7 ms·

I'd love to wipe the dust off a bunch of the old research OSes from the 90s. Amoeba, which gave birth to Python, is another OS from Tanenbaum that I feel died m

I'd love to wipe the dust off a bunch of the old research OSes from the 90s. Amoeba, which gave birth to Python, is another OS from Tanenbaum that I feel died much too soon of a death due to the goliath that Linux became. There are so many tantalizing bits and pieces about the network transparency so many of those research OSes offered that have shamefully been left by the wayside. With distribution through a book, at the time, it wasn't a terrible idea. The internet was in its infancy, and there were a lot of schools that had real poor connectivity. Unfortunately, the internet grew rapidly, and textbook publishers are conservative, and the rest really is history. To be honest, I feel there is a near-depressing anti-intellectualism in discussing non-Linux kernels with a number of hackers. They know the devil that is Linux, and fail to see how exploring those other devils and daemons out there could possibly improve their perceptions of what an OS can and should be. Network transparency, non-traditional filesystems, etc, have all been hampered by too stubborn of a refusal to question the assumptions as to what a kernel and OS can and should be.

vezzy-fnord 12y ago
Not only that, but we're even seeing an opposite trend where people are now actually starting to tear down and attack the principles of Unix that were once so cherished. The only problem is they're doing it in favor of adopting concepts from consumer operating systems, which is even worse than sticking to the aging primitives of the 1970s, as the latter at least provide a coherent model. Things are changing in the Linux world. Just not in a particularly positive direction. Moral of the story: Linguistic relativity (Sapir-Whorf hypothesis) is real. It doesn't apply just to human languages, but technology as well. People with broken mindsets will carry over their baggage with them and poison even already mediocre environments. More depressing though, is the anti-BSD sentiment present amongst many Linux users. Mostly because of how ironic it is.
- jfb 12y ago
  e.g., "You can write COBOL in any language".
- stefanix 12y ago
  The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is a bit dated. Comparative linguistics has shown very convincingly that pretty much all languages have a similar set of complex features. Even languages without a heritage, which are invented within two generations have complex features comparable to established languages. There are many good examples in Steven Pinker's "The Language Instinct." Similar to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis I think "broken mindsets," and "poison," are exaggerations with little basis. tl;dr It's really not that depressing. There are different ways of doing the same thing.
  - jfb 12y ago
    I think path dependence and software affordances are sufficient to explain why bad ideas seem to mutate and grow; no need to reach for Sapir-Whorf. It is a lovely metaphor, however.
- pjmlp 12y ago
  I wish for an alternate reality were Apple still has the success it enjoys, but with Mac OS X based on BeOS. UNIX had a few nice ideas, but so did other OS, there is hardly a reason to have it in a pedestal.
  - mwcampbell 12y ago
    In your opinion, what would be the advantages of a Mac OS X based on BeOS rather than BSD Unix? Or is your point merely that a Unix monoculture is inherently bad? (I think it's more like a common ancestor than a monoculture, though perhaps the descendants haven't diverged very far.)
    - pjmlp 12y ago
      Diversity. It would have been BeOS vs UNIX vs Windows, instead of UNIX vs Windows on the desktop. All monocultures are bad. What happened is that now young developer generations think that UNIX and Windows are the only OS in town and disregard all the other ones out there being used. As such they only focus their efforts into UNIX way, instead of trying to come up with new ideas. For example, how to move away from C for systems programming, when C is married with UNIX? This is just one example.
      - Zardoz84 12y ago
        AmigaOS have some interesting different things.
  - the_af 12y ago
