3 ms·
> Platform creep is nasty. Why? Why not just consider the kernel, the rest of the OS core, the userland and the GUI completely distinct products? GNU seems th
by qwerty456127 6y ago
> Platform creep is nasty.
Why? Why not just consider the kernel, the rest of the OS core, the userland and the GUI completely distinct products?
GNU seems the best userland to the date (because BSD is more antique and Windows had rudimentary until recently). The new Windows userland (PowerShell and .Net Core) are growing awesome. Both are OS-independent, as well as BSD. Why even associate them with a particular OS? How choosing a userland differs from choosing a programming language?
- m0xte 6y agoWhy? Because portability, standardisation, documentation and quality. Something GNU manages to screw up pretty well.
- qwerty456127 6y agoWhy not standardize and document every layer of the system separately? E.g. I prefer a userland as advanced as possible and a kernel to be lightweight and stable so I can choose GNU userland on BSD and I'm even looking forward to actually switch to PowerShell (on BSD or Linux). You favor long-term standardization and stability so you might prefer BSD userland on a Linux o whatever a kernel (which you can be forced to choose because of hardware or some other requirements). You probably are ok with competing vendors offering alternative apps solving same tasks on the same OS. You hardly believe everybody should use the same OS-specific programming language. Why should there be the same kernel+userland combination for everyone?