> > It's mostly unwarranted, pretty bitter and sad, but if there is somebody
> > who deserves our respect at all then Ken *is* such man. No matter how
> > strongly we disagree his opinion. We definitely owe him that much.
>
> I absolutely agree. Let's treat this man with a huge amount of
> respect. Perhaps he's read old code? Seen badly set-up systems? Not
> got much first-hand experience of the Linux kernel? Maybe his
> interview was badly sub-edited by the publisher (it occasionally
> happens)?
>
I read the article. I get the IEEE rag at home. The interviewer threw
an out-of-context question at Ken, asking if his early work with
Unix was anything like the current work going on with Linux.
Ken doesn't muck around with Linux. He has much more expensive toys
to play with than some Intel boxes. He mentioned that he heard that
Linux was unreliable (except perhaps on Intel machines), but Win-NT
was much worse. Further, he stated that he read some of the source-
code, some was good and some was bad. These are all things that
are true. Don't presume that he just blew away your religion.
In the interview, he mentioned that he had problems with the new
'C' so the first three attempts to port Unix from PDP assembly to 'C'
failed. This is a man who has learned via the road of "hard-knocks",
so he does know pretty much what he's talking about.
Also observe that if you invented Unix, and somebody else came along
20 years later and rewrote it, you'd be pretty damn critical.
Cheers,
Dick Johnson
***** FILE SYSTEM WAS MODIFIED *****
Penguin : Linux version 2.2.6 on an i686 machine (400.59 BogoMips).
Warning : It's hard to remain at the trailing edge of technology.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/