6 ms·

"starting fresh with no baggage" also means starting fresh with no drivers. Having drivers for a wide range of hardware is a major factor in operating system ad

"starting fresh with no baggage" also means starting fresh with no drivers. Having drivers for a wide range of hardware is a major factor in operating system adoption.

psychoslave 4y ago
Didn't FreeBSD incorporated an interface that allow to use Linux drivers? Not that I think it would make the point of having a bright new kernel easily compete with such a huge and firmly grounded project as Linux though. All the more, there already are multiple projects using Rust to build OSes out there, if I'm not mistaken.
simion314 4y ago
I was not suggesting this kernel to be used on laptops, it would be a server kernel, if it would actually be faster and safer then Google and Amazon will use it on their servers and they will make sure there are drivers, Google could use it in some mobile devices too if they care for safety. AMD has an open source driver so if desired that could be ported to Rust to also make sure the GPU is safe.
- xxpor 4y ago
  Things work the opposite way. In order to get companies to adopt things you need to get people working their interested in it. Which means they need to be able to run it on their PCs. There's a reason why x86 ate the world. The exception to this is when you can develop something and have a good case to use it yourself, like Google and Fuchsia. But I doubt Fuchsia will gain wide organic adoption because of the same factors.
  - simion314 4y ago
    >Things work the opposite way. In order to get companies to adopt things you need to get people working their interested in it. This would mean that the only OSes are first created by hobbyists, then fanboys use it then a company adopts it. But there are commercial OSes and commercial software that are created by a company to solve a problem and not by random dudes and companies then adopts it. IMO is sad that we the tech industry are stuck with old OSes and old architecture while you have this giants that use open source software to make billions and they could find researching and creating of a few new revolutionary OSes like it happened in the past. And I don't mean desktop OS that will defeat Windows.
    - xxpor 4y ago
      Name a single successful (non-niche, stuff like INTEGRITY doesn't count) OS kernel created post-Windows NT 3.1 that's commercial. Even Mac OS X still runs Mach as a kernel. The model is dead, because of the internet. OSes have MASSIVE network effects.
      - astrange 4y ago
        There's several proprietary RTOSes in most every computer. There's one in the baseband on your phone, though it might be an L4 fork.

"starting fresh with no baggage" also means starting fresh with no drivers. Having drivers for a wide range of hardware is a major factor in operating system adoption.

psychoslave 4y ago

Didn't FreeBSD incorporated an interface that allow to use Linux drivers? Not that I think it would make the point of having a bright new kernel easily compete with such a huge and firmly grounded project as Linux though. All the more, there already are multiple projects using Rust to build OSes out there, if I'm not mistaken.

simion314 4y ago

I was not suggesting this kernel to be used on laptops, it would be a server kernel, if it would actually be faster and safer then Google and Amazon will use it on their servers and they will make sure there are drivers, Google could use it in some mobile devices too if they care for safety. AMD has an open source driver so if desired that could be ported to Rust to also make sure the GPU is safe.

xxpor 4y ago
Things work the opposite way. In order to get companies to adopt things you need to get people working their interested in it. Which means they need to be able to run it on their PCs. There's a reason why x86 ate the world. The exception to this is when you can develop something and have a good case to use it yourself, like Google and Fuchsia. But I doubt Fuchsia will gain wide organic adoption because of the same factors.
- simion314 4y ago
  >Things work the opposite way. In order to get companies to adopt things you need to get people working their interested in it. This would mean that the only OSes are first created by hobbyists, then fanboys use it then a company adopts it. But there are commercial OSes and commercial software that are created by a company to solve a problem and not by random dudes and companies then adopts it. IMO is sad that we the tech industry are stuck with old OSes and old architecture while you have this giants that use open source software to make billions and they could find researching and creating of a few new revolutionary OSes like it happened in the past. And I don't mean desktop OS that will defeat Windows.
  - xxpor 4y ago
    Name a single successful (non-niche, stuff like INTEGRITY doesn't count) OS kernel created post-Windows NT 3.1 that's commercial. Even Mac OS X still runs Mach as a kernel. The model is dead, because of the internet. OSes have MASSIVE network effects.
    - astrange 4y ago
      There's several proprietary RTOSes in most every computer. There's one in the baseband on your phone, though it might be an L4 fork.