Board index › Topical Discussion › Computers, Math, Science, and Technology

Mac Vs Win Customizable

Page 3 of 3 [ 40 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

Previous topic | Next topic

Pikachu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,434
Location: half way up a big hill

28 Jul 2005, 9:53 am

Antonio wrote:
Pikachu wrote:
Antonio: go look elsewhere for an arguement, i don't want one

Thanks


Cry me a river.
Next time, if you don't want an argument, stick to stating what you know.

Keep your thanks.


why do i bother? :roll:

i did state what i know, jeez :roll:


_________________
Thanks Tinkerbell.

Allegedly away with the fairies for 6-7 years


M
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 7 Apr 2005
Gender: Female
Posts: 41
Location: London, UK

02 Aug 2005, 12:26 pm

OS X is more Unix than Linux.

Darwin is based on FreeBSD which is based on BSD Unix from the 1970s.

Linux though is a completely rewritten unix-like operating system from the early 1990s, so you could say it is actually a Unix emulator.

That is not an argument for or against either operating system though.

Michael.



Pikachu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,434
Location: half way up a big hill

03 Aug 2005, 10:43 am

M wrote:
OS X is more Unix than Linux.

Darwin is based on FreeBSD which is based on BSD Unix from the 1970s.

Linux though is a completely rewritten unix-like operating system from the early 1990s, so you could say it is actually a Unix emulator.

That is not an argument for or against either operating system though.

Michael.


Makes sense to me, but i don't understand how Linux could be a Unix emulator, as it is Unix like and it's an OS in it's own right


_________________
Thanks Tinkerbell.

Allegedly away with the fairies for 6-7 years


Nuttdan
WP Co-Founder
WP Co-Founder

User avatar

Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 323
Location: White River Junction, VT

03 Aug 2005, 6:56 pm

Linux is basically the ultimate in customization, when compared to mainstream desktop OSes. The main window managers have a dizzying array of options -- and if that isn't enough, you can edit the source and customize it however you want! You could make it a big hulking beast that takes up gigabytes of space, or you could make it small enough to run off of a CD or on an embedded device.

Pikachu wrote:
M wrote:
OS X is more Unix than Linux.

Darwin is based on FreeBSD which is based on BSD Unix from the 1970s.

Linux though is a completely rewritten unix-like operating system from the early 1990s, so you could say it is actually a Unix emulator.

That is not an argument for or against either operating system though.

Michael.


Makes sense to me, but i don't understand how Linux could be a Unix emulator, as it is Unix like and it's an OS in it's own right


I think he means to say that it tries to be like UNIX like a kid might want to be like a celebrity or something. Not that it's an actual emulator.

PeterMacKenzie wrote:
Alex wrote:
Linux has directx and good hardware support if you get the right hardware.


Yeah, but get the wrong hardware and you're screwed :P


It's also very user-friendly. Thing is, it's picky about who its friends are. :-)



M
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 7 Apr 2005
Gender: Female
Posts: 41
Location: London, UK

03 Aug 2005, 7:44 pm

Nuttdan wrote:
I think he means to say that it tries to be like UNIX like a kid might want to be like a celebrity or something. Not that it's an actual emulator.
That is exactly what I mean. It attempts to be like Unix, running the same programs and be configured and interfaced in the same way, but it is not Unix as it does not contain original Unix code.

This is not a bad thing, rather than patching up code that is over thirty years old and designed for different hardware architectures it makes a lot of sense to start again and target it for modern computers. To the users and programs it does not matter how it is written, just so long as the same commands and APIs are understood.

Michael.



Pikachu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,434
Location: half way up a big hill

07 Aug 2005, 7:56 am

M wrote:
Nuttdan wrote:
I think he means to say that it tries to be like UNIX like a kid might want to be like a celebrity or something. Not that it's an actual emulator.
That is exactly what I mean. It attempts to be like Unix, running the same programs and be configured and interfaced in the same way, but it is not Unix as it does not contain original Unix code.

This is not a bad thing, rather than patching up code that is over thirty years old and designed for different hardware architectures it makes a lot of sense to start again and target it for modern computers. To the users and programs it does not matter how it is written, just so long as the same commands and APIs are understood.

Michael.


That makes more sense to me


_________________
Thanks Tinkerbell.

Allegedly away with the fairies for 6-7 years


jb814
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 3 Aug 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 309
Location: Glasgow Scotland

12 Aug 2005, 1:02 pm

For those who were thinking of using something other than Windows to watch video, etc. Forget it.
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=882



alex
Developer
Developer

User avatar

Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,216
Location: Beverly Hills, CA

12 Aug 2005, 3:20 pm

M wrote:
This is not a bad thing, rather than patching up code that is over thirty years old and designed for different hardware architectures it makes a lot of sense to start again and target it for modern computers. To the users and programs it does not matter how it is written, just so long as the same commands and APIs are understood.

Michael.


They didn't start again. They based Darwin off of FreeBSD and based the WM off of nextstep.


_________________
I'm Alex Plank, the founder of Wrong Planet. Follow me (Alex Plank) on Blue Sky: https://bsky.app/profile/alexplank.bsky.social