On 6 Sep 2006, at 2:46PM, Richard Baker wrote:
JohnR said:
What we really need is an OS with all of the advantages of XP and
Ubuntu and none of the disadvantages of either. Then maybe we
would have a decent operating system.
That's called "OS X". Oh, except for the fact that OS X is much easier
to use (and prettier!) than XP.
And traditional Unix doesn't actually make a whole heap of sense. Why
are there dozens of different configuration file formats? Why does no
other Unix have things like launchd and lookupd but rather a rats nest
of systems for starting processes and looking up directory data?
Because the original grew up piecemeal over three decades and Linux
and the BSDs faithfully cloned every idiosyncrasy. OS X already
breaks with that tradition with its Mach kernel, file bundles and
other OS Xisms leaving Apple free to innovate further.
I got Singh's _Mac OS X Internals_ the other week. 1641 pages of hard-
bound fun to dip into!
No library is complete without it Maru
--
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/
"A bad thing done for a good cause is still a bad thing. It's why so
few people slap their political opponents. That, and because slapping
looks so silly." - Randy Cohen.
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
