[Gllug] Re:SCO's Linux fight

Christopher Hunter chrisehunter at blueyonder.co.uk
Tue Jun 3 04:36:22 UTC 2003


On Tuesday 03 Jun 2003 3:04 am, Ian Norton wrote:

> If memory serves (which it may well not) alot of the first versions of the
> NT kernels were largly written by a former developer of one of the early
> BSD projects, some may feel that bits of old nt are kind of like bits of
> unices but it really is a different animal, if linux is monolithic nt is a
> megalith, huge amounts are lumped into the kernel that have very little to
> do with what a kernel should really do and other stuff that should really
> be inside it can be found lurking in dribbler space along with stuff like
> solitare,
>
> remember, in unix, everything is a file, in nt everything is just big :-)

Exactly!  The "similarities" (that's Bill Gates' choice of word) are a little 
too coincidental.  Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, more is 
conspiracy.....

>
> > >                                         - the bits that weren't were
> > > cobbled together in a variety of languages (which goes a long way to
> > > explaining all the M$ OS's lack of stability).
>
> well, its not designed to be stable, its designed to make you spend money
> on employing windows techies and to steal your details and send them to
> spammers and junk mail groups, ;-)

True enough!

//snip//

> its worth noting that anything even vaguely like the stuff we all take for
> granted like shell scripting, perl/lisp etc are virtually alien to the
> world of windows and NT, anything there now has just been ported over and
> unless you use cygnus they are never as tightly integrated to the OS as a
> whole as you get on a *nix,

Precisely!
>
> wasnt that fun :-)

Yes.

Chris



-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at linux.co.uk
http://list.ftech.net/mailman/listinfo/gllug




More information about the GLLUG mailing list