-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Paul G. Allen wrote: > On Sun, 2007-06-10 at 20:06 -0700, Andrew Lentvorski wrote: > >> Unix was always the toughest to get working on a new microprocessor. >> Windows was always the easiest. > > I don't think so. > > Linux ran on the Alpha long before Windows did.
Not that "Linux ran on Alpha" and "Windows ran on Alpha" aren't necessarily using the same interpretations of "ran". Windows NT betas were available for Alpha as far back as at least 1992, if not 1991, and the betas were far more feature rich even in basic OS services than any version of Linux available at that time. Regardless, Linus started working on his port of Linux to the Alpha in the spring of 1994 and IIRC finished his work in 1995. There was an internal project at DEC that did an initial port of Linux to Alpha that completed before that, but it required foreign bits to function properly and I seem to recall it was actually limited to 32-bit applications. Anyway, Windows NT for Alpha was released in 1993, prior to the release of the 1.0 Linux kernel, so by any rational metric I can think of, Windows ran on the Alpha before Linux did. - --Chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGbix5OagjPOywMBARAoBjAJ4rQhxh81m/mDC7EyQVRNMWq39z7gCfThzd zzxZ91jF96IxVG3Dgr3dCK8= =9HFp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
