From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3e1162e60512130914i4fc19cefo4beb1f879567fbe0@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 09:14:21 -0800 From: David Leimbach To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] MS Research reinvents Inferno? In-Reply-To: <439EFB7D.4050205@lanl.gov> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_4310_12150082.1134494061590" References: <6bec4c2e9eee6a9e5369a0e693dd51b0@9netics.com> <126a2f7d0512130426g575169e4v8a349a9a35c5f855@mail.gmail.com> <283f5df10512130826u1fd2f19ahf71d310e0b6b7ff3@mail.gmail.com> <439EFB7D.4050205@lanl.gov> Topicbox-Message-UUID: c3035bb4-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 ------=_Part_4310_12150082.1134494061590 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On 12/13/05, Ronald G Minnich wrote: > > LiteStar numnums wrote: > > Let's see, first there was the Cyclone clone (Vault C), now there is a > > Plan9-ish/EROS-ish kernel... > > I did read the report, and IIRC they do give inferno its due. > > These are not dumb guys, I think Jim Laros at least deserves a little > respect. Sure, it's M$, but at least it's not another bolt-on to the > linux kernel, right? > > There are no real new ideas in CS popping around at this point, so we > are reduced to recycling each other's socks. So it goes. We're in an > evolutionary, not a revoluationary, business. This may be permanent, it > is hard to tell. > > ron > I agree with Ron here. I'm not often one to rush to Microsoft's aid. They are clearly pulling from ideas from L4, MUNGI, Inferno, SpinOS, and to some extend even House [Haskell GHCI runtime used as an OS] etc... They are combining them in a slightly different way, and exploring the result. I guess this still qualifies as research but it's not as groundbreaking as some people would like. If I were doing OS research today what would I do? I'd probably get some of those "new" Intel/AMD CPUs that will have integrated hypervisor support and work on something that's more like an Exokernel/Xen hybrid. Why "switch" OS images when you can just make the new hypervisor hardware just switch out whole applications which have an even more convincing view that they each own the whole machine. Hell you could probably get good performance out of a Xen version of DOS these days and do something interesting. Yes, it's recycling ooooold stuff to do this, but in a newer way. It may not be as earth-shattering OS research as people might like to see, but it's a hell of a lot better than just dorking around with Xwindows or making yet another Unix clone. So really, I'd just give em a break, at least they had the good taste to look at Inferno :). Dave ------=_Part_4310_12150082.1134494061590 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline

On 12/13/05, Ronald G Minnich <rmin= nich@lanl.gov> wrote:
LiteStar numnums wrote:
> Let's see, first there was the Cyclone clon= e (Vault C), now there is a
> Plan9-ish/EROS-ish kernel...

I d= id read the report, and IIRC they do give inferno its due.

These are= not dumb guys, I think Jim Laros at least deserves a little
respect. Sure, it's M$, but at least it's not another bolt-on to thelinux kernel, right?

There are no real new ideas in CS popping arou= nd at this point, so we
are reduced to recycling each other's socks. So = it goes. We're in an
evolutionary, not a revoluationary, business. This may be permanent, it=
is hard to tell.

ron

I agree with Ron = here.  I'm not often one to rush to Microsoft's aid.  They are cl= early pulling from ideas from L4, MUNGI, Inferno, SpinOS, and to some exten= d even House [Haskell GHCI runtime used as an OS] etc...

They are combining them in a slightly different way, and exploring = the result.  I guess this still qualifies as research but it's not as = groundbreaking as some people would like.


If I were doing OS res= earch today what would I do?

I'd probably get some of those "new" Intel/AMD CPUs that = will have integrated hypervisor support and work on something that's more l= ike an Exokernel/Xen hybrid.

Why "switch" OS images when y= ou can just make the new hypervisor hardware just switch out whole applicat= ions which have an even more convincing view that they each own the whole m= achine.

Hell you could probably get good performance out of a Xen version o= f DOS these days and do something interesting.  Yes, it's recycling oo= ooold stuff to do this, but in a newer way. 

It may not be as = earth-shattering OS research as people might like to see, but it's a hell o= f a lot better than just dorking around with Xwindows or making yet another= Unix clone.

So really, I'd just give em a break, at least they had the good tas= te to look at Inferno :).

Dave

------=_Part_4310_12150082.1134494061590--