On Sun, 2007-06-10 at 20:30 -0700, Tracy R Reed wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Andrew Lentvorski wrote: > > Unix was always the toughest to get working on a new microprocessor. > > Windows was always the easiest. > > I'm confused. If this is so then why does Unix run on so many different > processors? It was even ported for free by hackers over very short > timeframes. And Windows so few? >
Because the statement is incorrect? There are many, many systems that Windows will not run on, and probably never will. I remember the many issues we had with it on the Alpha while I was at DIGITAL (BSOD was the norm, actually running something useful was a bonus!). It's a huge behemoth that is a piece-meal of many other parts of other stuff acquired by M$ over the years (I wonder how much of it they actually wrote?). It was no designed to be mutli-threaded, let alone to support preemptive multi tasking as UNIX was. It was and still is based upon a consumer (toy) OS. To this day it can't handle interrupts worth a damn. PGA -- Paul G. Allen BSIT/SE Owner/Sr. Engineer Random Logic Consulting www.randomlogic.com -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
