Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : LINUX -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JC Jaros who wrote (955)	2/4/1999 8:40:00 PM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2615

The model I am thinking of was actually developed to replace X at another Unice. Vax VMS is a huge complex system with bad cryptic manuals and mainframe approach. Win NT is basically VMS reborn on a small system with a windows front end. The idea to replace X is to exist within its address space and pass through X commands. It would not do anything to an X program, but would allow higher level programs to operate. This way the whole idea of programs controlling the windowing code would be replaced. The server would handle the windowing code so would act as a more effective system monitor. X was a compromise based on the multi system manufacturers of the old Unix days. It is no longer necessary in the increasingly centrist-Intel-Alpha server world that seeks interoperability. The policy of MS to ignore the user and concentrate on OEM deals would not have to operate. Eventually the Linux dream will need better user code and drivers if it is rise out of the specialist and UNIX server world and take its place in the marketplace that the MS PC has dominated. The realism is that 90% of business and home users cannot handle Linux OS complexity. So if it a high end network machine it can handle the odd bit of proprietary code. Any new tool has to have maxiumum programmer accessibility to achieve its ends. So that means that a closed API like windows is out. But it does not mean that kernel code has to be necessarily opensource. Why would you want people screwing with that? If you did you could license it. They can get in easy but I would say of their product uses yours business could be done. It is a mistake to confuse Windows monopoly competitiveness and dominance of the markeplace with all proprietary code. Most Linux code operates as a proprietary code anyway. Sendmail has one impossible (well very hard) to configure version that is free and one version that actually can be set up on your business network that you will pay Allman many 1,000 for. I am not so sure that that is much less commercial than Microsoft. It may work better but it is just as expensive. Do you think Oracle is going to give its product away? EC<:-}