Kinda wish he was right about risc tbh

Interesting read: https://www.dfrobot.com/blog-13483.html

More processing power means new paradigms are less likely to be uncovered, I think. The deficiencies of current designs are obscured, and maybe moot, due to the raw power the processors. There isn’t any real pressure to improve kernel design.

All of the big current kernels (NT, Linux, XNU) are rooted in the i386 era. There’s certainly been a lot of changes in all of them but I don’t know if any have been completely re-architected.

Might have to wait for some kind of completely new processor before we see completely new kernels.

TBF, in 1992 you might have had a hard time getting slackware at all since it was officially released in 1993.

However, when I first used it around 1997, it was just a stack of floppies, no CD needed.

There's no single individual that made it happen, but no doubt that Linus and RMS were the two biggest. Bear in mind that there were lots of additional contributors to the kernel and GNU as well.

I also think Red Hat was also one of the biggest contributors to Linux's success. So many of the most important technologies that we use today came out of RH. I don't have a lot of love for them today, but their contributions in the '90s and '00s was immense.

I actually think that a large part of the reason why PCs are much better open platforms than mobiles is because there is no Red Hat of the mobile ecosystem. Google started it out with AOSP, but then closed it up when they monopolized the market. Makes you wonder if RH would have done the same if they had the same kind of success.

I actually did forget about Mac server. Wow, what a blast from the past.

You know this is actually kind of funny, cause I think it might be very possible that the roles between Tanenbaum and Intel could hypothetically be reversed.

There was a controversy a couple of years ago, with Wizards of the Coast and D&D, where they were planning on making a bunch of really bad and sweeping changes to the Open Gaming License. One of the controversies had to do with the license not having language for irrevocability, which Wizards believed allowed them to go ahead and deny people the right to make use of the old OGL moving forward, forcing everyone who publishes their OGL content to adhere to their new, more restrictive, license terms.

They never moved forward with the bullshit because the backlash was that bad, but supposedly licenses are not irrevocable by default, and so any license that lacks explicit language granting irrevocable rights can be susceptible to the same rug pull that WotC almost pulled.

And the last time I checked, guess which super permissive license does not grant irrevocability?

If you have a modern Intel processor. Some of us went AMD to avoid all that, although it's not exactly clear what's running in the negative rings of those either.

And it's in the big bold title...

Especially when the linked article does not open, yes.

I've been there with the MINIX debate back then. I've actually used MINIX on a job back then. Tannenbaum knows his stuff, but with that, he was completely off. I don't think that most people in the Linux scene nowadays have ever heard of him or his OS. So much for relevance.