Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #28017 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "anon" <anon@anon.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2019-08-29 08:34 -0500 |
| Last post | 2019-09-17 01:25 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 355 — 52 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "anon" <anon@anon.com> - 2019-08-29 08:34 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2019-08-29 10:13 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2019-08-29 12:40 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2019-08-29 14:04 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2019-08-29 15:41 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-08-29 22:34 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-08-30 08:05 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Rabid Robot <rabid@rob.ot> - 2019-08-30 10:05 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2019-09-15 15:04 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure AnonLinuxUser <Anon@Linuxusers.net> - 2019-09-15 16:20 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2019-09-15 18:26 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2019-09-15 22:39 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2019-09-15 22:43 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-09-16 08:26 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure AnonLinuxUser <Anon@Linuxusers.net> - 2019-09-16 08:52 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2019-09-16 11:28 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-09-16 17:32 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure AnonLinuxUser <Anon@Linuxusers.net> - 2019-09-16 11:10 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2019-09-19 15:26 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure AnonLinuxUser <Anon@Linuxusers.net> - 2019-09-19 08:29 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2019-09-17 05:05 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure AnonLinuxUser <Anon@Linuxusers.net> - 2019-09-17 12:48 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2019-09-19 10:35 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure AnonLinuxUser <Anon@Linuxusers.net> - 2019-09-19 08:31 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-03-25 03:14 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-25 13:13 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-25 20:57 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-25 16:25 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2020-03-26 00:36 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2020-03-26 01:31 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jean-David Beyer <jeandavid8@verizon.net> - 2020-03-25 23:02 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be> - 2020-03-26 04:34 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jean-David Beyer <jeandavid8@verizon.net> - 2020-03-26 00:30 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be> - 2020-03-26 07:45 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be> - 2020-03-26 07:47 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-03-26 08:18 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-26 09:57 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-26 12:23 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-27 04:35 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-26 13:18 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-26 21:44 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-27 01:42 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-26 19:28 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-26 19:55 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-26 22:21 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-26 22:49 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-27 12:46 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-27 13:01 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-27 16:15 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-27 17:48 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-27 12:47 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2020-03-27 21:00 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-27 22:18 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-27 16:16 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-26 12:22 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2020-03-27 03:10 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2020-03-26 07:33 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-26 13:17 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2020-03-26 21:32 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-26 21:52 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-26 16:05 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-26 23:45 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-26 19:29 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-27 08:06 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-27 12:48 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-27 03:04 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-26 22:25 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-27 05:47 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "lucent tpm" <telco@example.com> - 2020-03-27 16:53 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-27 18:05 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-27 17:19 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-27 08:03 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-27 12:50 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2020-03-27 06:59 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-27 12:52 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-27 21:54 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-03-29 22:46 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 01:34 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-29 19:14 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-30 04:17 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2020-04-03 21:26 +1100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-04-03 20:04 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2020-04-04 21:43 +1100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2020-04-04 05:53 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-04-04 11:48 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2020-04-05 21:09 +1000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-04-05 11:10 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 06:50 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2020-03-30 10:58 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-03-30 06:59 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Info <info@perfumeshotsale.com> - 2020-03-30 08:06 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2020-03-30 12:00 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-03-29 22:37 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-30 02:11 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-29 19:15 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2020-03-30 04:05 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 04:29 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 06:30 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2020-03-30 01:52 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Alogsa <alogsa.logistica@alogsalogistica.com> - 2020-03-30 08:05 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2020-03-30 11:31 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-30 13:01 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2020-03-30 11:05 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2020-03-30 09:26 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2020-03-30 17:51 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2020-03-30 12:03 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-31 00:06 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2020-03-31 08:55 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-31 03:18 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2020-03-31 04:16 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-31 04:11 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-31 04:45 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2020-03-31 08:03 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-31 15:26 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-31 18:55 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 05:59 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 06:30 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-30 07:28 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Contact <contact@larryshopping.com> - 2020-04-01 01:21 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-27 03:46 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-27 04:16 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-27 14:01 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-27 14:16 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-03-29 22:36 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 01:44 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-29 19:17 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 04:19 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-29 20:41 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-30 09:16 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure John-Paul Stewart <jpstewart@sympatico.ca> - 2020-03-30 11:47 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-30 13:12 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-30 19:59 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-30 20:53 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-30 21:57 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-30 19:19 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-30 13:13 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-03-31 05:04 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-31 11:21 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-03-31 17:25 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-30 20:01 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-30 20:53 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-30 21:59 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> - 2020-03-31 13:35 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-31 12:02 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-31 11:25 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-03-31 17:13 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-31 12:09 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-03-31 18:51 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-31 13:44 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> - 2020-04-01 13:37 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-04-12 10:35 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-04-13 02:22 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-04-12 22:50 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-13 09:41 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2020-04-13 