[dba-Tech] The latest Debian

Hans-Christian Andersen hans.andersen at phulse.com
Sun May 12 17:13:12 CDT 2013


Hi Shamil,

> please correct me if I'm wrong  but Linux core was based on Unix sources

No. Linux is the kernel of the operating system. It was built from scratch, with only Minix, a bare-bones operating system meant for educational purposes by a university professor, as inspiration. Linux was not built upon freely available code or anything of that sort. Here is a breakdown of the history of Linux: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Linux

Perhaps you are thinking of the GNU Project, which attempted to create a standardised Unix platform. This is not Linux, but is still like the bash command line environment and all the basic command line tools, like 'echo', 'cat', 'touch', etc etc. You find this on pretty much every Unix operating system out there, Apple OS X included.

> A lot of academic and industrial research was done before Linux inherited it "for granted" in 1991

Microsoft Windows also benefitted heavily from many many years of research and development at academic universities - foundational things that were developed before Windows or DOS existed and Microsoft also hiring researchers and academics right out of university. I don't see the difference.

Plus, Microsoft "benefitted" from their relationship with IBM while developing OS/2, before parting ways and "inheriting" Windows. Microsoft has done a lot of "inheriting" in their history... going as far back as the origins of MS-DOS.

So what are we really arguing about here?

- Hans



On 2013-05-12, at 1:39 PM, Salakhetdinov Shamil <mcp2004 at mail.ru> wrote:

> Hi Jim --
> 
> Thank you for your posting and the questions you proposed to discuss.
> 
> I have just a WinPhone here so I'll post a very short note for today:
> 
> - please correct me if I'm wrong  but Linux core was based on Unix sources, and the first version of Unix appeared in 1974(?). A lot of academic and industrial research was done before Linux inherited it "for granted" in 1991(?) when Linus Torwalds assembled and released the first Linux version "just for fun". All the subsequent 20+ years were spent on polishing  and extending  of what was rather stable system from the very beginning. Of course this "just polishing" is a great work.
> 
> MS Windows NT (the foundation of Win7/8) was written from scratch just 20+ years ago. As usual for MS they did experiment a lot with their OS during all that years - and they got a good result in just 20 years comparing to 40 years of Linux/Unix history. 
> 
> As for frustration from MS software - it's inevitable "natural" part of their business model :) But I personally was much more frustrated with MS software in the past than nowadays. MS always(?) stated that VB6/VBA are of limited use/history, and only C/C++ are for "true developers". I can't call myself a "true developer" as I currently mainly use C# but I have had a chance to participate in a rather large payroll system development originally written on C on MS DOS, then migrated to C++ and MS Windows 95 - and it's still working on Win7 and Win8, part of it as Web  service. Technical work of keeping this application inline with new MS Windows versions was minimal...
> 
> Comparing Oracle with MS Windows is not quite correct as DBMS development is thousands times easier IMO than development of OSes as MS Windows is.
> 
> Linux is more stable than MS Windows because its core and the principles of communication of its components are simpler than the ones of MS Windows.
> 
> Thank you.
> -- Shamil
> 
> Воскресенье, 12 мая 2013, 12:25 -07:00 от "Jim Lawrence" <accessd at shaw.ca>:
>> Hi Shamil and Gustav:
>> 
>> Taking this discussion from the other side, one big question remains.
>> 
>> Given that Linux was created with virtually no money and its various
>> components are designed on very limited budgets, lots of volunteers, in some
>> cases, working out of their basements, in their spare time, funded from
>> donations or from tax incentives given out by other large companies which
>> makes any money source, very tentative at best. It has not been until very
>> recently that there is some stable money sources for Linux development. 
>> 
>> OTOH, given that Microsoft has a budget that is steady and in the billions.
>> They can buy the very best developers, systems managers and sales staff
>> (which in the case of Linux is non-existant). 
>> 
>> Therefore, comparing the two development environments it would be logical
>> that Microsoft would be able to build a product superior in every way to
>> Linux...but the opposite is true.
>> 
>> On comparison, does this suggest that a corporate entity can not produce a
>> good product? Not at all, think of Oracle. It's prices are expensive but
>> they have designed some of the best databases in the market. They a fast
>> reliable, secure, innovative and the products run on all the major
>> platforms.
>> 
>> Companies do not mind paying a good price for a product but they expect
>> quality. Linux (and its related products) has set the bar and in twenty
>> years Microsoft is now scrambling to keep up and the performance gap keeps
>> getting wider.
>> 
>> My question is, why is this so? That rant/posting, though questionable may
>> have given some insight in to the core reasons. Does anyone have a better
>> suggestion as to the causes and subsequent results? 
>> 
>> I am willing to listen to any suggestion as no one is more frustrated than I
>> have been, in the last few years, with Microsoft.
>> 
>> Jim  
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: dba-tech-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
>> [mailto:dba-tech-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Salakhetdinov
>> Shamil
>> Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2013 5:20 AM
>> To: Discussion of Hardware and Software issues
>> Subject: Re: [dba-Tech] The latest Debian
>> 
>> Hi Gustav -- 
>> 
>> Yes, that article looks like a fake one or authored by a "psycho" with their
>> superEGO bloated in the first part of the article and lost all their vapor
>> in the second part. Taking such article into account doesn't look worthwhile
>> from here...
>> 
>> And all that conspirology, Kremlinoligy as they say, looks rather stupid. 
>> 
>> Linux is a good OS, no doubt, and it doesn't need such articles to be used
>> to prove its "superiority" over MS Windows, IMO.
>> 
>> Thank you.
>> -- Shamil
>> 
>> P.S. Typed on WinPhone from the garden house located in NW Russia - doing
>> some groundwork here :)
>> Воскресенье, 12 мая 2013, 10:30 +02:00 от "Gustav Brock" <gustav at cactus.dk>:
>>> Hi Shamil
>>> 
>>> I don't think so. Neither did Jim, so it seems, as that appended note is
>> the
>>> interesting part - written when the fellow had given the original blurb a
>>> second thought. 
>>> 
>>> I don't get why some are so clever on behalf of Microsoft and its
>> management
>>> and are convinced, that MS is nothing but a bunch of idiots. In no
>>> organisation anything is perfect, neither at MS, but when I think about
>> it,
>>> all the speakers and instructors I've met at MS developer events have been
>>> people I would have a good time working with. More or less, of course, but
>> I
>>> don't believe they left all the bad guys back home at MS.
>>> 
>>> /gustav
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> dba-Tech mailing list
>> dba-Tech at databaseadvisors.com
>> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-tech
>> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dba-Tech mailing list
> dba-Tech at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-tech
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com




More information about the dba-Tech mailing list