Now see, here's an example, of my /usual/ writing style, when I take the time to write things carefully, rather writing in a casual style:.. I said:

   "I, too often confuse linux with Unix, as it's seems the only
   largely supported and most freely available.... but I know it's not
   the entire market."


Dana Hudes wrote:
Linux isn't the only widely supported unix.  FrreBSD , NetBSD have their 
adherents.  Solaris is pretty widely used just not among consumers / desktops. 
Then you have Mac OS X which isn't exactly unix but is unix-like in many 
aspects (has a bash shell, you can use vi or emacs and of course perl).   I 
would suspect more Mac desktops than Linux.
====
So how does what you wrote apply to what I said? Are any of the BSD-derivatives as freely available as linux? Of those how many have a large amount of support behind them?
Servers on Mac exist but relatively rare.
Finally, Perl runs on Windows. There are a number of Windows-specific Perl 
modules.
---
   Windows isn't  something I'd likely confuse with Unix...

Dana Hudes
----

You see, when I respond to someone being historically, anal retentive, I try to dot such p's and q's as are necessary for context, vs. when I respond to those who are not focusing on such irrelevant details (very irrelevant to the subject of this discussion), I don't bother to check every such p and q... I write for the
context of those who I am writing to.

If someone who's focus is on historical events, or not very pertinent variations in license, of course they can pick apart things I said. They weren't part of the discussion, so I didn't include their information, as every person's information that I include takes me more time to either recall specifics (much of which I lived through, and would know if I **slowly** considered the words I wrote) or research before saying anything. My writings take far too much time as they do, to write for all possible readers, or to write legalistically, is far too tiring/tedious to do in a more casual discussion, but one parent was a lawyer, the other had a master's in speech and communication. Made for many lively discussions...(occasionally, though considerably more rarely, still does).

Reply via email to