07:51 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-04-13 11:45 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> - 2020-04-13 14:11 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure mGhost <mGhost@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-04-13 15:50 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-13 18:21 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure mGhost <mGhost@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-04-13 17:44 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jean-David Beyer <jeandavid8@verizon.net> - 2020-04-13 13:58 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure mGhost <mGhost@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-04-13 18:15 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2020-04-13 14:01 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-13 20:40 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2020-04-13 22:56 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-04-15 12:06 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2020-04-15 11:36 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Chris Elvidge <chris@mshome.net> - 2020-04-16 11:22 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-16 11:20 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2020-04-16 09:08 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-16 14:50 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2020-04-16 13:49 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2020-04-16 13:16 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-16 20:56 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2020-04-17 01:43 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2020-04-16 15:27 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-04-18 14:56 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure felix@palmen-it.de (Felix Palmen) - 2020-04-16 17:44 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-16 16:26 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2020-04-16 12:37 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2020-04-13 14:29 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2020-04-14 08:18 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-14 12:50 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2020-04-15 09:59 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-13 09:39 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-04-13 19:44 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-04-14 00:16 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-14 03:39 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-04-13 21:59 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-14 11:24 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-14 12:35 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-04-13 22:04 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-14 12:47 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> - 2020-04-14 14:15 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-14 15:05 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-04-15 11:43 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> - 2020-04-16 13:31 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-04-14 13:09 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-04-14 12:20 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-04-14 05:47 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-14 12:48 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-04-14 21:10 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-14 23:54 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-04-15 01:06 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> - 2020-04-15 13:39 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2020-04-14 08:40 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-01 09:37 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-01 08:55 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-01 11:13 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-01 20:40 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-31 21:38 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-04-01 13:39 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-04-01 13:51 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-01 20:42 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-02 07:42 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-02 09:19 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-02 13:24 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-04-02 12:10 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-02 21:56 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2020-04-03 08:42 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-03 08:05 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-04-03 09:13 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-03 08:15 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-04 01:16 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jack Strangio <jackstrangio@yahoo.com> - 2020-04-03 05:24 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-04-03 09:20 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-04-01 21:34 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-04-01 17:50 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-04-02 03:15 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> - 2020-04-02 13:42 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Chris F.A. Johnson" <cfajohnson@cfaj.ca> - 2020-04-01 17:32 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-04-01 17:49 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-02 07:44 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jean-David Beyer <jeandavid8@verizon.net> - 2020-04-02 07:12 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-03 08:02 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-04-12 10:39 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-04-02 18:30 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 07:16 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-30 09:13 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-30 09:19 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-30 09:29 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jean-David Beyer <jeandavid8@verizon.net> - 2020-03-30 12:20 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2020-03-30 12:35 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-30 13:14 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2020-03-30 18:52 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-03-30 07:01 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-30 09:58 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-30 09:21 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 19:01 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-26 09:52 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-26 13:46 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2020-03-26 07:51 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2020-03-26 10:34 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-26 17:36 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-26 21:49 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2020-03-27 14:30 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-27 21:31 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-27 15:44 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-27 23:19 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-27 16:56 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-28 05:10 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-27 22:46 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-28 20:22 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-28 16:15 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-29 00:11 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2020-03-28 12:32 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2020-03-28 10:18 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-28 10:52 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-27 12:59 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-27 21:31 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-27 15:48 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2020-03-27 22:03 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-27 00:23 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-26 19:29 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-27 14:07 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2020-03-27 15:42 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-27 17:35 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-27 18:20 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 08:41 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Contact <contact@rockygoods.com> - 2020-03-30 11:47 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-26 13:54 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-26 15:44 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-26 12:19 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-26 13:46 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-26 12:55 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2020-03-26 15:50 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-26 16:05 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-27 00:02 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-27 01:29 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-26 17:57 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-26 21:56 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2020-03-26 21:13 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-27 00:13 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-26 16:08 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-26 23:20 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-26 19:31 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-26 23:47 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-27 01:15 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2019-09-03 11:33 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2019-09-03 09:45 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jean-David Beyer <jeandavid8@verizon.net> - 2019-09-03 13:21 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-09-04 18:52 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2019-09-04 15:10 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2019-09-04 18:23 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-09-04 21:14 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-09-04 20:35 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-09-04 21:37 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2019-09-04 16:58 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-09-05 09:09 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Rabid Robot <rabid@rob.ot> - 2019-09-04 16:45 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2019-09-15 15:07 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2019-09-15 15:06 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2019-09-15 22:32 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Rabid Robot <rabid@rob.ot> - 