Hacker News Reader

Comment by alexmingoia | Hacker News Reader

Urbit runs as a VM with a translation layer for things like networking, file system, etc. Using a host OS is expedient to build a working OS that the user actually wants to use, since hardware support is an uninteresting implementation detail. Eventually, one could write a native hardware kernel in Nock/Hoon, and do networking without TCP/IP/DNS between Urbit computers.

View on HN

> that the user actually wants to use

Only a handful of people would rather use something like Urbit than established systems.

> Eventually, one could write a native hardware kernel

When it does, you can call it an OS. For now, it's a user space application.

Definitely agree with you. The practical implementation that it is, vs what it advertises itself as visionary-wise.

> what it advertises itself as visionary-wise

All puff. The amateurs over at /r/osdev are much closer to running directly on hypervisors or bare metal than Urbit will ever be.

I hear you - I'm in a similar opinion.

It hardly any different than Inferno or Android for that matter.

Android bundles a Linux kernel, or it won't run, it doesn't expect you to supply your own. It also doesn't try to reinvent DNS or TCP, the VM bytecode format or all the other things that Android leveraged to make itself into a useful platform so quickly.

The other difference is that Android has millions of users, Urbit, not so much.

Inferno can run on bare metal, so I'd say it's different. Urbit -- I'll believe it when I see it.

> Eventually, one could write a native hardware kernel in Nock/Hoon

Sounds like the dream of the "lisp machine". Is it more viable than that?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com