Still a minority of sysadmins though. Most seem to have embraced it to an extent that's honestly a little sad to see. I liked to think of the linux community as generally being a more technical community, and that was true for a long time when you needed more grit to get everything running, but nowadays many just want Linux to be 'free windows'.
> nowadays many just want Linux to be 'free windows'
This means Linux has "made it."
> I liked to think of the linux community as generally being a more technical community, and that was true for a long time when you needed more grit to get everything running
I guess that grit was a gateway to a basic Linux experience for a long time - it did take a lot of effort to get a normal desktop running in the early to mid 90's. But that was never going to last - technical people tend to solve problems and open source means they're going to be available to anyone. There are new frontiers to apply the grit.
What percent of Unix users are using a "modern OS" and what percentage are using Linux, which hasn't significantly changed since it was released in 1994?
My point was that most people are using things like Linux, MacOS, etc. nowadays, which are all also pretty old by now but not nearly as old as ATT Unix
Linux has changed dramatically since its first release. It has major parts rewritten every decade or so, even. It just doesn't break its ABI with userspace.
The "aging design" arguments holds water like a sieve.
Electricity and engines are 1800s vintage designs
The wheel is a prehistorical aging design
american government is an aging design
The quality of an idea is independent of the time of its conception.
The utility of an idea is dependent on the time and place where it may be used however.
Unix is an Apollo-era technology! Also an aging design.