2019-08-29 17:07 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2019-08-30 12:31 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> - 2019-08-30 17:25 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2019-08-30 18:46 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-08-31 04:08 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2019-08-31 03:34 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2019-08-31 10:02 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-08-31 10:41 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be> - 2019-08-31 16:15 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2019-08-31 13:34 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2019-08-31 13:59 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be> - 2019-08-31 21:36 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2019-09-01 09:59 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2019-09-01 14:44 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2019-09-15 15:01 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2019-08-29 12:34 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2019-09-16 20:05 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be> - 2019-08-29 21:40 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2019-08-29 16:03 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2019-08-30 00:59 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2019-09-16 20:11 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2019-09-17 05:42 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2019-08-30 00:34 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> - 2019-08-30 13:41 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2019-08-29 20:02 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2019-08-29 15:43 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2019-08-29 16:12 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure stepore <linshine@here.now> - 2019-08-29 21:29 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "F. Russell" <frussell@random.info> - 2019-08-30 14:02 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure stepore <linshine@here.now> - 2019-08-29 21:47 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2019-08-30 01:03 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure stepore <linshine@here.now> - 2019-08-31 00:52 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2019-08-31 11:17 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure stepore <linshine@here.now> - 2019-09-01 00:16 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure stepore <linshine@here.now> - 2019-08-31 01:03 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2019-08-31 10:56 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2019-08-31 11:37 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2019-08-31 11:30 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2019-09-16 20:20 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2019-09-17 01:45 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "anon" <anon@anon.com> - 2019-09-15 17:31 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from robert.wolfe@wildcat.uuhec.net (Robert Wolfe) - 2019-09-17 01:25 +0000
Page 17 of 18 — ← Prev page 1 … 15 16 [17] 18 Next page →
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-31 10:41 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qkdfbd$hi7$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #28064 |
On 31/08/2019 10:02, Richard Kettlewell wrote: > The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes: >> On 30/08/2019 18:46, Richard Kettlewell wrote: >>> Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> writes: >>>> The typical English term for that is a "clone". >>> >>> Yes. It’s also worth distinguishing between Unix as an implementation >>> (V7, System V, etc) and Unix as an interface (read, fork, etc). Linux >>> isn’t Unix in the former sense, but it is a Unix in the latter sense. >>> >> Wait till Bill Gates get someone to do the same for Windows. > > Wait? There’ve been many Unix API implementations for Windows. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_POSIX_subsystem > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Services_for_UNIX > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interix > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Subsystem_for_Linux > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cygwin > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UWIN > I had more the WINE pairing - Windows on top, *nix underneath - in mind... -- “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” ― Voltaire, Questions sur les Miracles à M. Claparede, Professeur de Théologie à Genève, par un Proposant: Ou Extrait de Diverses Lettres de M. de Voltaire
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-31 16:15 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <20190831161549.679eb16e@nx-74205> |
| In reply to | #28065 |
On 31.08.2019 at 10:41, The Natural Philosopher scribbled: > On 31/08/2019 10:02, Richard Kettlewell wrote: > > The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes: > >> On 30/08/2019 18:46, Richard Kettlewell wrote: > >>> Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> writes: > >>>> The typical English term for that is a "clone". > >>> > >>> Yes. It’s also worth distinguishing between Unix as an > >>> implementation (V7, System V, etc) and Unix as an interface > >>> (read, fork, etc). Linux isn’t Unix in the former sense, but it > >>> is a Unix in the latter sense. > >> Wait till Bill Gates get someone to do the same for Windows. > > > > Wait? There’ve been many Unix API implementations for Windows. > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_POSIX_subsystem > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Services_for_UNIX > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interix > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Subsystem_for_Linux > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cygwin > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UWIN > > > I had more the WINE pairing - Windows on top, *nix underneath - in > mind... That was what the original design philosophy behind Windows NT was, when Microsoft was still working together with IBM. The NT generation was supposed to be a jointly developed UNIX platform — on top of a Mach kernel — with IBM supplying an OS/2 API for it, and Microsoft in turn supplying a Windows API. However, Bill Gates hates UNIX, and as he saw the success of the pre-installed MS-DOS & Windows 3.x bundle sales, he blew up the deal with IBM and contacted Dave Cutler from DEC — who also hates UNIX, by the way — in order to write a VMS-like kernel for Windows NT. IBM then went on to develop OS/2 on their own — with OS/2 version 3 labeled "OS/2 Warp" — without the planned underlying UNIX foundation, and then they tried their luck with Apple, in a joint next-generation operating system initiative called Taligent, which also didn't live very long. After OS/2 version 4.x, IBM sold the rights to OS/2 — which was commercially dead in the water by then — and started supporting GNU/Linux, offering workstations with either RedHat or SuSE pre-installed. But then they sold off their workstation division — to Lenovo, I believe — and now they're only interested in mainframes and A.I. anymore. -- With respect, = Aragorn =
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-31 13:34 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <qkeb2n$feh$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #28068 |
Aragorn wrote: > On 31.08.2019 at 10:41, The Natural Philosopher scribbled: > >> On 31/08/2019 10:02, Richard Kettlewell wrote: >> > The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes: >> >> On 30/08/2019 18:46, Richard Kettlewell wrote: >> >>> Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> writes: >> >>>> The typical English term for that is a "clone". >> >>> >> >>> Yes. It’s also worth distinguishing between Unix as an >> >>> implementation (V7, System V, etc) and Unix as an interface >> >>> (read, fork, etc). Linux isn’t Unix in the former sense, but it >> >>> is a Unix in the latter sense. >> >> Wait till Bill Gates get someone to do the same for Windows. >> > >> > Wait? There’ve been many Unix API implementations for Windows. >> > >> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_POSIX_subsystem >> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Services_for_UNIX >> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interix >> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Subsystem_for_Linux >> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cygwin >> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UWIN >> > >> I had more the WINE pairing - Windows on top, *nix underneath - in >> mind... > > That was what the original design philosophy behind Windows NT was, > when Microsoft was still working together with IBM. The NT generation > was supposed to be a jointly developed UNIX platform — on top of a Mach > kernel — with IBM supplying an OS/2 API for it, and Microsoft in turn > supplying a Windows API. > > However, Bill Gates hates UNIX, I wouldn't say that Gates "hates" UNIX; after all, Gates and Co. (Microsoft) /owned/ a UNIX in the early '80s. At that time, Microsoft touted it's XENIX OS (a port of AT&T UNIX, with BSD'ish extensions) as the be-all and end-all of server operating systems. > and as he saw the success of the > pre-installed MS-DOS & Windows 3.x bundle sales, he blew up > the deal with IBM and contacted Dave Cutler from DEC — who also > hates UNIX, by the way — in order to write a VMS-like kernel for Windows > NT. > > IBM then went on to develop OS/2 on their own — with OS/2 version 3 > labeled "OS/2 Warp" — without the planned underlying UNIX foundation, > and then they tried their luck with Apple, in a joint next-generation > operating system initiative called Taligent, which also didn't live very > long. > > After OS/2 version 4.x, IBM sold the rights to OS/2 — which was > commercially dead in the water by then — and started supporting > GNU/Linux, offering workstations with either RedHat or SuSE > pre-installed. But then they sold off their workstation division — to > Lenovo, I believe — and now they're only interested in mainframes and > A.I. anymore. > -- Lew Pitcher "In Skills, We Trust"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-31 13:59 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <6uCdnaCKFosaXvfAnZ2dnUU7-KnNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #28072 |
At Sat, 31 Aug 2019 13:34:11 -0400 Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> wrote:
>
> Aragorn wrote:
>
> > On 31.08.2019 at 10:41, The Natural Philosopher scribbled:
> >
> >> On 31/08/2019 10:02, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
> >> > The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
> >> >> On 30/08/2019 18:46, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
> >> >>> Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> writes:
> >> >>>> The typical English term for that is a "clone".
