The post that started the revolution!

Message-ID:
[email protected]
From: [email protected] (Linus Benedict Torvalds)
To: Newsgroups: comp.os.inix
Subject: What would you like to see most in minix?
Summary: small poll for my new operating system

Hello everybody out there using minix-I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won't be big and professional like gnu) for 386 (486) AT clones. This has been brewing since april, and is starting to get ready. I'd like any feedback on things people like/dislike in minix, as my OS resembles it somewhat

Any suggestions are welcome, but I won't promise I'll implement them :-)

Linus


Linus
Open Source

oh yeah ... and [gloworange]****[/gloworange] Microsoft

Nice bit of nostalgia, don't see why it is hidden.. oh, and if you are really intent on "****ing Microsoft" as you so elequently put it, wear a condom.

ya y do u call this a hidden post . and i'll do ur os as soon as i get my old computer fixed

Quote:

---

and i'll do ur os as soon as i get my old computer fixed

---

tejaswyappalla , do you know who Linus Torvalds is ?

Btw nice info, always nice to read up some interesting history...

nice progect....... linus ist he the 1 who started linux... I am not sure tho.......

I feel all nostalgic! *wipes a tear*

You that old GG ? :p (j/k)

There was a site a while back that had the post made into stickers, so you could plaster them all over your room, dorm, neighbors car, local MS savvy computer store. Heh. Cool Post!! :D

I saw that post for my project on Linux last year. Quite fun actually. Although I learned basically nothing. To bad, it was a lot of work. It perhaps was that first post that started it, but there was a follow up post by the other guy in Europe telling Torvalds that he would fail him because of the monolithic kernel. The he[the other guy] got flamed by Torvalds supporters and Linux was born.
-BASH me please-

For the linux noobs:

If you haven't read the history of linux, you may want to check that out.

It is pretty intersting.

http://ragib.hypermart.net/linux/

Very cool link phish, this is another excellent history book. Its not free but its well worth the coin. Just For Fun

Thanks phish, that was quite an interesting story. I wonder why is Bill Gates bio on page 1337 of my history book, yet Linus is nowhere to be seen in the pages of great history?

Thanks Phish - great link, very interesting

Quote:

---

there was a follow up post by the other guy in Europe telling Torvalds that he would fail him because of the monolithic kernel.

---

From a technological standpoint Tannenbaum was very correct and this this a point that is still agreed upon by nearly all formally educated operating system designers today. (my former self included)
However, if Linus had made a microkernel system it would not have been popular at all. The reason is because developing a microkernel system is far more complicated then developing a monolithic one. (Linus essentially did not have the technical where-with-all to develop one.) This means that a monolithic system can be contributed to by more people as essentially any programmer can develop a monolithic kernel and I think as evident by my other recent post on Linux kernel errors it is quite clear the level of people working on Linux.
Also, building a microkernel OS by yourself would be a bit daunting as well, this is why very very few people know the individuals involved in the development of microkernel systems like NT, AIX, QNX, and OSX while Linus is near a household name. So despite my disdain for his work, my hat goes off to his marketing skills which is what has seperated him from virtually every other geek in a dorm.

catch

catch ... would be point me to some good doc's or tutorials about microkernels... that is if you are not still pissed about legacy free PC by M$ thread

So has anyone have an update on how his OS is doing?

Attached is a PDF document about microkernels.

Also of interest may be the following:

My recent post on Linux kernel errors.
http://www.antionline.com/showthread...323#post674323

My recent post on the security and assurance afforded by kernel verification, which the microkernel architecture makes feasible.
http://www.antionline.com/showthread...983#post673983

Information on QNX's (a high assurance RTOS) microkernel.
http://www.qnx.com/products/ps_rtosv4/#Microkernel

There are frequently complaints about microkernel speed, but this is more a result of people attempting to run UN*X on top of the microkernel and as you know, UN*X uses synchronous system calls, which is _not_ how the microkernl is designed to work. Microkernels should be used with asynchronous system calls in a just-in-time/event driven architecture. (as RTOSs require)
It should also be noted clearly that all trusted operating systems use the microkernel architecture, this is covered in the kernel verification post, but it is such an important point that I felt the need to restate it here. That said I can unflinchingly state that for a general purpose operating system to be considered secure it _MUST_ employ the microkernel architecture.

catch

PS. etruscan lose the attitude, I'm sorry that actively ignorant people frusterate me.

thanx ... catch

there's no attitude ... i don't dislike M$ because of their products but because of their imperialistic behavior ... monopoly is simply not healthy ... no matter how good your product may be at this time ...

