26 years later and he is still butthurt

26 years later and he is still butthurt

Why can't he just admit that Linux is good?

Attached: AndrewTanenbaum.jpg (640x480, 137K)

Is that the guy from the boomer maymays i've seen

this guy is just retarded, also see his retarded book on distributed systems

Microkernels are the OOP of operating system kernels; in the bad way.

>Why can't he just admit that Linux is good?

Because it's not. Why should he admit something that is obviously not true?

also is his book "Modern operating system" is childish and stupid

He won though, minix is used by nearly all computers

Is this the guy partially responsible for Intel ME? He defended his permissive-licensed OS as a success by claiming it being incorporated in every proprietary block box CPU as proof that it's more popular than Linux.

It is though

This. The guy is a dick, but even blind dogs dig up a bone every so often.

did you even read the debate?
even torvalds admits linux is not the best choice, also at the time both were shit
Linux is a lot better now, minix was also made perfect by intel probably

>Why can't he just admit that Linux is good?
because it isn't, and the only reason it's used now is because it was available to use with GNU at the time.

>Monolithic Kernel
>Good

I'm taking a course about operating systems in the next semester, and that's the book most of the course is based on. How bad is it? Does that guy hate Linux or something? I thought the book would be about Linux.

The book is good if you're freshman or undergrad, I'd say it's very shallow and totally irrelevant to what's being done actually in x86 OSes like linux, if you're really interested in OSes I suggest you read "Understanding the Linux Kernel" but that book is very, very, very hard and can't be understood in one or even 3 semesters

>The book is good if you're freshman or undergrad, I'd say it's very shallow and totally irrelevant to what's being done actually in x86 OSes like linux
So what's good about it then? I'm an undergrad and have no substantial knowledge about OSes (although the subject interests me a lot), will I learn anything useful at all with Tanenbaum's book?

you will be good, but you will learn almost nothing of real value, like I said if you really want to understand how real complex OSes are designed, you should read the textbook in my previous post or also read "Linux Kernel Development" which is way easier for a beginner

>le monolithic is bad maymay
>meanwhile at dll land

Attached: dlloverhead.jpg (259x194, 8K)

> OS for penguin fuckers
> Good

what is .so

This guy's most recent textbook on OS concepts is so fucking incredibly dated its retarded. Nobody over the age of 40 should be writing CS texts unless they worked at Bell Labs.

this and it feels like something I would read in high school

Nobody at Bell Labs should be writing either because they have shit taste and have done an incredible amount of damage to this industry. See C, Go and Unix for proof.

>i-its only wrong when windows does it