[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
▼ Settings Mobile Home
/g/ - Technology
Return Catalog Bottom Refresh
Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.
[Advertise on 4chan]
[Return] [Catalog] [Bottom]
Anonymous Archived
why did microkernels get BTFO'(...) No.109957759
File: Microkernel.jpg (60 KB, 414x381)
60 KB JPG
why did microkernels get BTFO'd?  No.109957759 Archived
>>
Anonymous
 No.109957777
 No.109957777
>>109957759
No driver support for PCs
They're used everywhere else though
>>
Anonymous
 No.109957782
 No.109957782
>>109957777
if microkernels are so good why does nobody want to implement drivers for them?

also checked
>>
Anonymous
 No.109958059
 No.109958059
>>109957759
First off, Minix is practically everywhere.
Secondly, the message parsing has an overhead that monolithic kernels avoid.
[Return] [Catalog] [Top]
Post a Reply
Return Catalog Top Refresh
[Advertise on 4chan]
Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.