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Yes. Itâs also worth distinguishing between Unix as an
> >> >>> implementation (V7, System V, etc) and Unix as an interface
> >> >>> (read, fork, etc). Linux isnât Unix in the former sense, but it
> >> >>> is a Unix in the latter sense.
> >> >> Wait till Bill Gates get someone to do the same for Windows.
> >> >
> >> > Wait? Thereâve been many Unix API implementations for Windows.
> >> >
> >> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_POSIX_subsystem
> >> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Services_for_UNIX
> >> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interix
> >> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Subsystem_for_Linux
> >> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cygwin
> >> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UWIN
> >> >
> >> I had more the WINE pairing - Windows on top, *nix underneath - in
> >> mind...
> >
> > That was what the original design philosophy behind Windows NT was,
> > when Microsoft was still working together with IBM. The NT generation
> > was supposed to be a jointly developed UNIX platform â on top of a Mach
> > kernel â with IBM supplying an OS/2 API for it, and Microsoft in turn
> > supplying a Windows API.
> >
> > However, Bill Gates hates UNIX,
>
> I wouldn't say that Gates "hates" UNIX; after all, Gates and Co. (Microsoft)
> /owned/ a UNIX in the early '80s. At that time, Microsoft touted it's XENIX
> OS (a port of AT&T UNIX, with BSD'ish extensions) as the be-all and end-all
> of server operating systems.
The problem with a UNIX-ish system *underneith* a MS-Windows GUI venear is
that M$ would lose control of the application space -- it would become trivial
to port UNIX or Linux code *seamlessly* to that flavor of MS-Windows. It would
*also* become trivial to write a "fake" MS-Windows GUI API layer for other
systems (eg Linux), making it possible to run *any* MS-Windows applications on
non-MS-Windows system. Because Microsoft is a pure software company, this
means that their revenue stream is somewhat threatened, in that they would
lose any kind of control of the market (basically would loose near-monoply
"vertical" integration). This is less of an issue for Apple WRT MacOSX/iOS
because Apple make much more money selling the *hardware*. The software side
is not a major or esentual revenue stream.
>
> > and as he saw the success of the
> > pre-installed MS-DOS & Windows 3.x bundle sales, he blew up
> > the deal with IBM and contacted Dave Cutler from DEC â who also
> > hates UNIX, by the way â in order to write a VMS-like kernel for Windows
> > NT.
> >
> > IBM then went on to develop OS/2 on their own â with OS/2 version 3
> > labeled "OS/2 Warp" â without the planned underlying UNIX foundation,
> > and then they tried their luck with Apple, in a joint next-generation
> > operating system initiative called Taligent, which also didn't live very
> > long.
> >
> > After OS/2 version 4.x, IBM sold the rights to OS/2 â which was
> > commercially dead in the water by then â and started supporting
> > GNU/Linux, offering workstations with either RedHat or SuSE
> > pre-installed. But then they sold off their workstation division â to
> > Lenovo, I believe â and now they're only interested in mainframes and
> > A.I. anymore.
> >
>
>
--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933
Deepwoods Software -- Custom Software Services
http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Linux Administration Services
heller@deepsoft.com -- Webhosting Services
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-31 21:36 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <20190831213631.12507a25@nx-74205> |
| In reply to | #28072 |
On 31.08.2019 at 13:34, Lew Pitcher scribbled:
> Aragorn wrote:
>
>> However, Bill Gates hates UNIX, [...]
>
> I wouldn't say that Gates "hates" UNIX; after all, Gates and Co.
> (Microsoft) /owned/ a UNIX in the early '80s. At that time, Microsoft
> touted it's XENIX OS (a port of AT&T UNIX, with BSD'ish extensions)
> as the be-all and end-all of server operating systems.
To be precise, Microsoft XENIX was actually SCO XENIX, for which
Microsoft had a license from SCO [*] to port it to the Intel i8086
processor. Microsoft never owned the full rights to XENIX. ;)
[*] The real Santa Cruz Operations, not The SCO Group, which is actually
the rebranded Caldera Systems that bought SCO, then rebranded
itself, and then began a by now notoriously protracted legal battle
against Novell and IBM, and earlier also against RedHat — a legal
battle in which Caldera Systems was sponsored by Microsoft on at
least three occasions by way of sock puppet companies, such as the
law firm of Bill Gates' father.
During this litigation, it was ruled in court that the AT&T Unix
copyrights and patents were the intellectual property of Novell,
which had legally acquired them from AT&T, and that the UNIX™
trademark had been donated to The Open Group by the original Santa
Cruz operations.
The litigation against IBM was based upon the proven-false
allegation that IBM would have inserted proprietary AT&T Unix code —
wrongfully expected by Caldera to have become their intellectual
property when they acquired the real SCO — into the Linux kernel.
