Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Yes, I said they focus on other things. It's not criticism. But it is true that they dismissed SMP, and did not see dual-core coming. They were late because they were reacting to dual core launching.

> I also feel that it's not really a fitting statement.

In what way? Linux got it almost a decade before that. Windows NT got it more than a decade before OpenBSD.

SunOS approaching 15 years before OpenBSD.

ChatGPT claims Mac OS X got it in 1999 with Mac OS X Server, but I could not immediately confirm that one.

Again, this is not criticism. But I don't see how it would be inaccurate to say they were late, when I think they were literally last.



> "In what way?"

They were last, but not late. SMP in the x86 world was miniscule in terms of multi-CPU setups. It didn't "happen" until the multi-core era, and OpenBSD was well in time for that.


I think you're nitpicking semantics, and don't know what your point is.

Anyway, this is not a productive semantics debate. Have a nice weekend.


If you were the last person to get to the train station but the train still hadn't left, then you really were not late for the train.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: