3 ms·
> that the user actually wants to use Only a handful of people would rather use something like Urbit than established systems. > Eventually, one could write a
by nineteen999 6y ago
> that the user actually wants to use
Only a handful of people would rather use something like Urbit than established systems.
> Eventually, one could write a native hardware kernel
When it does, you can call it an OS. For now, it's a user space application.
- dfischer 6y agoDefinitely agree with you. The practical implementation that it is, vs what it advertises itself as visionary-wise.
- nineteen999 6y ago> what it advertises itself as visionary-wise All puff. The amateurs over at /r/osdev are much closer to running directly on hypervisors or bare metal than Urbit will ever be.
- dfischer 6y agoI hear you - I'm in a similar opinion.
- pjmlp 6y agoIt hardly any different than Inferno or Android for that matter.
- nineteen999 6y agoAndroid bundles a Linux kernel, or it won't run, it doesn't expect you to supply your own. It also doesn't try to reinvent DNS or TCP, the VM bytecode format or all the other things that Android leveraged to make itself into a useful platform so quickly. The other difference is that Android has millions of users, Urbit, not so much.
- Volt 6y agoInferno can run on bare metal, so I'd say it's different. Urbit -- I'll believe it when I see it.