Quantcast
Channel: Cemetech
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 75345

Politics & Rants :: RE: Win8 and Linux

$
0
0
Author: elfprince13
Posted: 16 Oct 2012 11:12:50 pm (GMT -5)

It's a question of how you define an operating system. I'm saying your definition is incoherent, silly, or both. Any program (OS or otherwise) is specified in terms of its i/o behavior at some level of abstraction - the question is what level of abstraction do we care about? Machine code for the kernel? C code for the kernel? C code for essential-but-not-kernelspace-libraries? ABI compatibility with said libraries? API compatibility with said libraries? User interface compatibility? Some combination thereof?

We're also struggling through a name/value distinction here (branding/name for legal purposes vs what's underneath). Mac OS X *is* Unix, for all legal purposes. They've paid the fees to be certified for SUS compliance, which means they are legally entitled to use the name Unix in a self descriptive fashion. The non-commercial BSDs, which are probably closer to the original Unix sourcecode, and which by most practical definitions "are Unix", are NOT legally entitled to use that name.
_________________
StickFigure Graphic Productions || VSHI: Vermont Sustainable Heating Initiative




Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 75345

Trending Articles