    What fundamental thing would change if Apple changed the foundation of their desktop OS to something other than Unix? Of all the things about Apple that could be changed, I'd say the underlying technology of their OS is the least interesting.
    - pjmlp 12y ago
      A desktop OS done in C++ instead of C. Database based filesystem. The way multi-core programming was present across whole OS.
pjmlp 12y ago
Me too. My favourite were the Oberon variants, specially System 3 release with its gadgets. The proof you could have an workstation OS written in a GC enabled systems programming language. I cherish Microsoft for its work in Windows, it is the only mainstream OS that can save us from UNIX monoculture. Yes, UNIX has a bunch of nice ideas, but that is all.
- AceJohnny2 12y ago
  > I cherish Microsoft for its work in Windows, it is the only mainstream OS that can save us from UNIX monoculture. lol
- the_af 12y ago
  > I cherish Microsoft for its work in Windows, it is the only mainstream OS that can save us from UNIX monoculture. Note that the Microsoft way tends to lead to another monoculture and to vendor lock-in. I'd say "of course, the same applies to the products of every other corporation", except that in my experience, everyone is using Windows on the PC. Probably because I'm not a hacker from the 70s, when I discovered Linux (note a BSD variant would also have worked, had I known about them) it was a breath of fresh air in the ubiquitous monoculture that was Windows.
  - forca 12y ago
    Like you, I discovered Linux in 1998 and have personally used it exclusively since. I get as many people off the MS and Apple treadmill and onto Libre/OSS as I can, especially in SOHO settings. I've yet to not be able to do something I needed done in Linux, even if it did take a bit more time or effort initially.
    - tracker1 12y ago
      It's funny, I have an easier time getting friends/family on to a usable Linux OS than myself. I tend to use windows on the desktop (more about cost/value) and OSX for my laptops... I run Linux for my HTPC, and on servers. I run multiple monitors and multiple drives in my desktop, and generally one of those two things will lead me to pain when it comes to installation, or an upgrade cycle with the OS. I really don't like playing with my desktop for a half a day to get it running again when I'm trying to get work done. Given, it's a lot better today than in years past, I just haven't had it in me to go to Linux for a month, only to have an update break something that will take hours to fix. That just doesn't happen as much in OSX or Windows. I kind of wish one desktop platform would come to true prominence in Linux, and I care less about which one, as any one... then that one can get a lot better. I don't even mind gnome 3 or unity so much. I just want something that will keep working right through a few upgrade cycles... opposed to where I really consider not running updates on my desktop. My last attempt at Linux for a primary OS was about a year and a half ago. I tend to get the bug to try it out every couple years. Eventually, I hit a wall a week or few weeks in that I just don't have time/patience to deal with. PC-BSD was also a really nice option, but the limited VM options and support for current hardware really killed that for me. I think BSD fits my mindset better, but Linux has become more ubiquitous. Either way, I would love to see a truly great desktop Linux platform for me. A power user and programmer who likes to tinker with stuff, but wants something that has an ok ui, that gets regular updates without issue. Most of the time, when I did update, it was more for something I wanted to play with other than the main OS.
agumonkey 12y ago
Except reddit I never really found any place for alternative kernel design discussion. I wish for more.
- rdc12 12y ago
  Which sub reddits do conversations like that take place?
  - andrewflnr 12y ago
    /r/osdev is one, but it's pretty slow.
    - agumonkey 12y ago
      And it's often classical OS design in personal projects. There's also r/hurd .. and not about OS but still a different 'system' r/nixos. ps: from r/hurd http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/microkernel/viengoos.html http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/microkernel/viengoos.html https://archive.fosdem.org/2014/schedule/event/04_uk_escape/ https://archive.fosdem.org/2014/schedule/event/04_uk_escape/

