"Earlier this year, people in many places wrote about the 40th anniversary of the moment Ken Thompson sat down and started to work on UNIX (which is actually in August). In fact, UNIX celebrates another birthday this year, even though on a slightly smaller scale. In July 1974, exactly 35 years ago, Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson published the first version of their seminal paper The UNIX Time-Sharing System in the Communications of the ACM."
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-12-15
Member since:2005-07-06
Not really - it's just helps to better understand the security issues. Really, I think Windows has a very solid kernel. It's just 2 issues that hold them back:
1. Developers need to adjust their thinking to proper Windows application etiquette. Use the users home profile directory for configuration files, etc. I am a Windows developer and learned this the hard way - my app didn't work in Terminal Server (more of a multi-user environment).
2. Give up endless compatability with the past. Some of the old, poorly written apps are going to have to stop working.
However, your point is valid. I did mean to toot the horn of Unix - its built-in multi-user, networking legacy - more than I wanted to trash Windows. I just bought an upgrade license to Windows 7. It is not my main OS, but I like to keep Windows around.
Now if I could just afford a Mac. That would be way cool!
Member since:
2005-07-06
I think the roots of Unix matter. All Unix and Unixish systems come from a multi-user, networked background. Thus, Unix-like applications expect to share the computer. On the other hand, Windows (aka DOS) comes from a single-user background - thnk CPM or other home computers of the day. The applications were for cataloging VCR tape collections, home finance, etc. Thus, even to this day, many Windows applications tend to expect full control of the computer.
Roots matter.