Hmmm ... where did i put my plane of magnetic core memory?
..and a small collection of silicon-on-sapphire ICs?
..and a small collection of silicon-on-sapphire ICs?
I see you have a lot of knowledge, beyond what I have I am sure. Do you have a professional computer background? Me I am a hacker that self taught myself Dos, Windows, OS/2, when I went to Linux, I could learn a lot on the web, so not so much self taught, but learned in forum. I also will not own an Android, and actually start using it until it has root, and then it becomes "My Phone." And I have bricked and unbricked quite a few in the process. LOLOh, wait a minute! Now you have opened another can of worms (with malice aforethought, I suspect).
If you want to talk about the CLIs (Command Line Interpreters) for Linux and Mac and why they are so similar (but not the same), then we need to have a discussion about GNU (GNU's Not Unix!). The CLI used with the Linux kernel is GNU. GNU (as the acronym spells out) is not Unix, in the same way that the Linux kernel is not Unix. The GNU project set about re-writing all of Unix in order to escape the Unix licensing regimen (before Linus Torvalds time), with the utility programs that form the CLI as the most successful output of the project. Note: The GNU project created its own operating system kernel called GNU Hurd (have you heard of GNU? I have a herd of GNUs.) but it is sadly not as good as the Linux kernel. So most people using GNU are actually using GNU/Linux (usually referred to as just Linux... turns out that people can't agree what to call that combination).
Anyway, so the CLIs for Linux (GNU/Linux) and MacOS X are similar, but the Linux CLI is NOT Unix and the MacOS X is Unix. But they look very much alike, so your confusion is understandable.
The GNU project was essentially the beginning of the free software movement. It was announced by a guy named Richard Stallman in 1983 (he is famous and infamous in the free software movement). It fought back against a growing tendency for computing hardware and software to get locked up in corporate products and licensing, something that those who want to work on their Sprinter vans themselves can surely appreciate. Microsoft quite famously tried to quench the free software movement (as detailed in a series of internal memos called the Halloween documents) with then-CEO Steve Ballmer claiming in 2001 that Linux is “a cancer that attaches itself in an intellectual property sense to everything it touches”. Microsoft has recently admitted that their stance against free software was a mistake.
Raise a glass, everyone, to the free software movement (and the "right to repair" movement which is, at least in spirit, related to the ideals that the free software movement was founded upon).
And the free software movement has, by the way, made everyone's smart TVs and Android phones just a bit more affordable.
That depends upon your definition of "from Unix".So are you are saying that GNU Linux and Mac OS share 0% of attributes? Because while you all like to ramble on about this, my point was not that Mac is true Linux. My point is that they both come from UNIX.
No, I'm not saying that they share 0% of attributes; if they did then the GNU and Linux projects would have been failures.So are you are saying that GNU Linux and Mac OS share 0% of attributes? Because while you all like to ramble on about this, my point was not that Mac is true Linux. My point is that they both come from UNIX.
Thanks... this is an aspect of BSD that I was NOT as familiar with and should have been, especially as I was answering flman. I hadn't realized/remembered that BSD itself had gone through a clean room re-writing process. Should have hit Wikipedia to refresh my memory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_Software_Distribution.That depends upon your definition of "from Unix".
I'm going to discuss BSD/Mac, not Gnu, since i know the history of BSD better.
BSD was (according to the legal defense, and years of prior scuttlebutt throughout the industry) written in a "clean room" environment ... they did NOT look at the Unix source code.
... and that Wiki page, plus the "Unix Wars" page, say that BSD was a very "dirty room" development (they did use Unix code), but that GNU was "written from scratch". My memory is suspect.Thanks... this is an aspect of BSD that I was NOT as familiar with and should have been, especially as I was answering flman. I hadn't realized/remembered that BSD itself had gone through a clean room re-writing process. Should have hit Wikipedia to refresh my memory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_Software_Distribution.
A VAX 11/780, by 1998, could have been replaced for the cost of the electricity alone I suspect, if anyone was doing a "total cost of operation" comparison. I build a VAXcluster with an 11/780 (or was it an 11/785 by then? don't remember) and a VAX 8550 in 1988 (CI-based, with an HSC50 for shared storage). Added a MicroVAX 2000 in 1989 using the Local Area VAXcluster technology. Had to demonstrate compute-parity between the VAX 11/780 and the Microvax 2000 for our local user community that was somewhat perturbed (based on the physical size) that I was billing out the CPU time for the MicroVAX 2000 at the same cost as the 11/780. Had to, though... government regulations (DCAA) required that I justify all rates.It wasn't until after 1992 that Unix systems finally began to compete speed/power/price-wise in our environment. Even then, it wasn't until 1998 or so that we finally shut down our physically large VAX/VMS 11/780 system ... by then we had quite a few microVaxes and Alphas scurrying around.