4 ms·
> Writing a new OS only for the 386 in 1991 gets you your second 'F' for this term. But if you do real well on the final exam, you can still pass the course. w
by JodieBenitez 2y ago
> Writing a new OS only for the
386 in 1991 gets you your second 'F' for this term. But if you do real well
on the final exam, you can still pass the course.
what a way to argue...
- otherme123 2y agoIt's the fallacy of authority barely disguised. It works wonders with students. Luckily Linus didn't fall for it.
- snovymgodym 2y agoYeah these lines from Tanenbaum stuck out to me as well. To be fair this response only comes after Linus delivers a pretty rude rebuttal to Tanenbaum's initial points which were still somewhat arrogant but civilly stated. In the grand scheme of things, the whole thread is still pretty tame for a usenet argument and largely amounts to two intelligent people talking past each other with some riffing and dunking on each other mixed in. Makes me come back and appreciate the discussion guidelines we have on this site.
- intelVISA 2y agoThe debate that cemented Tanenbaum as a smug clown in my mind since '92, his poor students!
- lproven 2y agoNah. He was right then and he's right now. You need to understand the theory and the design if you want to design something that will last for generations without becoming a massive pain to maintain. Linux now is a massive pain to maintain, but loads of multi-billion-dollar companies are propping it up. If something only keeps working because thousands of people are paid to labour night and day to keep it working via hundreds of MB of patches a day, that is not a demo of good design.