This is more what I meant. It just seems like Redox is taking the lessons we've learned over years of development, and being willing to break compatibility in order to implement them.
That being said, I don't know much about OS/kernel development.
So is Google fuchsia - it is even capability based. (But Google is not cool here around HN circles, despite their contributions to open source and fostering one of good engineering environments, they aren't cool because they don't shout some Privacy buzzword like Apple.) Also it is not written in rust, which is webshit-favorite-of-the-month.
Redox is still Unix like, it moderately changes the file paradigm. Microkernel Unix clones are not new. They mention Minix as inspiration while there is no mention of L4 which did lot of work in microkernel performance.
At least it is capability based instead of yet another Unix clone. Not that any one of these are significantly better. But the rust crowd heralds redox as very innovative OS.
Disagree. It is mostly a Unix clone in rust with few novel concepts. Not that it is not important, and no offense meant to developers.