Andrew S. Tanenbaum

From Wikiquote
Jump to: navigation, search
Andrew S. Tanenbaum

Andrew Stuart "Andy" Tanenbaum (born 1944) is an American computer scientist living in the Netherlands. He is best known as the author of Minix, a free Unix-like operating system for teaching purposes, and for his computer science textbooks.

Sourced[edit]

  • I had never engaged in remote multishrink psychoanalysis on this scale before, so it was a fascinating experience.
    • Ken Brown's Motivation, Release 1.2 [1]
  • Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway.
    • Computer Networks, 4th ed., p. 91
  • Fight Features. … The only way to make software secure, reliable, and fast is to make it small.
    • "Some Notes on the 'Who Wrote Linux' Kerfuffle", release 1.5 [2]
  • However, as every parent of a small child knows, converting a large object into small fragments is considerably easier than the reverse process.
    • Computer Networks, 4th ed., p. 428
  • The nice thing about standards is that you have so many to choose from.
    • Computer Networks, 2nd ed., p. 254
  • "He" should be read as "he or she" throughout the book.
    • Modern Operating Systems, 3rd ed., p. 2
  • UNIX does not allow path names to be prefixed by a drive name or number; that would be precisely the kind of device dependence that operating systems ought to eliminate.
    • Modern Operating Systems, 3rd ed., p. 40

The "Linux is Obsolete" Debate[edit]

  • "Linux is a leprosy; …" This statement is not grammatically or factually correct.
    • Rebuttal to Ken Brown [3]
  • A lot of other people wanted a free production UNIX with lots of bells and whistles and wanted to convert MINIX into that. I was dragged along in the maelstrom for a while, but when Linux came along, I was actually relieved that I could go back to professoring.
    • Ken Brown's Motivation, Release 1.2 [4]
  • I really am not angry with Linus. Honest. He's not angry with me either.
    • Ken Brown's Motivation, Release 1.2 [5]
  • LINUX is obsolete.
    • In a Usenet message, 29 Jan 1992 [6]
  • The only real argument for monolithic systems was performance, and there is now enough evidence showing that microkernel systems can be just as fast as monolithic systems.
    • In a Usenet message, 29 Jan 1992
  • But in all honesty, I would suggest that people who want a modern "free" OS look around for a microkernel-based, portable OS, like maybe GNU or something like that.
    • In a Usenet message, 29 Jan 1992
  • Be thankful you are not my student. You would not get a high grade for such a design :-) […] Writing a new OS only for the 386 in 1991 gets you your second "F" for this term.
  • A multithreaded file system is only a performance hack.
  • Writing a portable OS is not much harder than a nonportable one, and all systems should be written with portability in mind these days.
    • In a Usenet message, 3 Feb 1992
  • While most people can talk rationally about kernel design and portability, the issue of free-ness is 100% emotional.
    • In a Usenet message, 3 Feb 1992
  • Will we soon see President Bush coming to Europe with Richard Stallman and Rick Rashid in tow, demanding that Europe import more American free software?
    • In a Usenet message, 3 Feb 1992
  • If you just want to use the system, instead of hacking on its internals, you don't need source code.
    • In a Usenet message, 5 Feb 1992
  • Microkernels are not a pipe dream. They represent proven technology.
    • In a Usenet message, 5 Feb 1992

External links[edit]

Wikipedia
Wikipedia has an article about:
Commons
Wikimedia Commons has media related to: