Dude...... everyone's been having a little fun here with this NT -vs- Unix things.... then someone's gotta get all defensive about it.... To assume that any OS or software package is "finished" is purely naive... to assume anything can be perfect is the same. To assume that good things can't be written in a month, or to assume they take years to write is the same. To assume that WinNT/2K are great OSes because they're based on a working OS is the same. If you trust your ATM machine to Windows, it's the same. I've been a NT server admin for years (actually I'm not now because I'm in networking =), and I've seen NT run stable before...... but I don't think anyone can argue that WinNT is as flexible and stable as Unix. I mean, how many times do you know of an ISP that simply recompiled some routines into the NT kernal so that all of their usage details and systems information was collected in a nice neat package. Not gonna happen. Unix gives that flexibility. Do they release "service packs" and patches and security patches on a weekly basis for Unix like they do for NT? Does Unix have a monopolistic creator that tries to violate everyone's privacy at every turn? I don't know why you wouldn't trust Unix on your ATM considering most of the banks, etc are using Unix or IBM AIX or something...... way more than NT...... get a clue "Jason" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > What was your point ? That Multics sucks , and by the same token, therefore > Unix sucks and NT/W2K rules !!! At least, NT/W2K was based on a working > operating system. Anyone of you notice that Unix is all about ego ? If Unix > is finished in 1 month, why are there still people working on it ? On the > other hand, if Unix is perfect, why the hell are people working on it ? If > Unix promotes innovation, why is nobody using it ? Would you trust you ATM > machine to Linux ? > > > > ""Jim Dixon"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > THE PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE B > > > > ABSTRACT > > B is a computer language designed by D. M. Ritchie and K. L. Thompson, for > > primarily non-numeric applications such as system programming. These > > typically involve complex logical decision-making, and processing of > > integers, characters, and bit strings. On the H6070 TSS system, B programs > > are usually much easier to write and understand than assembly language > > programs, and object code efficiency is almost as good. Implementation of > > simple TSS subsystems is an especially appropriate use for B. This > technical > > report contains a description of the MH-TSS (Honeywell 6070) version of B > > (by S. C. Johnson), and a tutorial introduction to most of the features of > > the language (by B. W. Kernighan). > > > > Ken Thompson > > The principal inventor of the Unix operating system and author of > > the B language, the predecessor of C. > > > > In the early days Ken used to hand-cut Unix distribution tapes, often with > a > > note that read "Love, ken". Old-timers still use his first name (sometimes > > uncapitalised, because it's a login name and mail address) in third-person > > reference; it is widely understood (on Usenet in particular) that without > a > > last name "Ken" refers only to Ken Thompson. Similarly, Dennis without > last > > name means Dennis Ritchie (and he is often known as dmr). > > > > Ken was first hired to work on the Multics project, which was a huge > > production with many people working on it. Multics was supposed to support > > hundreds of on-line logins but could barely handle three. > > > > In 1969, when Bell Labs withdrew from the project, Ken got fed up with > > Multics and went off to write his own operating system. People said "well, > > if zillions of people wrote Multics, then an OS written by one guy must be > > Unix!". There was some joking about eunichs as well. > > > > Ken's wife Bonnie and son Corey (then 18 months old) went to visit family > in > > San Diego. Ken spent one week each on the kernel, file system, etc., and > > finished UNIX in one month along with developing SPACEWAR (or was it > "Space > > Travel"?). > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Howard C. Berkowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 5:40 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on we NT guys? > > [7:6675] > > > > > > >Want to make any UNIX-head apoplex? Remind them that DOS is UNIX subset. > > >The multi-tasking & multi-threaded functions were dropped because there > > >weren't enough bits in the registers for the Intel 8088. These were added > > >back in when the hardware for PC's was available. However, they did add > > >better mnemonics for the UNIX commands so 'ls' became 'dir'. 'Easy' > > >translates to 'stupid' somehow. But even so it's UNIX! DOS is UNIX! > > >tee-hee. > > > > > >DOS clowns. > > >UNIX dweebs. > > >NT geeks. > > >Cisco nerds. > > >Where's Diane Arbus when we need her? > > > > > >- susan > > > > > > Get back to the origins of the name UNIX. Pronounced aloud, is there > > an English word that comes to mind? > > > > The ancestor of UNIX is MULTICS. UNIX is castrated MULTICS. > > > > Extra credit for the two predecessors of C. (No, the first one isn't A). Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6798&t=6798 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
