Bill on Unix

Bill on Unix

Post by D. Winslo » Wed, 19 Mar 1997 04:00:00



I was paging through an issue of PC Magazine the other day and noticed
an interview with M$'s Gates entitled "Looking Beyond" and one paragraph
caught my eye..

PC Magazine - 25-Mar-97 - P. 232, 235

GATES: "NT is the only from-scratch commercial operating system that's
been done in the last decade, and it was done based on the latest ideas
of how you make things multiprocessor and very extensible. We put more
money into advancing NT than is put into any operating system, whether
it's MVS or all the different flavors of Unix put together. That's a
very fresh piece of technology, and this year it'll get things such as
clustering and 64-bit. The question of whether PCs can take on the
toughest computing tasks will be answered once and for all. People still
see Unix as being higher-end or mainframes as being higher-end, but this
is the year when the pieces fall into place in both hardware and
software advances. NT will be the foundation for the next decade. It's a
very flexible base to be building on."

Comments?

--

 
 
 

Bill on Unix

Post by Colin Smi » Thu, 20 Mar 1997 04:00:00


|> I was paging through an issue of PC Magazine the other day and noticed
|> an interview with M$'s Gates entitled "Looking Beyond" and one paragraph
|> caught my eye..
|>
|> PC Magazine - 25-Mar-97 - P. 232, 235
|>
|> GATES: "NT is the only from-scratch commercial operating system that's
|> been done in the last decade, and it was done based on the latest ideas

DG/UX was written from scratch. Linux was written from scratch.

|> of how you make things multiprocessor and very extensible. We put more

That's why it only scales linearly to 2 CPUs.

|> money into advancing NT than is put into any operating system, whether

If you throw enough money at a piece of crap, you can probably re-write it into
a semi useful system.

|> it's MVS or all the different flavors of Unix put together. That's a
|> very fresh piece of technology, and this year it'll get things such as
|> clustering and 64-bit. The question of whether PCs can take on the

Ooh that new technology that Unix systems have been using for years. Linux
has been 64bit on the Alpha for almost 2 years now. Most of the serious Unix
systems have been 64bit for longer.

|> toughest computing tasks will be answered once and for all. People still

Linux already proves that PC's are useful for low to mid range computing.

|> see Unix as being higher-end or mainframes as being higher-end, but this
|> is the year when the pieces fall into place in both hardware and
|> software advances. NT will be the foundation for the next decade. It's a
|> very flexible base to be building on."

NT is probably the least flexible OS I have ever come across. What a joke.
You can't do anything with it unless you buy 3rd party add-ons.
--
Archeus Free FRPG - http://www.geocities.com/Area51/3002/

My opinions are completely my own, bought and paid for.

 
 
 

Bill on Unix

Post by Matthew Borows » Fri, 21 Mar 1997 04:00:00




>NT is probably the least flexible OS I have ever come across. What a joke.
>You can't do anything with it unless you buy 3rd party add-ons.

A total joke.

I can't wait until Caldera's next lawsuit against MS (if there is
another :)).

------------------------------------------------------------
* Matthew Borowski, http://mkb.home.ml.org/                *
------------------------------------------------------------
* "Macintoshes have to be smart computers --               *
* they must make up for their users' lack of intelligence."*
------------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

Bill on Unix

Post by Anthony D. Tribel » Sat, 22 Mar 1997 04:00:00


: ... Linux was written from scratch.

You must be referring to linux the kernel, not linux the operating system.
While the text files that contain the linux kernel source code may have
been written from scratch, this same source code was re-implementing other
code that had been in use for many years. Lets not forget the other
working models whose source code was available for inspection.

Don't misunderstand me, linux is great work but original it is not. Yet
another UNIX implementation, just more efficient and certainly less
expensive than most. :-)

Tony
--
------------------
Tony Tribelli

 
 
 

Bill on Unix

Post by Nathan Han » Sat, 22 Mar 1997 04:00:00



> I was paging through an issue of PC Magazine the other day and noticed
> an interview with M$'s Gates entitled "Looking Beyond" and one paragraph
> caught my eye..

