Windows. If somebody uses some hardware product (e.g. set top box) and doesn't know its Linux, then it's no big win for the Linux community. And it's not just necessarily that users don't realize it's there because "it just works", either. The set top box, for example, can be buggy or crappy but just not provide neither a way to dive in and fix it, nor branding related to Linux.
- cperciva 10y ago
  If somebody uses some hardware product (e.g. set top box) and doesn't know its Linux, then it's no big win for the Linux community. I have to disagree there. It may not be a marketing win, but that doesn't mean that there are no other benefits. The fact that the PlayStation 4 runs FreeBSD has resulted in a large number of improvements becoming available to us; whether Johnny knows that his games are running on a daemonic operating system is of very little relevance.
  - bluejekyll 10y ago
    > daemonic operating system I've never seen someone refer to it like that before. Awesome.
  - dTal 10y ago
    >the PlayStation 4 runs FreeBSD wait, what? Awesome.
  - JonnieCache 10y ago
    >The fact that the PlayStation 4 runs FreeBSD has resulted in a large number of improvements becoming available to us Is there a writeup of this anywhere? If stuff has been backported/upstreamed/whatever from the PS4 to the freeBSD kernel that would truly be living the dream!

kahrkunne 10y ago

Am I the only one who doesn't really consider that a shame? As a happy Linux desktop user here (considering switching to FreeBSD but switching is intimidating :|), I don't really care that much what other people use.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]