peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (01/04/90)
> >Now it may be that Sun, AT&T, and Berkeley have forgotten their roots. > I believe the above three define the label UNIX. I don't. UNIX is a family of operating systems based on a uniform device interface concept, with a common programming interface and a common set of utilities. I'm writing this message on a System-III based Xenix box. I could be using anything from a PC-XT running Minix to a Sequent Balance running whatever they run... and the system would look pretty much the same. Here you are saying "X is just a label", when it's even more closely tied into the implementation than UNIX, and then pegging UNIX as BSD+SYSV. I wish you were right. Because X is a horrible design. The first rule of system design is: make the easy things easy, then make the hard things possible. This is best done by providing a simple unifying concept that defines the system. I've not heard a lot about Apollo Domain, but what I have heard is typical of pre-UNIX proprietary systems: lots of complex system calls and data structures, I/O tied closely to the hardware. And X is certainly complex to use. Am I wrong? What's the simple unifying concept for DomainOS? Or X? -- _--_|\ Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. <peter@ficc.uu.net>. / `-_-'\ Also <peter@ficc.lonestar.org> or <peter@sugar.lonestar.org> \_.--._/ v