Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!hobyah.cc.uq.oz.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!munnari.OZ.AU!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!usenet.ucs.indiana.edu!news From: bdwheele@indiana.edu (Brian Wheeler) Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy Subject: Re: Historic Opportunity facing Free Unix (was Re: The Lai/Baker paper, benchmarks, and the world of free UNIX) Date: 6 May 1996 21:22:25 GMT Organization: Nope, Not Organized. Lines: 32 Message-ID: <4mlqih$qju@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> References: <4ki055$60l@Radon.Stanford.EDU> <ufafzyge0o.fsf@cumulus.sky.bln.sub.org> <4m8b33$1g5u@news.missouri.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: wombat.fms.indiana.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.7 Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.development.system:23196 comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc:933 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:3675 comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:3520 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:18868 comp.os.linux.advocacy:48299 In article <4m8b33$1g5u@news.missouri.edu>, rhys@vortex.cc.missouri.edu says... > >Martin Ibert (martini@heaven7.snafu.de) wrote: >: In article <4lqpu1$j7q@news.missouri.edu> rhys@vortex.cc.missouri.edu (Justin >"Rhys Thuryn" McNutt) writes: > >: : If Microsoft goes to hell, >: : DOS and Windows will (slowly) fade away, or be picked up by another >: : company who will hopefully turn them into real OSs. > >: DOS and Windows (16 bit, that is) are already going, and fast. Like it >: or not, Windows 95 is a "real" operating system, and Windows NT is >: even a reasonable good one. It has far less sex appeal, that is for >: sure, though. > >I think you have it backwards. Win95 is a big improvement over Win 3.x, >but it still isn't a real OS. Win NT is a real OS, but it's a strange >(well-done, but strange) hack of Windows crossed with Unix. It is solid, >and has plenty of advantages, but Linux is free, and Linux is freely >developed on open standards. DOS and Win 3.x need hardly be considered >in the long run. WinNT is a hack of Windows crossed with VMS. I have yet to see the "advantages" of NT. Sure, its pretty (sorta) but the hype about it being multiuser is a farce. Multiuser in the sense that everyone stands in a line and uses one at a time. It doesn't have quotas (Ok, Linux has not had them for that long, but still, its got them.) the administration utilities are nice, but alas, you've got to be at the console to do much of anything. Its a memory hog as well. Brian Wheeler