> That was not my direct quote, so you can dismount your high horse now.
You apparently can't follow a chain of comments in a thread nor understand what is written down. My comment pointing out yours is here - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40784174
> And it's telling that responding to the question of why an OS should do these things, you finding a definition of an OS and asserting (falsely, I might add) that transparent distributed systems and only those meet that definition.
Again, you have not read/understood what has been written down nor the sources to which i linked to elaborate my points. And also i never said "that transparent distributed systems and only those meet that definition".
In my comment here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40766810 i explicitly say "an OS is supposed to do viz. provide a uniform interface and transparent access to various Compute, Storage and Network resources wherever they might be." and then link to the distributed OS Wikipedia page for further details. If you had cared to even read that page you would have understood the key "Design Considerations" (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_operating_system#D...) driving the approach. It is the "User Experience" that makes a distributed OS approach so compelling; though its realization can be more complex/difficult compared to other approaches w.r.t. certain parameters eg. Scaling.
To summarize, i would advise you to read up on Distributed OS research before making silly blanket claims which can be easily disproved. Just because today the Cloud model has established itself as the industry standard doesn't mean that is the correct approach. You have to know both sides before you can argue for/against.