3 ms·

> starting something smaller and more modern Where do you draw the line? Do you throw away Linux and write your own OS, which is bound to grow to the same leve

> starting something smaller and more modern Where do you draw the line? Do you throw away Linux and write your own OS, which is bound to grow to the same level of complexity because it needs to deal with hardware complexity? Or do you throw away the existing hardware as well and start from silicon? Maybe even reboot the computing stack on an entirely different type of hardware?

moron4hire 7y ago
Why not? Apple runs their own chips in the iPad and iPhone, with their own OS. Seems to be working out for them.
- iainmerrick 7y ago
  They didn’t start from scratch, though. iOS is derived from macOS, which is derived from NeXT (and FreeBSD if I recall right), etc etc. iOS has a lot going for it, but it’s definitely not small, clean or simple. (Ditto for the chips, which build on ARM, originally Acorn)
- owl57 7y ago
  And they have a somewhat continuous team working on that OS since before Linux was a word. Same with Microsoft. Is it really relevant to any other company?
  - pushpop 7y ago
    Apple haven’t been working on iOS longer than Linux has been around. It’s true that iOS is based on macOS which is based on NEXT (of various capitalisations), FreeBSD and a few other platforms. But Apples direct involvement starts at macOS and there’s very little FreeBSD/NEXT/etc in iOS compared to original code. Likewise you could argue that “Linux” predates Linux if you include the GNU user land and start tracing things backwards that way (I’m assuming “Linux” in the context of this discussion is GNU/Linux because it wouldn’t be fair to compare a kernel to a full desktop or mobile OS). Ultimately I don’t think either arguments are particularly useful as all they demonstrate is that good technology is an evolutionary process of stands on the shoulders of other pieces of good technology.
    - owl57 7y ago
      Sure, I didn't mean Linux isn't standing on the (partially the same) shoulders. What I meant is macOS/iOS and Windows teams are unique in shipping general-purpose OSs AND doing so and accreting code and expertise tied to that code since ancient times when "try and paper over the complexities of linux" wasn't an option at all.
      - pushpop 7y ago
        Whether it’s 10 years, 20 years or 30. I don’t think it makes much difference after 10 in terms of the level of relevant expertise you’d expect. Particularly when you factor in staff leaving, getting promoted, etc and new engineers joining. Where Linux differs isn’t it’s age but rather it’s development model being decentralised. FreeBSD might be a more comparable example given the context you’re describing.
    - samatman 7y ago
      I'm fond of the jocular statement that NeXT acquired Apple for -$429 million dollars. Steve Jobs went from CEO of NeXT to CEO of Apple, and promptly started a project to scrap the existing "System" series of Macintosh operating systems in favor of a Unix derived from NeXTSTEP.
cultofmetatron 7y ago
I would be so down for a risc-V laptop running redox

moron4hire 7y ago

Why not? Apple runs their own chips in the iPad and iPhone, with their own OS. Seems to be working out for them.

iainmerrick 7y ago
They didn’t start from scratch, though. iOS is derived from macOS, which is derived from NeXT (and FreeBSD if I recall right), etc etc. iOS has a lot going for it, but it’s definitely not small, clean or simple. (Ditto for the chips, which build on ARM, originally Acorn)
owl57 7y ago
And they have a somewhat continuous team working on that OS since before Linux was a word. Same with Microsoft. Is it really relevant to any other company?
- pushpop 7y ago
  Apple haven’t been working on iOS longer than Linux has been around. It’s true that iOS is based on macOS which is based on NEXT (of various capitalisations), FreeBSD and a few other platforms. But Apples direct involvement starts at macOS and there’s very little FreeBSD/NEXT/etc in iOS compared to original code. Likewise you could argue that “Linux” predates Linux if you include the GNU user land and start tracing things backwards that way (I’m assuming “Linux” in the context of this discussion is GNU/Linux because it wouldn’t be fair to compare a kernel to a full desktop or mobile OS). Ultimately I don’t think either arguments are particularly useful as all they demonstrate is that good technology is an evolutionary process of stands on the shoulders of other pieces of good technology.
  - owl57 7y ago
    Sure, I didn't mean Linux isn't standing on the (partially the same) shoulders. What I meant is macOS/iOS and Windows teams are unique in shipping general-purpose OSs AND doing so and accreting code and expertise tied to that code since ancient times when "try and paper over the complexities of linux" wasn't an option at all.
    - pushpop 7y ago
      Whether it’s 10 years, 20 years or 30. I don’t think it makes much difference after 10 in terms of the level of relevant expertise you’d expect. Particularly when you factor in staff leaving, getting promoted, etc and new engineers joining. Where Linux differs isn’t it’s age but rather it’s development model being decentralised. FreeBSD might be a more comparable example given the context you’re describing.
  - samatman 7y ago
    I'm fond of the jocular statement that NeXT acquired Apple for -$429 million dollars. Steve Jobs went from CEO of NeXT to CEO of Apple, and promptly started a project to scrap the existing "System" series of Macintosh operating systems in favor of a Unix derived from NeXTSTEP.

cultofmetatron 7y ago

I would be so down for a risc-V laptop running redox