I couldn't agree more, that is why accurate information about Windows is so important. People are very poorly informed about operating systems and tend to fill these gaps in with wishful thinking and hearsay and then they can't explain why Windows does better so they blame it on Microsoft being evil rather than using objective data to make their own products better.
Just because I argue that Windows is more secure or that integrated hardware is the future does not mean I am pro big business/monopolies I am however pro information, monopolies only exist in a framework of misinformation, and sadly most of that comes from the non-microsoft camp. So many lies and whatnot are made up, so many myths perpetuated that when real issues arise, they are largely dismissed. (remember the boy who cried wolf?)

catch

now, i feel like i understand you better. integrated hardware/legacy free hardware may be the future or better yet (as I like to say), the right thing to do but the the key is "legacy free hardware" not "legacy free Windows hardware". That's why WE must help Linux. It's the best contender yet to restore some balance. (I know, I know ... BSD... I love BSD but I'm also a realist) Maybe Linux needs ppl like you to help it grow and evolve. It's free. Catch, I guess what it comes down to is that I belive that the world is due for "economic re-distribution" !

I would help Linux, and in fact I have done some research work with Linux in the past. I however no longer do this for the following reasons:

As a rule...
[list=1][*]... the Linux community has little to no understanding of how insecure and outdated their system really is.[*]... the Linux community has no respect for systems they don't understand, and rather then attempting to learn from them they berate them ("Windows sucks!" "Trusted operating systems are a silly obsolete military idea.")[*]... the Linux community is made up exclusively of programmers that have never taken an even intermediate level OS design class and as such Linux has repeated many of the same mistakes other systems resolved decades ago.[*]... the Linux community has no respect or utilization for tried and true developmental techniques. Completely ad hoc with the need for just-in-time documentation because often times the full functionality of a software isn't known until it is completed. This will ALWAYS yield an inferior product than one following a more mature development procedure. (you security folk better learn this cause it is on the CISSP)[*]... the Linux community is full of double-talk. Always preaching free speach and free everything, yet always jumps on everything they can to induce government involvement into Microsoft's dealings.[/list=1]

I could go on and on... the fact is, Linux isn't up to the challenge of going head to head against Microsoft. The same Microsoft that repeatedly hacked the largest ISP in a single night to force AIM to interact with MSN Messenger. The same Microsoft that told the DOJ to **** off and did what they wanted to anyhow. The same Microsoft that is now in bed with nearly every media copyright organization. The same Microsoft that the SUN people hate at the Tech Museum in San Jose because the Microsoft people ALWAYS hit their deadlines and are frequently called in to take over the schedule slipping SUN projects.

Linux is an inferior product thrown together by a bunch of kids that can't even program. Average Linux kernel source bug lasts almost two years? the only selling point they have is that bugs get fixed quickly, which isn't true for the above stated reason and for the reason that Linux bugs remain 0-day longer. So what does Linux have? It is cool to root for the underdog? I am sorry, but considering the uphill battle I'd need to fight with the Linux community just to make simple security changes, much less the change of switching it to a microkernel? Hahahaha... yeah I think my time is better spent elsewhere.

I used to do a fair amount of design/dev/research work on various high security/high assurance operating systems but I've done what I can there, any unique ideas I had were implemented and I moved on.

catch

catch....what you say in point 2 (Linux users say 'Windows Sucks' [not verbatim]) is generally true with most people and their favorite OS. MAC users say PC's suck. OS/2 users believe MS hates them personally.

Suse users don't like Red Hat : Red Hat users don't like Suse. and on and on.

Enjoyed the 'history' (finally in detail). Linus has been recognized and admired for his accomplishments. The $$$$$$$ wasn't his goal.

Bravo Linus !!!