OSNews

1. I had to suffer using NT4 for many years at work. Shudder.

2. What is vertualization?

Answers.com asks:
"Spell Check
Did You Mean:
virtualization (technology)
vernalization
verbalization
fertilization (process)
verbalize
ritualization
ritualize
vitalize
brutalize
virilization
fistulation
cartelize
Fertilisation
formalize
formulize
vandalize
feudalize"

I'm guessing you meant the first, but it is clear that you can't really know what you are talking about if you can't even spell it.

3. What is a kernal?

Answers.com says:
"KERNAL
Wikipedia

The KERNAL is Commodore's name for the ROM resident operating system core in its 8-bit home computers; from the original PET of 1977, via the extended, but strongly related, versions used in its successors; the VIC-20, C64, Plus/4, C16, and C128. The KERNAL consisted of the OS routines (in contrast to the BASIC interpreter routines, also located in ROM) and was user callable via a jump table whose central (oldest) part, for reasons of backwards compatibility, remained largely identical throughout the whole 8-bit series."

An 8-bit OS? Basic? Even Windows is better than that, surely?

But the real howler of your post is this one:
NT4 has ... multi user support ... since 1996.

NT4 runs binary programs designed for Windows 95. Windows 95 is a single user OS. The Windows 95 filesystem had absolutely no support for user or owner or execute permission to be associated with a file. Since NT4 and later derivatives would run binaries designed for Windows 95, the so-called "multi-user" nature of the OS is a thin veneer at best. I repeat, NT4 will attempt to run a file based simply on the fact that its file name happens to have one of a set of extensions. It has to do this in order to support backwards compatibility with Windows 95 - which was a single user OS. Files have no "owner" - the filesystem doesn't support it.

Therefore, the so-called "multi-user" nature of Windows NT4 and all its derivatives is a very thin pseudo-layer at best.

The very design of Windows is borked from the outset.

So, have you done with your lame (and wildly incorrect) defense of a lame, proprietary, expensive, insecure and buggy OS?

He didn't troll. However, he was a bit offensive here and there, but that doesn't qualify as flaming nor as trolling.

He is right, you know

"You my good man have never heard of NT4 I see. An ugly, but functional OS that's had full vertualization, multi user support and a solid kernal since 1996 still used by businesses and you can even install Visual Stuido on it despite the OS being nearly 10 years old.

Shall we discuss the state of Linux in 1996, or are you done with your trolling?"

Yes, lets discuss that. Cutler did a GREAT thing when he developed the kernel for NT4, but, if you remember your history, the whole thing was borked up because of Bill Gates desire to remain backwards compatible with old versions. Therefore, and this is documented, Cutler could not guarantee that the kernel would be stable; guess what, 10 or more years later, Cutler was correct. The Windows kernel is STILL not stable.

Linux in 1996 was already running enterprise applications (namely Apache) and was light years ahead of Windows operating system from a security and stability standpoint; and it was only at version 1.3, a development kernel at that time.

Linux came, out the door, with security in mind. Unix, on which Linux is mainly based on, was far superior to Windows in every aspect; it still is today. The only thing that made Windows so popular was strong armed tactics and a "Kiss your @$$" interface.

Edited 2005-11-11 15:32