Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #318621 > unrolled thread
| Started by | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-09-02 15:43 +0000 |
| Last post | 2015-09-04 04:55 +0000 |
| Articles | 8 on this page of 168 — 18 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-02 15:43 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-02 17:45 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-02 15:52 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 08:54 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX dunno <dunno@dunno.dunno> - 2015-09-03 00:12 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-02 18:00 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-02 16:07 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-02 18:40 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-02 12:09 -0500
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-02 20:43 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-02 21:19 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX ronb <ronbNOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 23:31 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-02 20:36 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-03 09:17 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-03 10:06 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-03 08:47 -0400
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-03 13:22 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-03 10:10 -0400
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-03 09:31 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-03 16:47 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-03 22:29 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-03 23:48 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-04 01:38 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-04 02:50 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-04 04:34 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-03 23:35 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-04 07:39 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-04 01:00 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-05 16:59 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-05 17:15 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-05 10:40 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-05 18:51 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-05 13:09 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-05 10:39 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-05 20:03 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-05 18:50 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-05 13:16 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-05 20:52 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-05 19:58 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-05 20:39 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-05 19:13 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-05 21:26 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-05 19:43 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-05 19:50 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-05 19:55 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 13:39 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-05 23:14 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-05 23:28 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-06 00:02 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-06 01:24 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-06 02:12 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-06 02:33 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX ronb <ronbNOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 01:03 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-06 03:24 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-06 09:45 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-06 06:40 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-06 09:58 -0500
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-06 03:40 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX dunno <dunno@dunno.dunno> - 2015-09-06 03:04 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX dunno <dunno@dunno.dunno> - 2015-09-06 04:48 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX dunno <dunno@dunno.dunno> - 2015-09-06 06:46 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-06 06:14 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-06 07:21 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-06 08:12 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-06 10:09 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-06 10:24 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-06 09:00 -0500
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-06 10:55 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-06 18:44 -0500
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX ronb <ronbNOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 19:24 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-06 21:47 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-06 09:35 -0500
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-06 12:03 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-06 21:04 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-06 23:18 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-06 21:51 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-06 22:37 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-06 23:08 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-06 23:38 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-07 00:10 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-08 09:15 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-08 09:18 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-08 10:04 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-09 01:44 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-09 02:00 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-08 19:05 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-09 09:23 -0400
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-09 09:44 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-09 12:47 -0400
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-09 10:04 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-09 13:15 -0400
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-09 10:28 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-08 19:00 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-09 02:12 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-08 19:18 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-09 02:30 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-08 19:33 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-08 07:42 -0500
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-08 15:30 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-08 09:05 -0500
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-08 08:02 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-08 12:10 -0400
