On Thu, 23 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> > The latest 'Linux is crap because' are :
> >
> > 1) 'Linux is only capable of blocking'. I thought Unix became non blocking about
> > 1980, but I'm not sure. If it did I assume Linux is as well.
>
> Linux wasn't non-blocking in 1980. It wasn't ...
> As for Unix, are you sure it was that recent. :-)
>
> > 2) NT / 2000 are completely object oriented from the ground up. Linux / Unix
> > are 'monolithoc monstrosities that wouldn't know an object it it bit them'. I
> > really don't know if the Linux kernel is OO or not.
>
WindowsNT is not an object oriented OS, it is a library oriented OS. Just have
them look at their disk drives and count the number of .dll files- i.e. dynamic
(loading or linkng, I can never remember which) libraries.
If I install EVERY piece of software that comes on the Mandrake CD,and
StarOffice, I have a system that can be used as a web server, development
platform, SQL database server and development platform, complete office
workstation, graphics workstation (GIMP), HTML authoring system, ftp server,
news server, mail server and several other functions. Total hard drive space for
ALL of this software and capabilities- 1.5GB. Now who's the monolithic monster?
>
> > 3) 'Linux / Unix is only capable of non pre-emptive scheduling, which is crap
> > compared to the vastly superior MS models'. Again, I have no answer to this.
Windows borrowed the idea of multitasking on a desktop from the Amiga- and did
a lousy job of it.
