SPONSORED LINKS
Thanks for the responses....I can certainly say i'm now motivated to do some more digging on the points both of you have brought up!! joe On Jul 21, 12:07am, Brad Pepers wrote: > Subject: Re: New Member to list.... > > On Sat, 20 Jul 1996, Joe Leonard wrote: > > > > > I am also (just now) installing Linux (intel version of > > > Unix) on a 340 Mb hd just to gain some experience with > > > Unix. (yeah, i know....i'm a glutton for punishment!!) > > > > Linux is not Unix and Unix is not Linux. What Linux is is a freeware > > operating system that looks, feels, and acts like Unix, and comes in any > > number of flavors that are kludgy at best, and really floow no > > standardizations. If you want Unix on an Intel based machine, get ahold > > of either BSD, or FreeBSD (which is in fact free, like Linux) or better > > yet, Solaris for x86, which are both true blue versions of Unix which run > > on Intel boxes. > > I will *not* get into any flame war over this but I totally disagree. > Linux is as much Unix as anything else like SCO, BSD, ... In my opinion > it is better in many ways (faster, better support, ...). It is in no > way kludgy and follows many standards (there is a group that is obtaining > the various standards needed to use the Unix name and I believe they > already have some of the Posix standards and FIPS - Linus recently > incorporated the changes and the only ones left were for some of the > stranger requirements). Linux kicks Solaris' ass speed wise (as it > also does SCO). > > Anyone who want clarification please email me about it. I really don't > want a flame war but wanted to give a separate opinion. > > Please do not take a single opinion one way or another. Look around on > the web for info and talk to lots of people. > > > -Mike > >-- End of excerpt from Brad Pepers