> Apple needs to take a bit of those tens of billions of dollars they have sitting around and spend it on starting from scratch with something that's not horrifically crufty.
They certainly don't have to throw everything away. Not having thrown everything away is one of the reasons why OpenBSD is a good example here. Remember all that quality code that was in place before Cranor's UVM? (Edit: actually, the fact that UVM is an improvement over it should say something, too...)
And, at the risk of sounding bitter, in my experience, very few companies have the capability to "commit to code quality", and I don't think Apple is one of them.
Edit: BTW, I really like your blog. You should write more often :-).
Hold on, because, I'm pretty familiar with pre- and post- UVM OpenBSD, because Arbor Networks shipped on OpenBSD (against medical advice) and ran into a number of really bad VM bugs that Theo couldn't fix because of the UVM rewrite!
> Apple needs to take a bit of those tens of billions of dollars they have sitting around and spend it on starting from scratch with something that's not horrifically crufty.
They certainly don't have to throw everything away. Not having thrown everything away is one of the reasons why OpenBSD is a good example here. Remember all that quality code that was in place before Cranor's UVM? (Edit: actually, the fact that UVM is an improvement over it should say something, too...)
And, at the risk of sounding bitter, in my experience, very few companies have the capability to "commit to code quality", and I don't think Apple is one of them.
Edit: BTW, I really like your blog. You should write more often :-).