Peachy Posted April 10, 2003 Share Posted April 10, 2003 I'd like to raise an interesting topic for discussion amongst us OSphiles. Given that the Linux Kernel is a monolithic kernel in which all the major OS services are compiled into it versus the Windows NT micro kernel wherein very few core services are built in but rather interface with higher level processes called executive services, which OS do you think provides the best performance and stability?I would say that neither, at the moment is inherently better or worse than the other. For example, with Linux, the graphical user interface is a user process. The X Window system does not integrate with the kernel and therefore if a badly written X Window code crashes your GUI, your OS doesn't get taken down with it, you just get a console window.On the other hand, with NT (and this includes 2000 and XP since they are both derivatives of NT), because the GUI is integrated in the kernel, video card drivers have access to the kernel's process areas in memory and if that code is buggy, the result is usually a Blue Screen of Death!Conversely with an integrated GUI, you get a more consistent look and feel with various application windows, whereas in the X Window environment, X only defines the basic set of window drawing programming code and you end up with a variety of window managers like KDE, GNOME, FVWM, AfterStep, etc., all drawing application windows slightly differently than the others.The interesting thing about this discussion for me is whether or not your arguments will reflect your philosophy about Open Source versus proprietary software code. Or put another way, how do the two programming models affect the type of OS that is developed?And to make sure everyone is on the same page, let's define Open Source using Richard Stallman's Free Software model which actually states that the source code should be provided *FREE* regardless of whether you also sell the software as prepackaged or downloaded binaries. Proprietary software can be sold or given away as freeware/sharware, but the source code is not provided or it is for a high fee (as was AT&T's UNIX back in the early '80s.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.