--
With respect,
= Aragorn =
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-01 09:59 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <87r2505r4i.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> |
| In reply to | #28074 |
Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be> writes: > On 31.08.2019 at 13:34, Lew Pitcher scribbled: >> Aragorn wrote: >>> However, Bill Gates hates UNIX, [...] >> >> I wouldn't say that Gates "hates" UNIX; after all, Gates and Co. >> (Microsoft) /owned/ a UNIX in the early '80s. At that time, Microsoft >> touted it's XENIX OS (a port of AT&T UNIX, with BSD'ish extensions) >> as the be-all and end-all of server operating systems. > > To be precise, Microsoft XENIX was actually SCO XENIX, for which > Microsoft had a license from SCO [*] to port it to the Intel i8086 > processor. Microsoft never owned the full rights to XENIX. ;) That’s not accurate. MS licensed Unix from AT&T and licensed their ports to SCO & others. They only transferred ownership to SCO in 1987. -- https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-01 14:44 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <874l1vzwiw.fsf@usenet.ankman.de> |
| In reply to | #28072 |
On Sat, 31 Aug 2019 13:34:11 -0400, Lew Pitcher wrote: > > Aragorn wrote: > >> However, Bill Gates hates UNIX, > > I wouldn't say that Gates "hates" UNIX; after all, Gates and Co. (Microsoft) > /owned/ a UNIX in the early '80s. At that time, Microsoft touted it's XENIX > OS (a port of AT&T UNIX, with BSD'ish extensions) as the be-all and end-all > of server operating systems. I didn't knew this until recently reading some BYTE magazines with all ads preserver. By chance I have 11-1983 here as PDF. On page 271 is their ad about XENIX and other products. Suppose any issue of BYTE will have a similar ad. -- Andreas My random thoughts and comments https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-15 15:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <qlmcbt$2q0$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #28023 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On 8/29/19 11:04 AM, Andreas Kohlbach wrote: <snip> > > Linux is some kind of fork from UNIX. Well not really (or Minix?). But > without UNIX there would likely be no Linux today, which runs under the > hood of Android smartphones. > It's not a fork in any way, shape, or form. UNIX inspired Linus and drove the direction of his development. Linux is mostly POSIX compliant. But Linux was only inspired by UNIX, it was not derived from it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-29 12:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <gsqnmuFm11pU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #28022 |
Cybe R. Wizard wrote: > The article is wrong right off the bat by conflating Unix and GNU/Linux. > Unix does NOT run smartphones in any way, shape, or form. GNU/Linux > does that. They are NOT the same. Well, we could spend a lot of time in this thread or some other debating how all of those systems mentioned in the article are kin or not kin or /how/ kin or how /not/ kin. They are more kin than to the CP/M DOS Win NT family. -- Mike Easter
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-16 20:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <qlpiid$saa$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #28024 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On 8/29/19 12:34 PM, Mike Easter wrote: > Well, we could spend a lot of time in this thread or some other debating > how all of those systems mentioned in the article are kin or not kin or > /how/ kin or how /not/ kin. > > They are more kin than to the CP/M DOS Win NT family. > Visually yeah. But under the hood? I think a strong argument could be made that the opposite was true. Linux was written directly for the x86 chipset. Linus couldn't afford Windows (if memory serves) and wanted to write an OS he could use for free. Window and Linux were both written to use the x86 instruction sets. Unix went all the way back to the PDP machines. It was only ported to x86 at a much later date (by the *BSD family of actual Unix derived OSs) So, I'd argue that Linux and Windows share much of the same underlying code theory and implementation. Both are at least somewhat POSIX complaint so there's that commonality. I'd say the original UNIX was a nearly alien OS that only later spawned variants that appear as they do today and that also appear to be closely related to Linux. I'd argue that it's only the surface that appears related. Kinda like how a Hyena looks like a Canine, but then you learn they're not even remotely related to Wolves. They're much closer to the Felines on the evolutionary tree.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-29 21:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <20190829214001.3921f0e0@nx-74205> |
| In reply to | #28022 |
[ sewer newsgroup deleted ] On 29.08.2019 at 12:40, Cybe R. Wizard scribbled: > On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:34:20 -0500 > "anon" <anon@anon.com> wrote: > > > <https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/08/unix-at-50-it-starts-with-a-mainframe-a-gator-and-three-dedicated-researchers> > > > The article is wrong right off the bat by conflating Unix and > GNU/Linux. Unix does NOT run smartphones in any way, shape, or form. > GNU/Linux does that. They are NOT the same. I'm afraid you've got that a bit backwards, Cybe. Android is based off of a heavily modified Linux kernel, but Android is most definitely not a GNU/Linux system. There is no GNU stuff in Android whatsoever. GNU/Linux is a Free Software implementation of UNIX, written from scratch, but compatible with the Single UNIX Specification, and largely compatible with POSIX, which is a super set of the SUS. At the moment of my writing this, at least two GNU/Linux distributions have officially been certified with the UNIX™ trademark by The Open Group. Both of them are RedHat-based, and one of them is commercially marketed under the name Inspur K-UX — I forgot the name of the other one. UNIX™ certification is however very expensive, which is why most GNU/Linux distributions don't bother, and most of them also don't even care, due to the Linux® registered trademark already having become immensely popular and well-reputed among professionals — and rightfully so. -- With respect, = Aragorn =
