Both, I think.
It's built in top of Mach, which has some architectural issues that aren't fixable without a huge amount of work.
And no one's interested in doing that work because we already have Linux and Linux is fine.
There have been a couple of pretty good post mortems over the years. I think one of them is on gnu.org somewhere.
Ive been using it for several years. I hardly think about it at all, which is pretty high praise.
I think I've learned and forgotten that tidbit a couple of times. It's something that I need to do seldom enough that when I finally do, I don't remember the keybind .
Here's a screenshot of the Gnome one, which is actually called baobob:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Baobab_screenshot.png
Wiztree looks interesting, I'll see if I can install it, although my work machine is pretty locked down, so I wouldn't be surprised if it's off limits.
I really like the disk usage analyzer in gnome. The ui/visualization is really intuitive and useful, and I often wish for something similar on windows.
I saw several threads and may be mixing them up, but at one point someone dug up a link to an interview with desselines where he claimed that the uyghur genecide and the tiananmen square massacre were both hoaxes. There was also some worry in one of the discussions about security and the inability to delete comments. Also something about private messages being stored in plaintext on the server.
When the API thing happened, several of the subreddits I frequented had threads about finding an alternative to move to. Lemmy was mentioned, but but discounted early on.
One problem was that people found out the main dev was a tankie and didn't want to be associated with the project because of that.
They ended up going to discords, or self hosted forums, or just staying on reddit.
It doesn't. All the time you spent reading manuals and tweaking configs to get it to boot quicker does.
I haven't seen that paper before. The ones I remember were blogposts or web pages. In fact, this may be what I was remembering: https://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/faq.html Particularly the part about what happened with the port to different microkernels.
IIRC NeXT and OSX use Mach, but they don't use it as intended. I think they're mostly a BSD kernel with Mach functioning as an interface to userspace.
Hurd actually used Mach as a microkernel, and moved most functionality to userspace daemons. This meant that Mach's performance issues,, at least the ones related to IPC, affected the Hurd a lot more than OSX or NeXT.
And yeah, I think developer interest was the biggest thing that held it back.