On Thu, 23 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> The latest 'Linux is crap because' are :
>
> 1) 'Linux is only capable of blocking'. I thought Unix became non blocking about
> 1980, but I'm not sure. If it did I assume Linux is as well.
Linux wasn't non-blocking in 1980. It wasn't ...
As for Unix, are you sure it was that recent. :-)
> 2) NT / 2000 are completely object oriented from the ground up. Linux / Unix
> are 'monolithoc monstrosities that wouldn't know an object it it bit them'. I
> really don't know if the Linux kernel is OO or not.
It is true the Unix and Linux are not OO kernels.
OO is the fad-de-jur. It is unproven that the advantages
outweigh the disadvantages in the low-level, time critical functions of the
kernel.
> 3) 'Linux / Unix is only capable of non pre-emptive scheduling, which is crap
> compared to the vastly superior MS models'. Again, I have no answer to this.
Total FUD! Those IDIOTS should learn the facts before they open their mouths.
Unix has ALWAYS had pre-emptive scheduling.
