On 28/03/16 16:13, John Rumm wrote:
On 28/03/2016 01:05, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 27/03/16 22:23, John Rumm wrote:
On 26/03/2016 09:33, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Once again the legacy of Windows - a single user system with its roots
back in floppy disks - and Unix - a multi-user system designed to work
with a very busy disk from the outset - show up.

You do talk a load of crap at times...

Windows 3.1, sure a shell on top of DOS. Win NT onward, basically a
re-engineering of VMS. Hardly what anyone would describe as a single use
floppy based system.


Why do you feel the need to pretend I wrote something I didn't, in order
to score ego-points?

I said that windows had its *legacy* back in single user single tasking
floppy based operating systems.

As I highlighted - that was a legacy of 16 bit windows. Modern versions
are not descendants of that, and hence don't share that legacy.

Not that it still was.

You might as well argue that *nix is command line only and does not
support a GUI...

Of course Win NT, written in 1993, some 20!! YEARS after Unix was
ALREADY a multi user multi tasking OS...had to try and drag windows into
the 20th century, but of course it still had to mainatain backwards
compatibility with older windows programs, and it still relied on pretty
guis to make administration accessible to the most complete moron of a
user, and that resulted in exactly the sort of compromises I
documentation. Form over function, designed to sell rather than work.

The NT kernal did not need (or attempt) to maintain backward
compatibility (remember it was not even intended to be a windows product
at first, ans was to be a development on from OS/2).

At the time it was designed the OS supported multiple APIs and multiple
hardware platforms. The windows compatibility was just an abstraction
that sat between the underlying OS and the application. (later versions
more closely coupled the Win32 API to the kernel in the interests of
greater performance, and in realisation that its POSIX and OS/2 APIs
were of less interest to customers)

And that is really the complete answer in a nutshell. *nix systems were
designed to work in professional applications, Windows has always been
first and foremost a consumer product, not an industrial one.
It's tried
and succeeded in getting sold into those markets, but that is more in
spite of its engineering, than because of it.

Rough diamond, or polished turd.

Your choice

As I have said many times, I use both. I just don't feel the need to
keep whining on about why my OS (or boiler, or any other hobby horse)
must be better that any other, just because its the one I like the most.


Well that is interesting, because I wasn't whining on' I was answering
someone who said 'how come the two strategies are different' and I
replied essentially 'history'.

And I am afraid the the legacy of windows a single task single user
operating system lives on even into its multi-tasking multiuser and
server aspects today.

These have all been somewhat additional things grafted on, they were
never designed in from the start.

As indeed I freely admit GUI X windows was grafted onto *nx.


--
A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on
its shoes.