Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 23:00:36 -0800 From: "Dan O'Connor" <dan@jgl.reno.nv.us> To: "Greg Lehey" <grog@lemis.com>, "Randall Senn" <randall_senn@yahoo.com> Cc: <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>, <webmaster@linux.org>, <www@openbsd.org> Subject: Re: Unix vs unix-like and unix-type Message-ID: <051001be519e$66955d60$ed3ce4cf@danco.home>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Microsoft's "NT" environment is UNIX. A friend of mine was also told this at an IBM point-of-sale system AIX seminar. Do you know of any documentation on this? I can't find anywhere where Microsoft admits to NT be derived from Unix. When hard drive support was added to PC-DOS, Microsoft incorporated more Unix-like commands (albeit with a renegade \ directory delimiter and a / switch character), but I've never seen anything suggesting NT (ne-OS/2) *was* Unix. If it is, it begs the question: Why is NT less stable and less robust than Unix? --Dan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?051001be519e$66955d60$ed3ce4cf>