From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <4AB22CC9.1090201@0x6a.com> Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2009 07:34:17 -0500 From: Jack Norton User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] fun quote Topicbox-Message-UUID: 6feb5562-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 erik quanstrom wrote: > i don't know how ingo managed to put his > finger on so many reasons i enjoy plan 9 > by counterexample. > > Linux is a 18+ years old kernel, there's not that > many easy projects left in it anymore :-/ Core kernel > features that look basic and which are not in Linux > yet often turn out to be not that simple. > -- Ingo Molnar > > - erik > > Now, Plan 9's kernel is pretty old too, isn't it? If Plan9 had become a bit more widely accepted, even as late as, let's say, 2002, do you think it would have become an unruly and frighteningly complicated beast as linux has? What has saved other 'popular' kernels from this? For instance, no body ever complains about FreeBSD being a complex cluster f***, but it has pretty wide adoption (even as a 'desktop'). What about OS X? Has Apple's arrogance and secrecy saved it from.... open source development? It seems like they release code only after they are damn sure they've gotten all they can out of it. So, is Linux the unwanted poster-child of open source development? I think an argument could be made. -Jack