Re: OFFTOPIC: Regarding NT vs Linux

Roger Irwin (irwin@mail.com)
Mon, 22 Sep 1997 09:08:12 +0200 (MET DST)


On Sun, 21 Sep 1997, Chris Wedgwood wrote:

>
> It standardized. I can write an MS app and assume they will not have to
> install lots of widget/control libraries, etc.
>
> If a vendor writes a device driver for Windows95 - generally it will work
> with a newer kernel. The same cannot be said for linux. Things like the
> module API and stuff are too volatile/sensitive to changes.

I'm sorry, anybody who writes this has zero experience upgrading Windows
systems. But that's not the point. When things don't go right (DLL
conflicts, driver no good etc.), nobody can expect end users to put things
right. But when the end user calls an expert (the infamous drip under
pressure?) the end user expects the expert to put it right. And that's
where the difference lies between open and closed systems IMHO.

>
> Linux needs a clearly defined API for many things. Yes, this lock you into
> support old backwards crap. SO, you do so. Then a year or so later, you
> release a new version a throw away backwards support to an extent (Al la
> SunOS -> Solaris).
>
No, what the industry needs is a platform independent API, and I think
this is one of those areas where public whould be better off for
formalised standards, but they are too ignorant to realise it, whilst the
industry is too rich and powerfull to let it happen.

> Users have trusted CRAPDOS and CRAPWIN for 15 years waiting for Bill to
> decide to offer them 20 years old features. We have all been done, and
> it seems that this swindling is not about to stop.
>
Not all of us, I have been 'there' and back. Once upon a time my UNIX
access was limited to a 'user' on aterminal that accessed a mega important
machine. You did not play around because you where afraid of damage. I
installed Linux at home a few years ago because I was interested in the
GNU tools, but it allowed me to experiment and learn how powerfull UNIX
really was. I think this is true for a lot of Linux users. We cannot
pretend that the worlds computers rely on one family of OS's, just as we
would not pretend everybody drives the same car. We can pretend that
OS/APP interfaces and SOURCE/DEV_TOOLS are reasonably compatible just as
we can pretend that car manufacturers put the pedals in the same place.

The biggest hurdle is a big American Monopoly, where it not American, Feds
would have busted it years ago, remeber the hoo-haa when Japan was accused
of price dumping RAM chips.....