| 1 |
On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 18:55:02 -0500 |
| 2 |
"Anthony G. Basile" wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Oh dear god, Minix! While I respect what Tanenbaum is up to with Minix |
| 5 |
> and I hope he keeps developing it, the current situation is that it has |
| 6 |
> a very tiny base and it will probably stay that way. I loved the |
| 7 |
> original Minix for teaching (although I've moved on to James Molloy's |
| 8 |
> kernel), but usability is inversely proportional to complexity. If |
| 9 |
> Minix were to span the usability spectrum of a kernel like Linux or BSD, |
| 10 |
> I've got a gut feeling it would hit many of the same insecurity issues |
| 11 |
> despite the theory of separation of subsystems. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Me and my brother won a playbook, out of interest, what do you think of QNX? |
Archives