vezzy-fnord 12y ago

Not only that, but we're even seeing an opposite trend where people are now actually starting to tear down and attack the principles of Unix that were once so cherished. The only problem is they're doing it in favor of adopting concepts from consumer operating systems, which is even worse than sticking to the aging primitives of the 1970s, as the latter at least provide a coherent model. Things are changing in the Linux world. Just not in a particularly positive direction. Moral of the story: Linguistic relativity (Sapir-Whorf hypothesis) is real. It doesn't apply just to human languages, but technology as well. People with broken mindsets will carry over their baggage with them and poison even already mediocre environments. More depressing though, is the anti-BSD sentiment present amongst many Linux users. Mostly because of how ironic it is.

jfb 12y ago
e.g., "You can write COBOL in any language".
stefanix 12y ago
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is a bit dated. Comparative linguistics has shown very convincingly that pretty much all languages have a similar set of complex features. Even languages without a heritage, which are invented within two generations have complex features comparable to established languages. There are many good examples in Steven Pinker's "The Language Instinct." Similar to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis I think "broken mindsets," and "poison," are exaggerations with little basis. tl;dr It's really not that depressing. There are different ways of doing the same thing.
- jfb 12y ago
  I think path dependence and software affordances are sufficient to explain why bad ideas seem to mutate and grow; no need to reach for Sapir-Whorf. It is a lovely metaphor, however.
pjmlp 12y ago
I wish for an alternate reality were Apple still has the success it enjoys, but with Mac OS X based on BeOS. UNIX had a few nice ideas, but so did other OS, there is hardly a reason to have it in a pedestal.
- mwcampbell 12y ago
  In your opinion, what would be the advantages of a Mac OS X based on BeOS rather than BSD Unix? Or is your point merely that a Unix monoculture is inherently bad? (I think it's more like a common ancestor than a monoculture, though perhaps the descendants haven't diverged very far.)
  - pjmlp 12y ago
    Diversity. It would have been BeOS vs UNIX vs Windows, instead of UNIX vs Windows on the desktop. All monocultures are bad. What happened is that now young developer generations think that UNIX and Windows are the only OS in town and disregard all the other ones out there being used. As such they only focus their efforts into UNIX way, instead of trying to come up with new ideas. For example, how to move away from C for systems programming, when C is married with UNIX? This is just one example.
    - Zardoz84 12y ago
      AmigaOS have some interesting different things.
- the_af 12y ago
  What fundamental thing would change if Apple changed the foundation of their desktop OS to something other than Unix? Of all the things about Apple that could be changed, I'd say the underlying technology of their OS is the least interesting.
  - pjmlp 12y ago
    A desktop OS done in C++ instead of C. Database based filesystem. The way multi-core programming was present across whole OS.

pjmlp 12y ago

Me too. My favourite were the Oberon variants, specially System 3 release with its gadgets. The proof you could have an workstation OS written in a GC enabled systems programming language. I cherish Microsoft for its work in Windows, it is the only mainstream OS that can save us from UNIX monoculture. Yes, UNIX has a bunch of nice ideas, but that is all.

AceJohnny2 12y ago
> I cherish Microsoft for its work in Windows, it is the only mainstream OS that can save us from UNIX monoculture. lol
the_af 12y ago
> I cherish Microsoft for its work in Windows, it is the only mainstream OS that can save us from UNIX monoculture. Note that the Microsoft way tends to lead to another monoculture and to vendor lock-in. I'd say "of course, the same applies to the products of every other corporation", except that in my experience, everyone is using Windows on the PC. Probably because I'm not a hacker from the 70s, when I discovered Linux (note a BSD variant would also have worked, had I known about them) it was a breath of fresh air in the ubiquitous monoculture that was Windows.
- forca 12y ago
  Like you, I discovered Linux in 1998 and have personally used it exclusively since. I get as many people off the MS and Apple treadmill and onto Libre/OSS as I can, especially in SOHO settings. I've yet to not be able to do something I needed done in Linux, even if it did take a bit more time or effort initially.
  - tracker1 12y ago
    It's funny, I have an easier time getting friends/family on to a usable Linux OS than myself. I tend to use windows on the desktop (more about cost/value) and OSX for my laptops... I run Linux for my HTPC, and on servers. I run multiple monitors and multiple drives in my desktop, and generally one of those two things will lead me to pain when it comes to installation, or an upgrade cycle with the OS. I really don't like playing with my desktop for a half a day to get it running again when I'm trying to get work done. Given, it's a lot better today than in years past, I just haven't had it in me to go to Linux for a month, only to have an update break something that will take hours to fix. That just doesn't happen as much in OSX or Windows. I kind of wish one desktop platform would come to true prominence in Linux, and I care less about which one, as any one... then that one can get a lot better. I don't even mind gnome 3 or unity so much. I just want something that will keep working right through a few upgrade cycles... opposed to where I really consider not running updates on my desktop. My last attempt at Linux for a primary OS was about a year and a half ago. I tend to get the bug to try it out every couple years. Eventually, I hit a wall a week or few weeks in that I just don't have time/patience to deal with. PC-BSD was also a really nice option, but the limited VM options and support for current hardware really killed that for me. I think BSD fits my mindset better, but Linux has become more ubiquitous. Either way, I would love to see a truly great desktop Linux platform for me. A power user and programmer who likes to tinker with stuff, but wants something that has an ok ui, that gets regular updates without issue. Most of the time, when I did update, it was more for something I wanted to play with other than the main OS.

agumonkey 12y ago

Except reddit I never really found any place for alternative kernel design discussion. I wish for more.

rdc12 12y ago
Which sub reddits do conversations like that take place?
- andrewflnr 12y ago
  /r/osdev is one, but it's pretty slow.
  - agumonkey 12y ago
    And it's often classical OS design in personal projects. There's also r/hurd .. and not about OS but still a different 'system' r/nixos. ps: from r/hurd http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/microkernel/viengoos.html http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/microkernel/viengoos.html https://archive.fosdem.org/2014/schedule/event/04_uk_escape/ https://archive.fosdem.org/2014/schedule/event/04_uk_escape/