Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2001 14:40:24 -0500 From: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> To: Dale Chulhan - Home <dchulhan@uwi.tt> Cc: "chat@FreeBSD.ORG" <chat@FreeBSD.ORG>, My List <TheTechies@onelist.com>, The Trinidad and Tobago Microsoft BackOffice Users Group <mbug@listbot.com> Subject: Re: Win NT vs UNIX ( cross fire ) Message-ID: <15055.27944.187865.22558@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <3ACF5BED.86A4FB58@uwi.tt> References: <3ACF5BED.86A4FB58@uwi.tt>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dale Chulhan - Home <dchulhan@uwi.tt> types: > The following is part of some cross fire passing tru another news group: > Any comments? After picking myself up off the floor from laughing so hard, yes. > Dick, Windows NT was based on VMS not UNIX. In fact UNIX and Windows > 2000/NT are very different. Windows uses a micro kernel > architecture, UNIX uses a monolithic kernel. The speaker doesn't seem to be very familiar with Unix. Some Eunices use a monolithic kernel. Not all of them do. Apple's OSX, for instance, is based on the Mach micro kernel. Thanks to the clean seperation of the APIs (which Windows is missing), it's relatively easy to mix-n-match these things on Unix. > That is why you have to recompile/reload the kernel when you add a > driver. This is unlike Windows 2000 where drivers can be loaded and > unloaded automatically. It's been quite a while since any serious Unix required you to recompile & reload the kernel to add every driver. Some drivers may still require that, and you may want to do that for performance reasons, but it's no longer strictly required. > In fact, you can change IP Addresses on Windows 2000 and you do not > need to reboot. This is also very unlike most versions of UNIX. This is unlike *any* version of Unix I've ever seen. That includes all the mainstream ones for the last 20 years, and a fair number of the less well-known ones. I'd be interested in knowing which version of Unix is that braindead. > The technology in the Windows 2000 Operating System is standards > based, not stolen from the UNIX OS. IPSec, VPN, Kerberos are all > technologies that are standards based. Have you ever heard of RFCs? I'm not familiar with the history of IPSec and VPN, but Kerberos was developed for Unix. IIRC, MS even ported the Unix code. The GNU people like to point at MS doing that as a reason to avoid BSD-like licenses in favor of the GPL. MS also did their usual thing, and didn't *quite* implement the standard. They extended it in ways that they are working very hard to keep closed, in order to force users to buy their servers instead of someone elses. Many of the standards documented in the RFCs were first developed on Unix systems. Try cross-matching the names of the RFC authors with the names of the implementors of the Unix versions. Nuts - the C socket API that every C implementation I know of uses was developed for Unix. > Do you know how long after that the first windows version of UNIX > came up? IIRC, Apple introduced the Mac during the '84 SuperBowl, which would be January, 84. MS just barely beat them to the punch with MS Windows 1.0 (though basically nobody ever used it), so call it sometime in '83. The first Unix based system I know of that had windowing was SunOS, which showed up in February '82. So Unix had a windowing system a full year before MS did. If you only count windowing systems that enough of the platforms users used to make it a market preferable to the underlying OS, then SunOS did that from day one, but MS had to wait until MS Windows 3.0 in around '92, meaning Unix was there a decade before MS. > In fact they even chose to call it X-Windows. No, the did *not* call it X-Windows. Sun's first generation windowing system was called SunView. Later ones were called SunDEW, then NeWS, and later OpenWindows. Even what you're thinking of isn't called "X-Windows". The list of names the X Consortium ask people to use are "X", "X Window System", "X Version 11", "X Window System, Version 11" and "X11". Their documentation calls it the "X Window System", *never* "X Windows". I'm not sure when X was first shipped with a Unix system. Since it was at version 10 as of '85 when I first ran into it, it wouldn't surprise me if it was in distribution before MS's Windows 1.0 as well. > Today, of all the mainstream Operating Systems, UNIX still has the > slowest Windows interface. I can say with equal truth that of all the mainstream Operating Systems - and most of the minor ones - Windows has the least user friendly interface. <mike -- Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15055.27944.187865.22558>