> PC Magazine - 25-Mar-97 - P. 232, 235

> GATES: "NT is the only from-scratch commercial operating system

                                      ^^^^^^^^^^

This is how they excluded Linux, NetBSD and FreeBSD. Unfortunately
they forget Plan9, which has been done from scratch recently, and
is more technically advanced than NT will ever be (definitely more
advanced than UNIX for that matter). MS publicity department is a
bunch of lying toerags: lotsa hype and no facts.

Quote:> that's
> been done in the last decade, and it was done based on the latest ideas
> of how you make things multiprocessor and very extensible.

Then I'd have thought NT would be able to outperform Solaris, but
according to reasonably trustworthy benchmarks, it doesn't.

Quote:> We put more
> money into advancing NT than is put into any operating system, whether
> it's MVS or all the different flavors of Unix put together.

This assumes that more money = better technology. Linux shows that
this isn't true, as do many other free technologies.

Sad that people equate $$$ with value, and $$$ with quality. You'd
think the first Jaguar they saw would convince them otherwise.

Quote:> That's a
> very fresh piece of technology, and this year it'll get things such as
> clustering and 64-bit.

What? Like UNIX has had for the past decade? Any 128-bit unices on
the horizon yet? Perhaps they are already in use!

Quote:> The question of whether PCs can take on the
> toughest computing tasks will be answered once and for all.

They can't. PC's are totsy hardware, no matter how much $$$ you spend
on the junk. Sure, you can spend $10,000 and get an OK system, but
you'd have done yourself a favour by buying a better architecture and
getting more raw power and better reliability from the word GO.

Quote:> People still
> see Unix as being higher-end or mainframes as being higher-end, but this
> is the year when the pieces fall into place in both hardware and
> software advances.

I can't make sense of this.

Quote:> NT will be the foundation for the next decade. It's a
> very flexible base to be building on."

Remains to be seen. I would find it hard to believe that it's more
flexible than UNIX. UNIX runs on more processors than I've had hot
dinners, and the easiest way to get a wealth of software for a new
processor is to port UNIX to it.

UNIX is used for graphics work, desktop machines, processor farms,
laboratory environments, databases, file servers, dialups, routers,
firewalls, printer servers, authentication servers, web-servers,
e-mail servers, computer research, emulation bases, education and
training, application development, terminal adaptors.

How the heck is NT supposed to be more flexible than this. "Oh it
can run Microsoft applications". Pfffttt... HAHAHAHAHA.

Quote:> Comments?

Only that MS can't sell OS's based on merit or facts, so they use
bullshit like the above to push their crud.

Reminds me of how drug-dealers push their foul shit. If you don't
like my analogy, then sod off, I see the similarities.

--
Anyone find it strange that Microsoft is having difficulty beating
a 25 year old operating system with their New Technology? I don't.

 
 
 

Bill on Unix

Post by Ralph Jenning » Sat, 22 Mar 1997 04:00:00




> |> GATES: "NT is the only from-scratch commercial operating system that's
> |> been done in the last decade, and it was done based on the latest ideas
> DG/UX was written from scratch. Linux was written from scratch.

Yes, but though I dunno about DG/UX..., Linux is not commercial.
--

Public Access UNIX and Internet at (503) 220-1016 (2400-28800, N81)
 
 
 

Bill on Unix

Post by Ralph Jenning » Sat, 22 Mar 1997 04:00:00




> : ... Linux was written from scratch.
> Don't misunderstand me, linux is great work but original it is not. Yet
> another UNIX implementation, just more efficient and certainly less
> expensive than most. :-)

What?!?  Are you telling me that NT isn't "yet another Windoze
implementation"???  I admit it is a hell-of-a-lot less buggy than
3.1, and 95, but it's still just "another Windows", just more
efficient, though a hell-of-a-lot more expensive than the rest.
--
Sometimes,
 you're better off dead.
There's a gun in your hand,
 it's pointing at your head.

