SE f*** over the western world (yet another reason to hate microsoft!)

[Caspian]

Re: SE f*** over the western world (yet another reason to hate microsoft!)

ssssooooo to sum this all up....


Mac = asshole
PC = Slob
Unix = Pedo



.....alright well now that we have all this strait ;p

wait, so what if you have more than one type? For instance, I have a pc desktop and a mac laptop. Am I a messy asshole? Or do they even eachother out a little making me an untidy dick?

[Tickmeoff]

Re: SE f*** over the western world (yet another reason to hate microsoft!)

The desktop is bigger than the laptop so I would say you are somewhere around disgusting dickhead.

[Feba]

Re: SE f*** over the western world (yet another reason to hate microsoft!)

Keep in mind that OS X is (from .3 up, iirc) Unix.

[TheGrandMom]

Re: SE f*** over the western world (yet another reason to hate microsoft!)

wait, so what if you have more than one type? For instance, I have a pc desktop and a mac laptop. Am I a messy asshole? Or do they even eachother out a little making me an untidy dick?

HAHAHAHAAHAHAHA

[Mhurron]

Re: SE f*** over the western world (yet another reason to hate microsoft!)

Unix = Pedo

Linux isn't Unix.

[Kailea]

Re: SE f*** over the western world (yet another reason to hate microsoft!)

Linux isn't Unix.

Well pardon me -.- its "Unix-like" then, not my fault that I have always herd of it as a Unix based OS.

[Yellow Mage]

Re: SE f*** over the western world (yet another reason to hate microsoft!)

Linux isn't Unix.

If I am not mistaken, Linux is a kernel, and Unix is an OS, correct?

If so, Kailea's original analogy is still, for the most part, in tact.

[Mhurron]

Re: SE f*** over the western world (yet another reason to hate microsoft!)

If I am not mistaken, Linux is a kernel, and Unix is an OS, correct?

If so, Kailea's original analogy is still, for the most part, in tact.

Linux is a kernel, an OS built on that kernel is still not UNIX.

UNIX is both a trademark and a flow of source code. As a trademark, only certified OS's on specific hardware can call themselves UNIX. Other 'familial' UNIX OS's have to call themselves UNIX-like or as descended from UNIX.

Register of Open Branded Products
Those are UNIX. The z/OS that conforms to UNIX95 has no UNIX source in it, it just passed the certification tests.

The BSD's are familial UNIX.

Linux distros just try to give the appearance of working like UNIX. And they do it poorly. Linux distros are like wannabes trying to be just like the big boys instead of trying to improve or trying something different.

[Feba]

Re: SE f*** over the western world (yet another reason to hate microsoft!)

Mhurron, asking purely out of curiosity and not trying to antagonize you, but if a distro follows the LSB, and complies with POSIX and the Single UNIX Specification,

A- How is it functionally different from a machine which is certified UNIX?
B- If a Linux distro were to officially become UNIX, would you still call it inferior:
B1- Why or why not?
B2- depends on how/why
B3- it's impossible (please explain)
C- In your opinion, which of the various UNIX (and UNIX-like) systems is the best execution of the various standards involved?

[Mhurron]

Re: SE f*** over the western world (yet another reason to hate microsoft!)

Mhurron, asking purely out of curiosity and not trying to antagonize you, but if a distro follows the LSB, and complies with POSIX and the Single UNIX Specification,

A- How is it functionally different from a machine which is certified UNIX?

No Linux conforms completely to the LSB, implements complete POSIX or would have a chance at passing the UNIX spec requirements. If they ever did, significant gains in portability of tools and scripts would be the biggest benefit. They would probably also have to have a stable API as well.

B- If a Linux distro were to officially become UNIX, would you still call it inferior:
B1- Why or why not?
B2- depends on how/why
B3- it's impossible (please explain)

It would be UNIX. It would not be superior or inferior in that regard. It would have to be judged on its extensions, of which no Linux distro has anything special.

C- In your opinion, which of the various UNIX (and UNIX-like) systems is the best execution of the various standards involved?

The standards are actually quite boring and unimpressive outside of compatibility. If I'm careful, I can write scripts or utilities that would only need to be relinked or fully recompiled without source changes (within reason) and have it portable between the commercial UNIXes and if I was really careful would probably also work on the BSD's. You can't do that moving from Solaris or a BSD to Linux for anything except the most trivial. The GNU tools themselves don't even have the same flags for the same options between them, how could it be portable with something the

Simply adhering to the standard doesn't mean much as far as impressive features (Windows has a POSIX complaint layer). There are tools that exist in each of the commercial UNIXes that no one else really matches. I've never used AIX, but I hear it has a management system that works wonders. Solaris has ZFS, DTrace, Zones and a whole bunch of other things that Linux is trying (and failing) to reimplement. No easily obtainable OS has the security track record of OpenBSD. NetBSD runs on everything. These features aren't portable, but they are the reasons to choose those systems. Linux is just sort of there and has a lot of stuff from different people written for them. If you need some obscure tool there is a higher chance of it working on a Linux system then anything else, but again that is because of all the specific Linuxisms throughout the OS. Linux has the same thing going for it that MS does. It's 'everywhere.' It's easy to find someone who 'knows' Linux just like it's easy to find someone who 'knows' Windows.

UNIX isn't the be all and end all of computing anyway. It beat out more worthy OS's the same way Windows did. It was cheap (at the beginning), available freely at schools and it was 'good enough.' The first really good ones didn't last (Tru64, IRIX) and what remained slowly developed new features until other OS's and hardware started gnawing away at what people thought you had to have a big iron UNIX for.

[Yellow Mage]

Re: SE f*** over the western world (yet another reason to hate microsoft!)

Ok, so working with what Mhurron gave me in relation to the analogy newly presented by Kailea (and possibly restating what Feba just said):

How are Pedos, Lolicons, and Child Molesters in general any more or less abhorrent from each other?

[Feba]

Re: SE f*** over the western world (yet another reason to hate microsoft!)

UNIX isn't the be all and end all of computing anyway. It beat out more worthy OS's the same way Windows did. It was cheap (at the beginning), available freely at schools and it was 'good enough.' The first really good ones didn't last (Tru64, IRIX) and what remained slowly developed new features until other OS's and hardware started gnawing away at what people thought you had to have a big iron UNIX for.

also just out of curiosity, how could another OS improve on what UNIX has? It seems to me like with Mac literally becoming UNIX, some of Vista's user control stuff (Primarily UAC, and honestly I don't remember most of what I've read about it, but I remember it striking me as aiming towards a multi-user system), and like you said Linux trying to become a UNIX, it's becoming more popular, not less. Ignoring things like web-based OS, cloud computing, etc.; speaking purely in terms of a desktop OS. Would it require some 'big new thing', or just working out flaws, or is it one of those things where it's flawed, but there's not really any better way to do it?

[The Mauva Syndicate]

Re: SE f*** over the western world (yet another reason to hate microsoft!)

I love listening to the big brains talk computers
I understand most of the individual words but not all the acronyms
but in the order presented - it's like a foreign language....

[Feba]

Re: SE f*** over the western world (yet another reason to hate microsoft!)

I have a giant head. Not brain. There's a difference.

I just have a hard time finding hats.

[TheGrandMom]

Re: SE f*** over the western world (yet another reason to hate microsoft!)

I have a giant head. Not brain. There's a difference.

I just have a hard time finding hats.

Hydrocephalus can do that to ya.