"Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > At the time frame in question, "operating system" and "kernel" was > used pretty much synonymously in computer science circles. > > Again, incorrect. Maybe you are to young to remeber these things,
Maybe you are too conceited to make a valid argument. It is not the first time you are trying to pull this particularly condescending bluff off on me. While it is self-disqualifying anyway, let me just tell you that I started computing on the Cyber 175 family of computers (60bit architecture, running NOS at that time. I just recently discarded the old COMPASS assembly language manuals I still had flying around in my basement), even did some processing with an old CDC6400, have worked extensively with punch cards and even a bit with papertape as programming media. > but the definition of kernel and operating system has always been > blurry in Computing Science circles. So you admit that there has been no _fixed_ definition. Maybe you are too old to remember those things, but in those times, "operating system" and "kernel" was used pretty much synonymously in computer science circles. I am not saying it was an established definition. I am saying that is was used pretty much synonymously. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