  -- Pet Shop Boys (West End Girls)

 
 
 

Bill on Unix

Post by Axel Bold » Sat, 22 Mar 1997 04:00:00



Anthony> Don't misunderstand me, linux is great work but original it
Anthony> is not. Yet another UNIX implementation, just more efficient
Anthony> and certainly less expensive than most. :-)

If you'd rather have original but slow, try the Hurd.

Axel

 
 
 

Bill on Unix

Post by Bernd Mey » Mon, 24 Mar 1997 04:00:00



>I can't wait until Caldera's next lawsuit against MS (if there is
>another :)).

What happened to the first one?

Bernie
--
============================================================================
"It's a magical world, Hobbes ol' buddy...
                                           ...let's go exploring"
Calvin's final words, on December 31st, 1995

 
 
 

Bill on Unix

Post by Colin Smi » Tue, 25 Mar 1997 04:00:00




|> > |> GATES: "NT is the only from-scratch commercial operating system that's
|> > |> been done in the last decade, and it was done based on the latest ideas
|>
|> > DG/UX was written from scratch. Linux was written from scratch.
|>
|> Yes, but though I dunno about DG/UX..., Linux is not commercial.

Tell Red Hat and Caldera that then.

--
Archeus Free FRPG - http://www.geocities.com/Area51/3002/

My opinions are completely my own, bought and paid for.

 
 
 

Bill on Unix

Post by Anthony D. Tribel » Wed, 26 Mar 1997 04:00:00




: > : ... Linux was written from scratch.
: >
: > Don't misunderstand me, linux is great work but original it is not. Yet
: > another UNIX implementation, just more efficient and certainly less
: > expensive than most. :-)
:
: What?!?  Are you telling me that NT isn't "yet another Windoze
: implementation"??? ...

Relax, calm down, and then reread my post. I never mentioned NT. I'm just
debunking the myth that linux is original. You're reading in things that
aren't there.

Tony
--
------------------
Tony Tribelli

 
 
 

Bill on Unix

Post by Colin Smi » Wed, 26 Mar 1997 04:00:00






|> : > : ... Linux was written from scratch.
|> : >
|> : > Don't misunderstand me, linux is great work but original it is not. Yet
|> : > another UNIX implementation, just more efficient and certainly less
|> : > expensive than most. :-)
|> :
|> : What?!?  Are you telling me that NT isn't "yet another Windoze
|> : implementation"??? ...
|>
|> Relax, calm down, and then reread my post. I never mentioned NT. I'm just
|> debunking the myth that linux is original. You're reading in things that
|> aren't there.

Nobody pretends that Linux is original. It was designed to be a Unix clone.
It was however written from scratch. As was DG/UX (Our commercial Unix).
No AT&T or BSD code. Completely designed, written and owned by DG.

That is the wording that I was answering. Bill was wrong (again).

|>
|> Tony
|> --
|> ------------------
|> Tony Tribelli

--
Archeus Free FRPG - http://www.geocities.com/Area51/3002/

My opinions are completely my own, bought and paid for.

 
 
 

Bill on Unix

Post by Ralph Jenning » Wed, 26 Mar 1997 04:00:00



> |> Yes, but though I dunno about DG/UX..., Linux is not commercial.
> Tell Red Hat and Caldera that then.

RedHat isn't Linux.  RedHat is a distribution of Linux and many
other things.  I say again Linux (in itself -- the kernel) is
not commercial.

l8r, Me.
--
Sometimes,
 you're better off dead.
There's a gun in your hand,
 it's pointing at your head.

  -- Pet Shop Boys (West End Girls)

 
 
 

Bill on Unix

Post by Joseph I. Valenzue » Wed, 26 Mar 1997 04:00:00


    Anthony> I'm sorry, implementing well known ideas while examining
    Anthony> other bodies of source code doesn't seem like "written from
    Anthony> scratch" to me. "Written from scratch" to me would be
    Anthony> something a bit closer to a "clean room" design where those
    Anthony> implementing the clone have not seen source code related to
    Anthony> the original.

Kind of rules out NT then, as I think Cutler had something to with VMS
;).

And what did Linus see of the original (any original) UNIX code, outside
of what anyone can get from Bach's "Design of the UNIX Operating
System"?

