The hardware providing those nanoseconds is not nanosecond accurate (unless using atomic clock)
However they may be more accurate than 1ms. The guy is saying the timeslice given by the OS for a program to run in has at best a 1ms slot because the OS is switching between threads on a 1ms timeslice basis
So unless you're polling, the timing at which you ask the hardware for nanoseconds will jitter with 1ms offsets
There are a lot of applications in the world that don't run on a regular processor under regular linux
The guy is overgeneralizing IMO. You can delve deep within the sub millisecond world even as a regular dude with a regular computer and a regular OS by just doing everything in an interrupt context
No, TSC on modern CPUs is much more granular that that. No atomic clocks needed, just a normal quartz crystal. This is how ptp works and you can definitely get sub nanosecond accuracy from it.
Wrt scheduling quantum, this is entirely configurable and subject to scheduling policy, priorities and additional mechanics such as isolcpus and nohz. GP's comment is just plain wrong.
However they may be more accurate than 1ms. The guy is saying the timeslice given by the OS for a program to run in has at best a 1ms slot because the OS is switching between threads on a 1ms timeslice basis
So unless you're polling, the timing at which you ask the hardware for nanoseconds will jitter with 1ms offsets