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-08 09:17 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-05 22:53 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-06 01:00 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-09-07 00:10 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Melzzzzz <melz@zzzzz.com> - 2015-09-07 02:12 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-06 01:04 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-05 12:45 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-05 19:48 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-05 13:20 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-05 13:38 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-05 19:10 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-05 12:48 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-05 19:53 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-05 13:26 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-04 09:28 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-04 04:52 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-03 23:48 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX dunno <dunno@dunno.dunno> - 2015-09-04 05:13 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-03 23:49 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX dunno <dunno@dunno.dunno> - 2015-09-04 07:34 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-04 00:48 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-05 10:09 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-06 09:42 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-06 07:49 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX ronb <ronbNOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 19:26 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-08 07:34 -0500
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-08 08:31 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-03 09:33 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-03 16:48 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-05 10:08 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-09-05 13:36 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 11:45 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-05 01:26 -0500
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-05 02:27 -0500
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX ronb <ronbNOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 23:30 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-05 02:15 -0500
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX ronb <ronbNOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 21:19 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-07 04:39 -0500
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-05 01:15 -0500
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-05 02:12 -0500
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-05 02:26 -0500
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX ronb <ronbNOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 21:21 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-07 04:46 -0500
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-09-07 10:18 -0400
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-03 04:27 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-09-03 09:26 -0400
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-03 10:37 -0400
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-02 20:40 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-02 21:17 +0200
Snit Michael Glasser unable to do simple search Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-02 23:02 +0200
Re: Snit Michael Glasser unable to do simple search hifye <hifye@humanoid.net> - 2015-09-02 17:10 -0400
Re: Snit Michael Glasser unable to do simple search Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-03 01:09 +0200
Re: Peter Köhlmann admits he has no clue what he is talking about "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-09-02 17:50 -0400
Re: Peter Köhlmann admits he has no clue what he is talking about Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2015-09-05 01:17 -0500
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-09-03 12:02 -0500
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-03 13:02 -0500
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-09-03 13:16 -0500
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-02 20:42 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 09:08 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-09-02 20:35 +0200
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX dunno <dunno@dunno.dunno> - 2015-09-03 00:12 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX dunno <dunno@dunno.dunno> - 2015-09-03 01:07 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX dunno <dunno@dunno.dunno> - 2015-09-03 01:39 +0000
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-03 04:28 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX Debbie Ballard <rex.ballard@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 21:10 -0700
Re: Three more weeks of UNIX owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-09-04 04:55 +0000
Page 9 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9]
| From | John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-02 09:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0892d84f-3994-4050-ad73-5e08a302df9f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #318621 |
On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 at 11:43:44 AM UTC-4, owl wrote: > Three more weeks until OS X Yosemite is no longer UNIX Certified. > > http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/certificates/1201p.pdf > > Not a peep about UNIX Certification for THe Captain. Follow the bouncing owl. If only the turd had a brain. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SILvPVVAhBo
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-02 20:35 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ms7fdi$d8h$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #318621 |
Snit wrote: > On 9/2/15, 8:43 AM, in article 390avmv9.jiida@rooftop.invalid, "owl" > <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > >> Three more weeks until OS X Yosemite is no longer UNIX Certified. >> >> http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/certificates/1201p.pdf >> >> Not a peep about UNIX Certification for THe Captain. >> > They likely will get it certified... but if not it means nothing to me. > Does not impact me one way or the other. > > Except your bragging about "using a certified unix" is even more a riot then it is now. For people who actually know their stuff that "certificate" has never had any worth whatsoever. They know that OSX is a shitty unix, certificate or not
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | dunno <dunno@dunno.dunno> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-03 00:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ms838s$ip0$1@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #318662 |
Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote: > Snit wrote: > >> On 9/2/15, 8:43 AM, in article 390avmv9.jiida@rooftop.invalid, "owl" >> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: >> >>> Three more weeks until OS X Yosemite is no longer UNIX Certified. >>> >>> http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/certificates/1201p.pdf >>> >>> Not a peep about UNIX Certification for THe Captain. >>> >> They likely will get it certified... but if not it means nothing to me. >> Does not impact me one way or the other. >> >> > > Except your bragging about "using a certified unix" is even more a riot then > it is now. For people who actually know their stuff that "certificate" has > never had any worth whatsoever. They know that OSX is a shitty unix, > certificate or not >shitty unix Why is that? I did run a lot of UNIX software (including some server software) on OS X. For example, I was able to compile and run INN NNTP server on OS X. I had to do few minor fixes of the code, but never had any issues with UNIX-specific system calls, and there were no problems setting up environment (that is, special users with their home directories and restricted access to the rest of the system, POSIX command-line tools, etc.) OS X is BSD with proprietary GUI, but if we're talking of internals, it's not much worse than any flavor of UNIX. Actually, I was using Linux documentation on system calls when I did some programming on OS X, because they're compatible (and because Linux documentation is much easier to find). -- dunno
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | dunno <dunno@dunno.dunno> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-03 01:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ms86fj$qos$1@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #318719 |
