This seems to be a sensitive question for some people, particularly at Sun Microsystems. While IBM stated this week they had increased their market share over last year's, Sun also had its own press release this week claiming that it is the number one Unix platform server vendor in the world, in both revenue and unit shipments. It turns out they are both right.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:So, the point is, you can call many things UNIX-like, or UNIX-based, but that doesn't make them UNIX. They are what they are.
Not UNIX(tm), though they are de-facto unix; *nix.
Instead of arguing that they're really UNIX, if being UNIX doesn't really matter, then why do people feel so deeply the need to argue that they are esentially UNIX? That's what doesn't make sense to me.
Yet, it's not an argument anymore. 8 years ago...yes. Now...nope.
----
There are only two main operating systems being maintained and updated these days;
* Windows
* Unix
Everything else is either highly specialized or is a variation on one of these two.
If you know a UNIX or unix or *nix, you know much of what it takes to learn the other ones, and that includes porting (as long as the original design took portability into account to some extent).
A joke for you as an illustration;
I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. I immediately ran over and said "Stop! Don't do it!"
"Why shouldn't I?" he said.
I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!"
"Like what?"
I said, "Well ... are you religious or atheist?"
He replied, "religious."
I said, "Me too! Are you Christian or Jewish?"
He replied, "Christian."
I said, "Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?"
He replied, "Protestant."
I said, "Me too! Are you Episcopalian or Baptist?"
He replied, "Baptist."
I said, "Wow! Me too! Are you Baptist Church of God or Baptist Church of the Lord?"
He replied, "Baptist Church of God."
I said, "Me too! Are you Original Baptist Church of God, or are you Reformed Baptist Church of God?"
He replied, "Reformed Baptist Church of God."
I said, "Me too! Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1879, or Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915?"
He replied, "Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915!"
So I said, "Die, heretic!" and pushed him off the bridge.
Member since:2005-07-08
Member since:
2005-07-06
UNIX based means probably that there is more than UNIX in OS X (like in any LINUX distribution AND like in *ANY* other UNIX).
Show me a UNIX verdor that does not add some of his own extensions...
The point is that basing an OS off another technology doesn't make it just like that other technology unless *all* the functionality of that technology is there.
For example, I could create a new OS based off part of the OS X sources (Darwin) but that wouldn't make my new OS just like OS X, because I would be missing the most distinguishing feature of OS X, the GUI. In the same way, UNIX-based or UNIX-like systems aren't UNIX because they always are missing the most distinguishing features of what is recognized as UNIX: POSIX compliance, certain interfaces, as well as other characteristics.
So, the point is, you can call many things UNIX-like, or UNIX-based, but that doesn't make them UNIX. They are what they are.
Instead of arguing that they're really UNIX, if being UNIX doesn't really matter, then why do people feel so deeply the need to argue that they are esentially UNIX? That's what doesn't make sense to me.