Re: Properties

[Warren <ve3wwg@gmail.com>]

Jeffrey Carter expounded in
news:id93pc$qf9$1@tornado.tornevall.net: 

> Shark8 wrote:
>>
>> But then, prior to Unix, O/S's were usually steeped in
>> assembler language (like OS/2 for a modern example).  C
>> has been a big improvement in that regard.
> 
> OS/2 "prior to Unix"? Unix dates from ~1970, OS/2 the
> 1980s. 

Yes. I never said _anything_ about OS/2 predating Unix. 

What I did say was that OS/2 was as a modern example of an asm 
version of an O/S.  Sheesh.  Didn't you read the word 
"modern"?

> What I find funny is that the alternatives to Windows are
> all versions of Unix. Unix is hardly perfect; you'd think
> we'd have come up with something better by now. 

Agreed that Unix has imprefections but at least it was 
"designed" with some peer review.  

MS stuff just gets "marketing review" and pushed out the door 
with a "look what we can do?" approach.  Everyone told them 
ActiveX over the internet was a bad idea. It tooks years for 
that lesson to sink in.

It would be interesting to know more about what NT was 
designed like, before MS bastardized it, to make it compatible 
with prior Windows APIs.

I've never worked with VMS, but folks that have seem to have 
really liked it.

More recently, I've personally liked the idea of an Ada mach 
kernel myself, and even did some work on one once (RTMK I 
think it was).  But I'm too old to follow through on something 
that huge.  That is a Linux type of project in need of a young 
university grad with energy and enthusiasm.

Warren