Jason - Once again... for the reading impared: Cisco IOS is Unixish. Did I state that it IS Unix? Where do you suppose Cisco came up with the idea of the Internetworking Operating System? Please do not tell me MS-DOS, PC-DOS, Logo or some other crap... Commands like finger, who, telnet, history may seem foreign to you but they have Unix origins... If only IOS incorporated grep, sed and awk then life would be a little nicer (and no... the inc/begin/exclude in >= 12.0 does not count...) Regarding your barb on Unix experts should be CCIEs - by the same token we should could also state that all NT admins are on the same level as all script kiddies... Please... there are some good/great NT admins out there who are very technical. You never answered the Windows 3.1 AS question... Would you trust your Enterprise to this? There are Unix systems that are still running from that um.. time period. For some fun reading, Jason, check out http://www.sciam.com/1998/1198issue/1198techbus2.html Perhaps the link is a little old but it is one example of how many organizations are attempting to use Windows NT in the Enterprise. Hopefully, the IRS does not... Then again, 4 billion later and they still have problems perhaps that could be their new answer. If only that flat tax would pass... sigh... If Cisco is working on a GUI then they are going the same path as Lucent and others before them. I cannot wait until the know it all manager configures the network and does not understand why it doesn't work... I mean.. all the pretty lines with a thunderbolt connected to a ring here and a bar there... Guess there will always be work for IT folks :) One last thing.. could you send me some mail offline from this mailing list? You are listed as an anonymous poster and I would love to continue this conversation in a more private forum. Regards, Kelly ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jason" To: Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 3:14 AM Subject: Re: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on we NT guys? [7:6859] > Oh, now the IOS is Unixish ?? Phew, so by that token, all Unix experts would > be CCIE... so I guess the number would include all the so call Unix/Linux > "experts" > I don't remember mentioning that the ATM runs NT, most of them actually run > OS2. The extra $$ you save from using open?? source OS would be waste on > support.... > > In case you have not notice, Cisco is working on a GUI.... > > > > ""Kelly Hair"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > "Jason" - > > > > By your logic, Windows NT 3.1 is all you need for your Enterprise to > > succeed. Good luck in that endevour! > > > > In response to your other point, yes, I would trust my ATM server to > Linux. > > The blue screen is pretty but I would prefer to have money instead. Oh.. > > not to mention the extra money I would have from using a an open source OS > > rather than an M$ one... > > > > Perhaps Cisco should throw out the Unixish IOS and replace it with a GUI > so > > everyone could write configs for routers. Sounds like a grand idea... > > > > Regards, > > Kelly > > > > > 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). > > > Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6897&t=6897 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
