In-Reply-To: <4rbjrg$k1l@digital.netvoyage.net>
Message-ID: 
References: <833058917.18622.0@melech.demon.co.uk> <4r3s3b$r2r@news2.inlink.com> <4r4v5b$he7@digital.netvoyage.net> <4r9uo1$66p@dino.swlink.net> <4rbjrg$k1l@digital.netvoyage.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII



On 2 Jul 1996, Joe Sloan wrote:

> In article <4r9uo1$66p@dino.swlink.net>,
> Steven Gavette  wrote:
> >
> >NT is more scalable than most any other OS, with the possible exception of 
> >some versions of "unix". Yes NT is more scalable than DOS, but that's like 
> >saying "unix" is more scalable than CP/M. There is not a *single* flavor of 
> >"unix" that scales to the degree you are claiming.
> 
> OK, I'll play along; why do you put "Unix" in quotation marks?
> You see, I put quotations marks around windows "nt" because it is
> supposedly "new technology", which is sort of a hoax... I don't consider
> the odd mishmash of old mainframe, Unix and vms concepts dressed out in a 
> PeeCee flavoured environment to be anything new, so I quote the "nt" moniker
> to signify a wink and a nod.

Actually, it is very appropriate.  Unix is a registered trademark
previously associated with a specific group of binaries for example AT&T
System V Release 4.  The more generic "unix" referrs to an entire class of
operating systems which is complies with specific source code,
application, and infrastructure specifications (Posix, X/Open, and
FIPS specifications).  NT eveb meets the absolute minimum
specification to be considered a member of the "unix" family.  All they
would have to do is add X11, shells, and port the gnu source code.
Unfortunately, Microsoft really hates to give out source code (a
requirement of the GPL).

Does anybody have a version of GCC (with libraries) for Windows NT?

Is there a version of Xfree for Windows NT?

I have been told that many of the "generic" utilities normally used by NT
are not GPL because they link to Microsft's DLL stubs which are
copyrighted, no reverse engineering allowed,.....  protected to the point
of making sure that NT will never be able to run a "unix" suite of
applications.


The important thing is that X/Open compliant "unix" is 95% source code
compatibile (the remainder being conditional switches).  Most of the
differences can be identified by looking at source code for "highly
portable" programs like perl, X11, or emacs.

Microsoft has never been a big fan of making itself compatible with
anything but Microsoft.  Microsoft C 6.0 was ALMOST compatible with unix
compilers such as gcc.

> jjs
> 
> 

	Rex Ballard - Director of Electronic Distribution
	Standard & Poor's/McGraw-Hill
	Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect
	the Management of the McGraw-Hill Companies.
	http://cnj.digex.net/~rballard




From rballard@cnj.digex.net Wed Jul  3 20:03:45 1996
Status: O
X-Status: 
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy