Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.mel.aone.net.au!news.netspace.net.au!news.mira.net.au!inquo!news.uoregon.edu!newsxfer3.itd.umich.edu!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!ais.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!165.254.2.53!nonexistent.com!not-for-mail From: le@put.com (Louis Epstein) Subject: Re: Linux or FreeBSD (or something else?) Followup-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc X-Newsreader: TIN [UNIX 1.3 950824BETA PL0] X-Nntp-Posting-User: le Lines: 19 Organization: Putnam Internet Services Message-ID: <E84y08.JqI@nonexistent.com> References: <332c9a76.3278270@news.adelaide.on.net> <01bc32f2$3783f300$04000001@Colin> <E79F14.n7z@forthdv.pfm-mainz.de> <332f5ffb.519605@news.sprynet.com> <5h51ma$b1u$2@kayrad.ziplink.net> <3337e3ad.1847437@news.sprynet.com> <5hbh2g$gah$1@kayrad.ziplink.net> <333990e3.2587820@news.sprynet.com> <333EE698.41C67EA6@kzin.dorm.umd.edu> <3343cbbf.1091644@news.sprynet.com> <5i1216$gc4$1@news3.realtime.net> <33457087.6003026@news.sprynet.com> <E84Kwp.8ox@nonexistent.com> <3346646b.68448149@news.sprynet.com> X-Trace: 860194086/24805 X-Nntp-Posting-Host: main.put.com Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 22:48:08 GMT Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au alt.os.linux:19785 comp.os.linux.misc:168031 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:38467 Goatboy (lcappite@sprynet.com) wrote: : >4 years ago(when FreeBSD started) there were no 200 MHz x86 CPUs! : : Actually, there were. The DEC Alphas and the MIPS processors, all of : which NT can run on. I said x86. : >If you want to look at the UNIX family tree,you trace back to Multics, : >of which Unics(as it was first spelled) was a single-processor version : >(so is SMP UNIX really Multix?);if you do the same for NT,you get : >Seattle Computer's Quick and Dirty Operating System for 8088s, : >designed to make CP/M apps portable for an 8-bit data line leading : >into 16-bit logic. : : NT was not even remotely based on Q-DOS. Q-DOS->MS-DOS->W*nd*ws->NT. Where do you see a lack of continuity?