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-29 16:03 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <20190829160320.71470d89@WizardsTower> |
| In reply to | #28025 |
On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 21:40:01 +0200 Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be> wrote: > [ sewer newsgroup deleted ] > > On 29.08.2019 at 12:40, Cybe R. Wizard scribbled: > > > On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:34:20 -0500 > > "anon" <anon@anon.com> wrote: > > > > > <https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/08/unix-at-50-it-starts-with-a-mainframe-a-gator-and-three-dedicated-researchers> > > > > > The article is wrong right off the bat by conflating Unix and > > GNU/Linux. Unix does NOT run smartphones in any way, shape, or form. > > GNU/Linux does that. They are NOT the same. > > I'm afraid you've got that a bit backwards, Cybe. Android is based > off of a heavily modified Linux kernel, but Android is most > definitely not a GNU/Linux system. There is no GNU stuff in Android > whatsoever. In the past Android has used at least one scaled-down version of a GNU standard library ( libstdc++ ?) I see they've replaced it with non-free code. Stallman, shut out! > > GNU/Linux is a Free Software implementation of UNIX, written from > scratch, but compatible with the Single UNIX Specification, and > largely compatible with POSIX, which is a super set of the SUS. ...and, as such, shares no code with Unix, thereby making it NOT Unix. > > At the moment of my writing this, at least two GNU/Linux distributions > have officially been certified with the UNIX™ trademark by The Open > Group. Both of them are RedHat-based, and one of them is commercially > marketed under the name Inspur K-UX — I forgot the name of the other > one. Yeah, auto makers make other auto makers' autos, too, but that doesn't make one into the other. Brewers, too. If Miller makes Pabst, that doesn't mean that Pabst bottles contain Miller beer. > > UNIX™ certification is however very expensive, which is why most > GNU/Linux distributions don't bother, and most of them also don't even > care, due to the Linux® registered trademark already having become > immensely popular and well-reputed among professionals — and > rightfully so. > I understand a GNU/Linux distro being granted the Unix certification. That doesn't mean it is Unix, just that it complies with certain standards, not code identity. -- Cybe R. Wizard My other computer is a HOLMES IV with the Mycroft OS My other car is a Chandler MetalSmith Mark III
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-30 00:59 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <2e77e04a3c426c6075111f9c02c6d9ce@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #28029 |
In article <20190829160320.71470d89@WizardsTower> "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> wrote: > > On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 21:40:01 +0200 > Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be> wrote: > > > [ sewer newsgroup deleted ] > >=20 > > On 29.08.2019 at 12:40, Cybe R. Wizard scribbled: > >=20 > > > On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:34:20 -0500 > > > "anon" <anon@anon.com> wrote: > > > =20 > > > > <https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/08/unix-at-50-it-starts-with-a-= > mainframe-a-gator-and-three-dedicated-researchers> > > > > =20 > > > The article is wrong right off the bat by conflating Unix and > > > GNU/Linux. Unix does NOT run smartphones in any way, shape, or form. > > > GNU/Linux does that. They are NOT the same. =20 > >=20 > > I'm afraid you've got that a bit backwards, Cybe. Android is based > > off of a heavily modified Linux kernel, but Android is most > > definitely not a GNU/Linux system. There is no GNU stuff in Android > > whatsoever. =20 > > In the past Android has used at least one scaled-down version of a GNU > standard library ( libstdc++ ?) I see they've replaced it with > non-free code. Stallman, shut out! > >=20 > > GNU/Linux is a Free Software implementation of UNIX, written from > > scratch, but compatible with the Single UNIX Specification, and > > largely compatible with POSIX, which is a super set of the SUS. > > ...and, as such, shares no code with Unix, thereby making it NOT Unix. > >=20 > > At the moment of my writing this, at least two GNU/Linux distributions > > have officially been certified with the UNIX=E2=84=A2 trademark by The Op= > en > > Group. Both of them are RedHat-based, and one of them is commercially > > marketed under the name Inspur K-UX =E2=80=94 I forgot the name of the ot= > her > > one. > > Yeah, auto makers make other auto makers' autos, too, but that doesn't > make one into the other. Brewers, too. If Miller makes Pabst, that > doesn't mean that Pabst bottles contain Miller beer. > >=20 > > UNIX=E2=84=A2 certification is however very expensive, which is why most > > GNU/Linux distributions don't bother, and most of them also don't even > > care, due to the Linux=C2=AE registered trademark already having become > > immensely popular and well-reputed among professionals =E2=80=94 and > > rightfully so. > >=20 > I understand a GNU/Linux distro being granted the Unix certification. > That doesn't mean it is Unix, just that it complies with certain > standards, not code identity. > > --=20 > Cybe R. Wizard > > My other computer is a HOLMES IV with the Mycroft OS > My other car is a Chandler MetalSmith Mark III > =09