--

How much does it cost to entice a dope-smoking UNIX system guru to
Dayton?
                -- Brian Boyle, UNIX/WORLD's First Annual Salary Survey

 
 
 

Bill on Unix

Post by Anthony D. Tribel » Wed, 26 Mar 1997 04:00:00


: Nobody pretends that Linux is original. It was designed to be a Unix clone.
: It was however written from scratch...

I'm sorry, implementing well known ideas while examining other bodies of
source code doesn't seem like "written from scratch" to me. "Written from
scratch" to me would be something a bit closer to a "clean room" design
where those implementing the clone have not seen source code related to
the original.

Tony
--
------------------
Tony Tribelli

 
 
 

1. Bill G. Sings the Nerdy Blues (and Bill C. Plays a Sour Sax)


: MS has a perilous grip on the entirety of personal computing. Imagine if
: one company owned 80% of the all the roads in America.

: [MS] leveraged its unique position - from the day IBM licensed QDOS - to
: now reign unchallenged (unchallengeable, really) so that they alone can
: dictate the future of personal computing ... and that future basically
: means paying more and more to MicroSoft.

: How quicky we forget: remember what MS considered the future of online
: information and computing? Something as egalitarian and free flowing (and
: you *like* freedom, don't you) as the internet? NO NO NO, mon ami, it was
: MSN. Two years ago the feds were up in arms about MS forcing the MSN icon
: onto every Windows desktop, to the exclusion of CompuServe and AOL.

: Without products like Netscape and Mosaic, you'd be getting this message on
: the MS tollway.

Great insights and well-put. I'm no fan of government in general, but the
minimal reason for government to exist is to protect the rights of everyone,
whether rich or poor. In this case, the wealthiest man who ever lived can't
restrain himself from using that wealth to satisfy his and his hangers-on
lusts to run right over everyone else. I'm sure he calls it "economic
Darwinism" or some such and justifies how "the strong and fit" (himself and
his pals, natch) have a perfect right to devour the weak (everybody with
less money.)

How nerd-like, in the end. A basic understanding of human instead of
spreadsheet psychology would have helped Bill understand how while he was
becoming ever more fantastically wealthy and powerful, and receiving the
sycophantic adoration of all who wished they had his money, or a bit spill
out of his pocket as he walked past them, the entire exercise of celebrity
had a strong undercurrent of hatred and jealousy rather than sincere
appreciation of his obvious (to himself) genius.

In a democracy, you've got to be careful not to rub your success in people's
faces. The bigger the success, the more careful. Maybe not obviously, the
little people seen so far away through the wrong end of the telescope on the
Microsoft hill have lives too, equally worth living although it may not seem
so in a world seemingly made in Bill's image and worthwhile in it primarily
to be Bill or, if you must, a figment subject to Bill's philistine
imagination. Those crude inferior (unevolved?) specimens not only paid your
freight but they can (and will) vote their emotions too. And should you
fall, they won't be sad no matter how great your sacrifice to build the $100
mil home. After all, they don't care about the folks without health
insurance or the homeless, either. So don't expect sympathy unless you're
willing to pay for it. And even that might not work.

Public sentiment, Bill. Where do they want you to go today?

You could've had Cab Calloway over to sing at the house, if he'd lived:

"How big can you get,
Ain't you big enough yet.
You trying to grow up,
Taller than tall?
Don't you know, the bigger you get
The harder you'll fall.
How big can you get?
Ain't you big enough yet?"

2. cancel <unix-faq/faq/part5_1082972703@rtfm.mit.edu>

3. BILL & bill

4. ufsdump and ufsrestore

5. Billing Program for UNIX

6. Install faile dto create MRB (Master Boot Record) on 13G HDD

7. Billing software, c++ und Unix

8. wu-ftpd and cname alias problems

9. Bill Gates on the future of Xenix/UNIX

10. comp.unix.questions comp.unix.misc comp.unix.sys5.r3

11. rcp/ftp problems between OS5/Unix & Unix/Unix

12. Unix Unix Unix!

13. comp.unix.wizards comp.lang.c comp.sys.sun alt.unix.wizards alt.unix.wizards.free