3 ms·

The linux kernel has a certain architecture which informs the design of every OS built on top of it. There is effectively no competition of core OS architecture

by Joeri 9y ago

The linux kernel has a certain architecture which informs the design of every OS built on top of it. There is effectively no competition of core OS architecture ideas anymore because linux won. Now, linux won because it was better, but is it really the right OS architecture for the 3d xpoint / quantum-mechanical hardware stack of the future? The monoculture makes it harder for people to experiment, and slows down discontinuous innovation in OS design. Or, just imagine microsoft won and you substitute windows for linux in this thought exercise. Wouldn’t that be a problem for innovation?

gtirloni 9y ago
Windows is not developed in the open. It'd be a very different situation.
ghaff 9y ago
From an architectural perspective, it's really *nix that won. To the degree that we worry about software monocultures in that vein, it really doesn't matter much if it's only Linux or if it's Linux + AIX + various other Unixes. That Linux is open source and allows for customization and variants makes it less of a monoculture but it still embodies a specific architectural approach. (Although GPU computation is one big change that's taken place.) The TOP500 list does tend to be oriented to highly parallel systems because of the benchmark used. However, the different architectures like vector systems have largely gone by the wayside anyway. As CMOS scaling runs its course I expect we'll see more experimentation. Whether some of that requires a new operating system model as well remains to be seen.
icelancer 9y ago
>>Or, just imagine microsoft won and you substitute windows for linux in this thought exercise. Wouldn’t that be a problem for innovation? There is no "winner" as far as I can tell in the grand scheme of things. We're talking about a set niche of computing. Win10 is still superior for a lot of GPU-clustering specific work; HBM2 memops via Vega architecture comes to mind as the Linux compute drivers are simply inadequate and the Windows tooling is significantly better.

by Joeri 9y ago

gtirloni 9y ago

Windows is not developed in the open. It'd be a very different situation.

ghaff 9y ago

From an architectural perspective, it's really *nix that won. To the degree that we worry about software monocultures in that vein, it really doesn't matter much if it's only Linux or if it's Linux + AIX + various other Unixes. That Linux is open source and allows for customization and variants makes it less of a monoculture but it still embodies a specific architectural approach. (Although GPU computation is one big change that's taken place.) The TOP500 list does tend to be oriented to highly parallel systems because of the benchmark used. However, the different architectures like vector systems have largely gone by the wayside anyway. As CMOS scaling runs its course I expect we'll see more experimentation. Whether some of that requires a new operating system model as well remains to be seen.

icelancer 9y ago

>>Or, just imagine microsoft won and you substitute windows for linux in this thought exercise. Wouldn’t that be a problem for innovation? There is no "winner" as far as I can tell in the grand scheme of things. We're talking about a set niche of computing. Win10 is still superior for a lot of GPU-clustering specific work; HBM2 memops via Vega architecture comes to mind as the Linux compute drivers are simply inadequate and the Windows tooling is significantly better.