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-16 20:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <qlpist$to3$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #28029 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On 8/29/19 2:03 PM, Cybe R. Wizard wrote: <snip> . >> > I understand a GNU/Linux distro being granted the Unix certification. > That doesn't mean it is Unix, just that it complies with certain > standards, not code identity. > Technically it does mean it's UNIX. That's precisely what the certification certifies. Code identity isn't a requirement. If the UNIX group certifies an OS as Unix, the OS can legally call itself UNIX. That was the deal with IRIX, HP-Unix, and others. The code had diverged, sometimes significantly, between all of those OSs, yet all were still considered legit UNIX.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-17 05:42 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1128360f45013ccc7f92217a5e613ab0@remailer.paranoici.org> |
| In reply to | #28238 |
In article <qlpist$to3$1@dont-email.me> Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> wrote: > > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > --------------8211C631D3377EE9F92B5CE2 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > On 8/29/19 2:03 PM, Cybe R. Wizard wrote: > > <snip> > > =2E > >> > > I understand a GNU/Linux distro being granted the Unix certification. > > That doesn't mean it is Unix, just that it complies with certain > > standards, not code identity. > >=20 > > Technically it does mean it's UNIX. That's precisely what the > certification certifies. Code identity isn't a requirement. If the > UNIX group certifies an OS as Unix, the OS can legally call itself UNIX. > That was the deal with IRIX, HP-Unix, and others. The code had > diverged, sometimes significantly, between all of those OSs, yet all > were still considered legit UNIX. > > --------------8211C631D3377EE9F92B5CE2 > Content-Type: application/pgp-keys; > name="pEpkey.asc" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Content-Disposition: attachment; > filename="pEpkey.asc" > > -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- > > mQGNBF0x1hQBDACnFiWjBWrUpTfxAtnsCIWdxsBWxu8NBfUkEfEfSi1IZ0m9YzTY > DQmIqFdn05c0T1FW9pcfNplPhb1FIC313UxP/y4tBKvIHx5aJhR3eUqAtPjNdL8C > wlSP+3zmvvWJuzvz6LuwCkiplCxD8TgN5USjCyzUvzmfT4fnNOpL2wYGxUqhRajX > lDVar/8WSfbM9JFjuNuJpprHMPM1JlVKrHbKPAZt4UgUtXPlDHEXPRzLoZPNd0B2 > z+BMB6zccLAmvtEx/aweJ+DXFKy50+dXJdqEzBnHTPmfAKFJv5o56oewvu/lPNK0 > YCqgzUOM2ZvasnhnEaR7Av0SC6H7N0qTXSQopyJEMqasEONfNvwZDzvDj9daSAMq > uR6ploTIhhKAC6Qc0i/3WxlXziF7aA5h8LWk7BfukUBZ9K3WDFFDHiW9fvZHKEVc > nUBBKtXa89hLaQDzibRvao+7+YZrgE/JUmW5/tR+gGHGFtnR7zyTpLjPyHUsaI7V > Us5466dwZl3n+nkAEQEAAbQrSm9oYW5uIEJlcmV0dGEgPGJlcmV0dGFAbnVuLXlh > LWJpem5lc3MuY29tPokB1AQTAQgAPhYhBBMNiZpO3cAypuS7tLLEE+j32UHtBQJd > MdaMAhsDBQkB4TOABQsJCAcCBhUKCQgLAgQWAgMBAh4BAheAAAoJELLEE+j32UHt > s7EL/Rbgsn0M1Iz8s/4MPkHNE6/nV3IX9d2pRtb6JAdt8OSirpImuTfyS4z+ctGO > bJ0zAvjPjmdf/tbfrMl6pcOwFyi6YB5j01cwfyuGy6HRURE63+XouV/luTmaOmRJ > v0hQdzljkKl91+A2nuE7HvRnuwOdsL/4Nzf/93v++4i9T5kk/P4XYBOWxxQ65wj/ > L1exF/9GVFSIsk2Aw2T+4ZcaAI/GNXs8wHCDWVr1Um2sQNK+ytmIXItMfBsMS/Ww > pkl3IBvffzgaDlKacASOVELO5+8gdxMnDaJ1/bek959dOjhpAKge5znEGIsG/C38 > B9dtbsoQGV71Vocpsr556S3TmQbGDnIjqwcRAlfwmz/O+3k6RFIG+B+2KmOEYieV > UHukxlFOxILMKsuVjy0tyAJFvcne4eHiDtmhqmNJqyFdBvtsK6cLpxjWdOJcJE3a > eiBc5opAxAo5FoocNYWf55BEn7VqaRQ4B88kGCEe9KpCT545ugruhjMHaDB3MoqA > yIn8b7kBjQRdMdZOAQwArIrJqoPb4GHl/5JYsq7AnADI9IlNKD+y2Evq2Fvhkgv+ > kJhblLEIkMYmXDBNByrpTUiK8hBwVsmdPbwIh7iwyZTanihdzx9g0yUvo3bPa6Mr > j47HAORBVF+fyGjy843F87fx1lVCJrxb46uXq2+cHZyE0vGZxcY6YTxRM4Sl3KPC > 4PzaGaQ3/W7fv3s0OrLbxCYCi07DiRZFUFiC3EYgh3dbbQlR9mTL8/obMmeHZLgH > t7vTWHkf5fkq0VRHD5MaH2a3zj+Dk5LuCwaAzqMIcn0JEm327oUl/HkKmoAc+oiF > mZ/rHW2U1E307bakJtkng0gQq6NgEuNPkXPjUCojzzKP4OCcB97pWPpTleSu1MJf > CxR6qqp7MUOtmFGQgGHwQ8iD7v3hTCFad8h/jWmoPO+F3LDgnFvAhtXPRhhkRt8g > Lo6jgIKh2ZCHVvTS0n/n7+oq6A0S/Hshh4Ng/m3dvdZFZ/TT0GSgkjmYDRfa5v6l > K2W4ucve7qSw7oKLvB+LABEBAAGJAbwEGAEIACYWIQQTDYmaTt3AMqbku7SyxBPo > 99lB7QUCXTHWTgIbDAUJAeEzgAAKCRCyxBPo99lB7XceC/sEXHFm9gOvUbneqelU > 8kuBBqbEt29PaZeIT4+YPOO10J07y94fRzjcfHb6TdQrHAxKccZU6U/NyrITM+Mb > CTfn5QnLLcsXAgirQI5URGVND+Wpum2JZpgLJG7QL+FY2yW3LAjNlWF17Sna6oMA > vuL/SL444vyXEEOAlNJ2cT9lZ1eGuNlnND3PEuvJgJNuhFfmpEe50+tzbf/8B0/Z > tHaUwhLbQA5TCsY0V2/PlxGxylinFSzBKaA+rCEYtftIqh3KiXvbO1OpmAj5rbXf > Ys1ikSjonEwWsQsXUebKOhWa9iHtPPa8Mps/uwQ8Eq1HgkILGTeAoKqGJCErrWig > YX4Ab4tMdEw/Iq4dPQdqpM46wwg7+PU3+ejAFmnQS8iJjRSOcf3k66Zk/QO+CDkY > QcmkmVH4mD/l+rdWGQjH78CeQj52aLR4EG2jLhcSR0OMSAOuFyls01o0nADkD5vr > PdMjhyVPeqo2rAPTGY3ipEkbui+ch2mu06dOuD2TvUFGLAk=3D > =3Dow0t > -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- > > --------------8211C631D3377EE9F92B5CE2--
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-30 00:34 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ebbe8b17917067a869231d389fbaf654@remailer.privacy.at> |
| In reply to | #28025 |
