Re: User vs. Kernel (was: To be smug, or not to be smug, that is ,

Mark H. Wood (mwood@iupui.edu)
Sun, 24 Jan 1999 07:55:04 -0500 (EST)

On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Jon M. Taylor wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Richard Gooch wrote:
[concerning OS competition in an evolutionary context]
> > They
> > hang on until the bitter end.
>
> This is where the analogy breaks down. OSes are not life forms.
> They exists to serve our needs, cannot reporoduce without our help, and
> the form of their genetic code, so to speak, is entirely within our
> control. I see no reason whatsoever why a *free* OS should hang on to the
> bitter end.

A kernel doesn't care whether its code survives or not. Developers, OTOH,
do. Some people *prefer* to wring the last drop of performance from an
existing design, because it's intellectually stimulating, and don't care
whether that design is or is not obsolete. Someone will go on working on
Linux as long as it is still interesting to him, regardless of whether it
continues to interest you.

This sub-thread should probably migrate elsewhere.

-- 
Mark H. Wood, Lead System Programmer   mwood@IUPUI.Edu
Innovation is only valuable if it improves one's life; otherwise it's
just one more silly change to cope with.




-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/