I'm not trying to insult, but on re-reading I guess one can see it that way, what with the troll remark and all. You have to admit your post had most of the eff

I'm not trying to insult, but on re-reading I guess one can see it that way, what with the troll remark and all. You have to admit your post had most of the effects your typical internet troll's would. But on topic; your original post suggests that there are "simpler ways of starting a new process" and that using threads "seems far more useful with a lot less complications." I think this is wrong on both counts. There is no simpler way to start a process, and using threads leads people towards manually reproducing many of the things fork provides for free, leading to more complicated and difficult to understand code. I understand when the average programmer misunderstands fork, but systems programmers should know better. Since your experience is on the hardware level, and not operating systems, it makes more sense that you're not aware of the advantages of fork. But I still can not fathom what you consider to be more simple than fork. Perhaps your definition of process creation differs from mine, and most others? I'd like to understand more, in any case.