In article <20190829214001.3921f0e0@nx-74205> Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be> wrote: > > [ sewer newsgroup deleted ] > > On 29.08.2019 at 12:40, Cybe R. Wizard scribbled: > > > On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:34:20 -0500 > > "anon" <anon@anon.com> wrote: > >=20 > > > <https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/08/unix-at-50-it-starts-with-a-ma= > inframe-a-gator-and-three-dedicated-researchers> > > > =20 > > The article is wrong right off the bat by conflating Unix and > > GNU/Linux. Unix does NOT run smartphones in any way, shape, or form. > > GNU/Linux does that. They are NOT the same.=20 > > I'm afraid you've got that a bit backwards, Cybe. Android is based off > of a heavily modified Linux kernel, but Android is most definitely not a > GNU/Linux system. There is no GNU stuff in Android whatsoever. > > GNU/Linux is a Free Software implementation of UNIX, written from > scratch, but compatible with the Single UNIX Specification, and largely > compatible with POSIX, which is a super set of the SUS. > > At the moment of my writing this, at least two GNU/Linux distributions > have officially been certified with the UNIX=E2=84=A2 trademark by The Open > Group. Both of them are RedHat-based, and one of them is commercially > marketed under the name Inspur K-UX =E2=80=94 I forgot the name of the other > one. > > UNIX=E2=84=A2 certification is however very expensive, which is why most > GNU/Linux distributions don't bother, and most of them also don't even > care, due to the Linux=C2=AE registered trademark already having become > immensely popular and well-reputed among professionals =E2=80=94 and rightf= > ully > so. > > --=20 > With respect, > =3D Aragorn =3D
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-30 13:41 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n5in3g-uo2.ln1@ID-313840.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #28025 |
Aragorn wrote: > GNU/Linux is a Free Software implementation of UNIX, written from > scratch, but compatible with the Single UNIX Specification, and largely > compatible with POSIX, which is a super set of the SUS. Assuming by "POSIX" you mean POSIX.1, you have that the wrong way round. SUS is a superset of POSIX.1. The SUS "base" volumes and POSIX.1 are one and the same standard (since 2001). SUS has an additional Xcurses volume that is not in POSIX.1. > At the moment of my writing this, at least two GNU/Linux distributions > have officially been certified with the UNIX™ trademark by The Open > Group. Both of them are RedHat-based, and one of them is commercially > marketed under the name Inspur K-UX — I forgot the name of the other > one. The other one is Huawei Euler-OS. > UNIX™ certification is however very expensive, which is why most > GNU/Linux distributions don't bother They also would not pass the certification tests (unless they make a lot of changes). A typical GNU/Linux system will fail hundreds of the tests (out of many thousands), for example all of the tests of the archive format written by "pax -w -x pax" and its related "-o" options. There are even some places where the LSB requires behaviour that does not conform to POSIX.1/SUS, such as kill(-1, sig) not sending the signal to the calling process. I don't know how Inspur and Huawei addressed that - I suppose either they don't conform to LSB or they made it configurable somehow. -- Geoff Clare <netnews@gclare.org.uk>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-29 20:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <qk9b0b$i06$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #28022 |
On 2019-08-29, Cybe R. Wizard <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> wrote: > On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:34:20 -0500 > "anon" <anon@anon.com> wrote: > >> <https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/08/unix-at-50-it-starts-with-a-mainframe-a-gator-and-three-dedicated-researchers> >> > The article is wrong right off the bat by conflating Unix and GNU/Linux. > Unix does NOT run smartphones in any way, shape, or form. GNU/Linux > does that. They are NOT the same. Nor is Androaid the same as Linux if that is the way you want to play the game. There are a lot of similarities between Linux and Unix and one can argue that there is a pretty clear trail from one to the other. (Not least that the GNU part was always a rewrite of the equivalent commands in Unix.) >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-29 15:43 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure |
| Message-ID | <geKdnX6jeJp0pfXAnZ2dnUU7-SvNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #28022 |
At Thu, 29 Aug 2019 12:40:16 -0500 "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:34:20 -0500
> "anon" <anon@anon.com> wrote:
>
> > <https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/08/unix-at-50-it-starts-with-a-mainframe-a-gator-and-three-dedicated-researchers>
> >
> The article is wrong right off the bat by conflating Unix and GNU/Linux.
> Unix does NOT run smartphones in any way, shape, or form. GNU/Linux
> does that. They are NOT the same.
iPhones run BSD *Unix* (aka Darwin).
>
--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933
Deepwoods Software -- Custom Software Services
http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Linux Administration Services
heller@deepsoft.com -- Webhosting Services
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-29 16:12 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure |
| Message-ID | <20190829161221.373c5b3f@WizardsTower> |
| In reply to | #28028 |
On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 15:43:21 -0500 Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> wrote: > At Thu, 29 Aug 2019 12:40:16 -0500 "Cybe R. Wizard" > <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:34:20 -0500 > > "anon" <anon@anon.com> wrote: > > > > > <https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/08/unix-at-50-it-starts-with-a-mainframe-a-gator-and-three-dedicated-researchers> > > > > > The article is wrong right off the bat by conflating Unix and > > GNU/Linux. Unix does NOT run smartphones in any way, shape, or > > form. GNU/Linux does that. They are NOT the same. > > iPhones run BSD *Unix* (aka Darwin). > BOOM! You're right, and, since June of this year, has at least a 50% market share, too. Good knowledge, thanks! -- Cybe R. Wizard My other computer is a HOLMES IV with the Mycroft OS My other car is a Chandler MetalSmith Mark III
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 17 of 18 — ← Prev page 1 … 15 16 [17] 18 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web