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > On 9/2/15, 5:12 PM, in article ms838s$ip0$1@news.mixmin.net, "dunno" > <dunno@dunno.dunno> wrote: > >> Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote: >>> Snit wrote: >>> >>>> On 9/2/15, 8:43 AM, in article 390avmv9.jiida@rooftop.invalid, "owl" >>>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Three more weeks until OS X Yosemite is no longer UNIX Certified. >>>>> >>>>> http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/certificates/1201p.pdf >>>>> >>>>> Not a peep about UNIX Certification for THe Captain. >>>>> >>>> They likely will get it certified... but if not it means nothing to me. >>>> Does not impact me one way or the other. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Except your bragging about "using a certified unix" is even more a riot then >>> it is now. For people who actually know their stuff that "certificate" has >>> never had any worth whatsoever. They know that OSX is a shitty unix, >>> certificate or not >> >>> shitty unix >> >> Why is that? I did run a lot of UNIX software (including some server >> software) on OS X. For example, I was able to compile and run INN NNTP >> server on OS X. I had to do few minor fixes of the code, but never had any >> issues with UNIX-specific system calls, and there were no problems setting >> up environment (that is, special users with their home directories and >> restricted access to the rest of the system, POSIX command-line tools, >> etc.) >> >> OS X is BSD with proprietary GUI, but if we're talking of internals, it's >> not much worse than any flavor of UNIX. Actually, I was using Linux >> documentation on system calls when I did some programming on OS X, because >> they're compatible (and because Linux documentation is much easier to >> find). > > Certified or not, OS X and Linux each are Unix-like at the very least. For > the last quite a few versions Apple has had OS X certified. They likely will > again... but if they do not does it really matter? Not to me. > It matters for businesses. Apple's Mac Pro mostly considered as machines to do graphics, video, music, and preprint. Apple was doing UNIX certification because back in the days there were a lot of specialized graphic and FX software running on different flavors of UNIX, and Apple wanted to ensure businesses that their software can be ported to OS X with little or no extra cost. Technically there is nothing that can stop one from using Mac Pro as server, since OS is able to run all the software needed, but of course no one would buy machine with very expensive graphic card and huge screen to be used as email or HTTP server. -- dunno
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | dunno <dunno@dunno.dunno> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-03 01:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ms88c5$vgk$1@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #318735 |
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > On 9/2/15, 6:07 PM, in article ms86fj$qos$1@news.mixmin.net, "dunno" > <dunno@dunno.dunno> wrote: > >>>> OS X is BSD with proprietary GUI, but if we're talking of internals, it's >>>> not much worse than any flavor of UNIX. Actually, I was using Linux >>>> documentation on system calls when I did some programming on OS X, because >>>> they're compatible (and because Linux documentation is much easier to >>>> find). >>> >>> Certified or not, OS X and Linux each are Unix-like at the very least. For >>> the last quite a few versions Apple has had OS X certified. They likely will >>> again... but if they do not does it really matter? Not to me. >>> >> >> It matters for businesses. Apple's Mac Pro mostly considered as machines to >> do graphics, video, music, and preprint. Apple was doing UNIX certification >> because back in the days there were a lot of specialized graphic and FX >> software running on different flavors of UNIX, and Apple wanted to ensure >> businesses that their software can be ported to OS X with little or no >> extra cost. Technically there is nothing that can stop one from using Mac >> Pro as server, since OS is able to run all the software needed, but of >> course no one would buy machine with very expensive graphic card and huge >> screen to be used as email or HTTP server. > > I know some use the Mac mini... but again this is for small server needs. No one would argue with that. You can even use MacBook if you want to, but of course not in cases where performance matters, mostly for development and proof of concept. -- dunno
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-03 04:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <50d79177-b203-4cf6-aa33-d005d8c5de48@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #318621 |
On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 at 2:31:02 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote: > On 9/2/15, 8:43 AM, in article 390avmv9.jiida@rooftop.invalid, "owl" > <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > > > Three more weeks until OS X Yosemite is no longer UNIX Certified. > > > > http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/certificates/1201p.pdf > > > > Not a peep about UNIX Certification for THe Captain. > > > They likely will get it certified... but if not it means nothing to me. Does > not impact me one way or the other. Apple will be pleased to hear it! You're the only one that matters.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Debbie Ballard <rex.ballard@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-03 21:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d8adfd58-8698-4b77-8b43-f7f26a6db4b4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #318621 |
On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 at 11:43:44 AM UTC-4, owl wrote: > Three more weeks until OS X Yosemite is no longer UNIX Certified. > http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/certificates/1201p.pdf Yes, so there is an annual contract that is about to expire. That's what annual contracts do. The contract will probably be renewed, partly because Apple is the biggest name in UNIX licensed/trademarked systems - in terms of number of units sold. Macs and iOS are both variants of Unix optimized for their specific hardware. Android and ChromeOS are both variants of Linux, even though most people never interact with the shell prompts or command line interfaces. It's there under the covers. You can also get the terminal and kits to be able to do development using Linux. Of course, Microsoft is making Windows more and more like Unix/Linux as well. The result has been some nice improvements in reliability and efficiency. Security has always been an issue and will be again. > Not a peep about UNIX Certification for THe Captain.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 04:55 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sfdnmv93.jfids@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #318897 |
Debbie Ballard <rex.ballard@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 at 11:43:44 AM UTC-4, owl wrote: >> Three more weeks until OS X Yosemite is no longer UNIX Certified. >> http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/certificates/1201p.pdf > Yes, so there is an annual contract that is about to expire. That's what annual contracts do. > The contract will probably be renewed, partly because Apple is the biggest name in UNIX licensed/trademarked systems - in terms of number of units sold. Macs and iOS are both variants of Unix optimized for their specific hardware. They have never renewed a UNIX trademark license. They have always waited for the next version and licensed it. The licenses are OS version specific for OS X. They also only apply to "default configuration."
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 9 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9]
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web