Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.unix.sys5.r4:8881 comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:7839 comp.unix.misc:15186 comp.unix.bsd:15677 comp.sys.powerpc:30239 comp.sys.intel:26047 comp.os.misc:3546 comp.os.linux.misc:32146 comp.os.linux.development:21593 comp.os.386bsd.misc:4501 comp.os.386bsd.development:2866 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msunews!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!library.ucla.edu!galaxy.ucr.edu!jjs From: jjs@dostoevsky.ucr.edu (Joe Sloan) Newsgroups: comp.unix.sys5.r4,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd,comp.sys.powerpc,comp.sys.intel,comp.os.misc,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.386bsd.misc,comp.os.386bsd.development Subject: Re: Interested in PowerPC for Linux / FreeBSD / NetBSD? Date: 21 Dec 1994 01:12:53 GMT Organization: University of Calfornia at Riverside Lines: 38 Message-ID: <3d7vel$442@galaxy.ucr.edu> References: <3d7s4q$3bm@galaxy.ucr.edu> <NEWTNews.11453.787971347.muzaffer@omer1.smixedsignal.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: dostoevsky.ucr.edu In article <NEWTNews.11453.787971347.muzaffer@omer1.smixedsignal.com>, <muzaffer@smixedsignal.com> wrote: > >All those above items are wrong. You have no idea what NT can or can't do. You, sir, are misinformed. NT is not "a better UNIX than UNIX", it's not even close... I have daily access to NT machines, and I am all too familiar with their shortcomings... I said that NT for instance, will not support multiple UNIX logins - NT has no concept of process group leader, controlling tty, parent processes id - and so many critical components that give a multi-user, networking OS like UNIX the ability to do the things it can do! I know there are implementations of telnet and rlogin for NT, windows, and OS/2, but these are just not the real thing - I know, I've used them! The rlogin/telnet programs on our NT machines are a toy - useless for any real work... I also said that it will not run "X". I know there are third parties who are selling a partial implementation of X for NT, mac, and windows... but NT lacks the basic OS infrastructure needed to be able to support a full-on implementation of X. The day I can telnet in to an NT machine, set the display to my desktop, run excel on the NT machine and have it display on my desktop, THEN you can say that NT runs X! just because you can display the "X" logo on your NT desktop doesn't mean you are running X! If you want to dispute some part of what I've said, please do - I'm all ears! But you have to attempt to make sense - don't just wave your hand and say "you don't know what NT can do"... Email to: | Running Linux! (Slackware) jjs@dostoevsky.ucr.edu | because a 486 is a terrible jjs@ucrengr.ucr.edu | thing to waste...