Fuchsia/Zircon claims not to be a microkernel. It definitely isn't a classic microkernel like Mach or L4; Zircon is still responsible for a very large number of syscalls.

However, core components such as graphics, file systems, hardware devices, etc. are moved into userland, so in that sense it follows the microkernel idea of putting as little as possible in the kernel itself.

Personally, I love the design, and hope it takes off. We really need to get away from letting kernels and devices have elevated privileges in an OS.

As far as I'm concerned, Tanenbaum won the monolith/microkernel debate — Minix 3 is a true microkernel, and is currently a popular niche OS — and the success of Linux does not diminish the argument. (The infamous failure of GNU Hurd doesn't, either.)