Message-ID: <37B33DA9.9EFFA2D8@Wireless.Com>
From: Mike Cheponis <Mike@Wireless.Com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: LINUX !
X-Priority: 5 (Lowest)
References: <rqt367ghkur80@corp.supernews.com> <37B132A1.41C6@fh-dortmund.de> <37B1CDA4.4983863E@Wireless.Com> <37B232D8.B92BD2DE@cln.etc.bc.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 65
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 14:33:29 -0700
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.185.76.24
X-Trace: ultra 934493233 209.185.76.24 (Thu, 12 Aug 1999 14:27:13 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 14:27:13 PDT
Path: news.adfa.oz.au!clarion.carno.net.au!news0.optus.net.au!news1.optus.net.au!optus!yorrell.saard.net!duster.adelaide.on.net!news.saix.saia.asn.au!news.syd.ausbone.net!newsfeed.zip.com.au!192.148.253.68.MISMATCH!netnews.com!newshub.northeast.verio.net!kiowa!ultra!not-for-mail



Steve Shack wrote:

> >Or open bsd? or freebsd? They're each best suited to slightly different
> >tasks. I won't argue with your choice because you seem rather adminent
> >about it.

For learning, Minix has no equal.  Please, if you don't have it, immediately go to
Amazon and buy the second edition of "Operating Systems, Design and
Implementation" by Andrew S. Tanenbaum and Albert S. Woodhull.  This book
describes Minix 2.0, as well as OS concepts in general.

I don't have as much experience with FreeBSD or the other one you mentioned, but I
do have a lot of experience with BSDI and NetBSD.  I prefer BSDI, but it costs
money, and NetBSD is certainly robust and stable, especially compared with the OS
that was written by that student who would have gotten an "F" in Andy's class.

>
> >Untill recently I was working with a company who had the need for data
> >entry in the field. NT just simply can't do this. You can't have
> >terminals attached to one system and have 50+ users at once banging away
> >enteries for a database especialy in a mission critical envornment where
> >if the system fails you've lost 10K

The original point was that, somehow, the OS that was written by the student was
causing delays in Microsoft releasing W2K; that is not true.

I am not certain how pointing out that NT is not applicable in all uses is
relevant to this point?  NT is not relevant to all uses, nor is any OS of which I
am aware; that's one reason we have a panoply of choice in OSs.

> > >If you want a hobby OS, written by amateurs, for amateurs, then, by all
> > >means, get Linux.

> >You also consider donald becker  who works at cesdis (nasa) an amature?
> >Wow. Your standards are much higher that the %100 of the rest of the
> >computer industy. NT, linux, *bsd, others are each suited to different
> >things. They do those things well. To say that linux is outright a joke
> >is just foolish.

I don't want to dis donald becker, but he wrote a flame on his site about how
awful the IrDA protocols were, and how they just couldn't be reliably implemented,
etc.  Then Dag Brattli came along and dropped IrDA support into that OS that was
written by the student.

I suspect that I, coming from MIT where programming correctness and actual
-design- of systems is paramount, and the fact that I -read- a lot of code, makes
me a stickler for things that should be "done right".  The OS that was written by
the student isn't such a project.

I suspect you haven't actually -read- much code in the OS (not the drivers, like
becker's) of that OS written by the student. Perhaps that explains your position?
Or maybe have you don't understand the architecture of the OS written by the
student?

I also encourage you to get a copy of "The Unix Hater's Handbook" which,
unfortunately, is now out of print, but perhaps a friend or a local library has a
copy.  I especially liked the "UNIX Barf Bag" that came with the book.  Until unix
users realize what a crock unix really is, I don't think we're going to see real
innovation in OS design.

Very best regards -Mike


