William T Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, Mar 24, 1998 at 08:58:42PM -0500:
> > How is linux not an OS. I really need to rethink my ideas about
> > computers...
>
> It's a matter of which definition of OS you subscribe to. Some say that
> the OS is responsible for mediating the interactions between CPU, RAM, and
> peripherals, and providing a set of system calls for programs to interact
> with them. Linux (even the kernel by itself) provides all this. Others
> say that the OS is supposed to include all kinds of other things (user
> interface, window system, applets, programming libraries, and so on, which
> are typically provided by the distribution under Linux).
>
> The second flavor is typically adhered to by the Microsoft marketing
> department. The rest of the world follows the first definition.
"Operating System" is a technically precise definition and there is no
arguing the point. What you describe here is a non-technical
understanding on the part of people that do not care to delve into the
same technical details. This is a prevalent issue, and becoming more
pervasive even in the Linux community. I'm not sure that this is a good
sign, or a bad one; I will reserve judgement.
--
Scott
--
PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject.
