On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 08:29:55PM -0600, Michael Heath wrote:
> That isn't the case with the Hurd. Not many people use it, and not
> many people will use it until the improvements come that will only
> come with major progress.
The reason people are not using the Hurd, is not because it runs on
Mach, or any other shortcoming in the current design.
The reasons are that it is not complete and polished enough to make it a
viable system for people to use seriously; and that it lacks most of the
infrastructure necessary to enable users to actually benefit from the
advantage of the Hurd architecture -- there is not really much incentive
for people to switch.
Both of these aspects can only be addressed by improving the existing
implementation, not by musing about possible future design changes.