From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 111d6b,328622178ec8b832 X-Google-Attributes: gid111d6b,public X-Google-Thread: 10d15b,328622178ec8b832 X-Google-Attributes: gid10d15b,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid1094ba,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,8775b19e3c68a5dc X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: fred@genesis.demon.co.uk (Lawrence Kirby) Subject: Re: Which language pays most 17457 -- C++ vs. Java? Date: 1998/01/04 Message-ID: <883937777snz@genesis.demon.co.uk>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 312734108 References: <67et6o$dql@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net> <882757510snz@genesis.demon.co.uk> <67ktrg$ibk@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net> <883319809snz@genesis.demon.co.uk> <34AA80B3.E651528D@its.cl> X-Mail2News-User: fred@genesis.demon.co.uk X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net X-Mail2News-Path: genesis.demon.co.uk X-Trace: mail2news.demon.co.uk 883942613 5163 fred genesis.demon.co.uk Organization: none Reply-To: fred@genesis.demon.co.uk Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.misc,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.cobol,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-01-04T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <34AA80B3.E651528D@its.cl> gschwarz@its.cl "Guillermo Schwarz" writes: >This is a multi-part message in MIME format. >--------------3DDDA4709FEFF727FDE888E1 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > > >Lawrence Kirby wrote: > >> Unix >> was gaining strength from the exposure it was getting in Universities. > >Yes. > >> Most people who bought DOS weren't even aware that Unix existed. >> > >In the early 80's that was true. But in the late 80's UNIX was known toreplace >other OS's. It did. We were discussing the influences on the design of DOS. The design was well set before the late 80's so that isn't really an issue. >But now there in Windows NT in the horizon, >which for the most part has been behind Novell Netware, and I think >has almost killed it. >What does this have to do with Smalltalk? >Everything! >Smalltalk was created in Xerox PARC as was the graphic workstation, >the mouse and the ethernet. Guess which part is missing in every single >desktop... Perhaps the part least relevant to the way people use computers. >> > They did not see that UNIX provided better performance (for >> >the money), or that is was more reliable - which it wasn't at the time. >> >> What is your definition of "relaiblae"? > >Relaiblae? It must be latin for reliable ;^)Everybody knows it means "performs > as >expected". I would hope not. If I expect Windows to crash regularly that doesn't mean that it is reliable. >UNIX didn't stay up more than 3 days until LINUX was born. Get real. Lunix has never been one of the most reliable Unix platforms out there although it is ceratinly a decent enough platform these days. A commercial Unix system that died every 3 days would be junked by its users. They expect reliability. >I've seen linuxes uptime as long as 1 year. Linux doesn't fare well here because there are often reasons to take the typical small system that runs Linux down quite frequently. So seeing a Linux system up for over a year is quite unusual. For many commercial systems it can be quite common. A commercial Unix system might be *expected* to stay up a year or more whereas, as your tone suggests, it is a surprise to see a Linux system up this long (although as I say that isn't necessarily a fault of Linux). >Long life to Linux. No arguments there. -- ----------------------------------------- Lawrence Kirby | fred@genesis.demon.co.uk Wilts, England | 70734.126@compuserve.com -----------------------------------------