Paul G. Allen wrote:
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?).
From my exposure to it, probably just the parts that don't work worth a
damn.
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
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
