I’m not sure how you can argue Fuchsia isn’t much of anything at all considering it’s mostly open source, you can see it’s development, and has came a long way since it was announced. You don’t want it to be much of anything but it is very real.
The amount of human resources dedicated toward improving Linux is order of magnitude higher than the amount of devs working of fuschia. That + the fact that Linux is actively improved since decades.
It's quite obvious it's dead on arrival to anybody that allocate a few neurons to the economics question.
People would have said the same thing about Linux compared to proprietary Unix or even early Windows in 1993-1994. Also Linux has millions of lines of legacy that people are having to maintain and work around while Fuchsia and their team gets to start from scratch with all the knowledge learned.
As to your ad hominem in the end there, perhaps you should learn to engage with a level of respect presented to you by your peers, as it is that kind of discourse does little but put on display how your harsh words are little more than a projection. A better type of conservation is expected here.
People would have said the same thing about Linux compared to proprietary Unix or even early Windows in 1993-1994.
I don't think the comparison apply, linux had a unique value proposition at the time by being welcoming for opensource and free. Fuschia in comparison is redundant the same way BSDs are nowadays.
Also Linux has millions of lines of legacy that people are having to maintain and work around
This claim lacks concrete evidence. The number of lines of code that are here for legacy reasons is unknown but 1 million since like an exageration. More importantly, most of legacy code is confined (does not affect non legacy code). Of course linux because of backwards compatibility has many suboptimalities and developer productivity could be higher without it, but this argument isn't enough to outweight the order of magnitude difference in human resources (and expertise (hardware makers))
with all the knowledge learned
All? I think most of the fuschia devs had no significant role in the Linux kernel codebase, it's not like they had hired Greg kroah-hartman. But essentially, fuschia has not access to useful knowledge that is only encoded as comments in the Linux kernel. And the knowledge about past mistakes is lost unless you spend years reading the linux mailing lists and commit history.
Hence the economics point still stand, of course a world without my ad hominem would be better, but such an hypothetical world is precluded for as long as a community like HN is unable to see such striking NIH issues.
Fuchsia isn’t redundant because the literal king of the internet is putting its weight behind it, so you’re economics point doesn’t just not stand, it’s almost a fallacy.
As for the point about Fuchsia not having knowledge because they didn’t personally build Linux, that isn’t my point. What I’m saying is that they can look at what Linux (and other OS’s) have done and skip over lots of pathways that have been proven over the last three decades to be dead ends or inefficient, while mimicking those systems and conventions that are proven to work. I’m sorry but you seem to be going out of your way to ignore the fact that Fuchsia is, whether or not you want it to be or think it should or will be.
