Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 1 Nov 2001 12:10:06 +0100
From:      "Anthony Atkielski" <anthony@atkielski.com>
To:        "FreeBSD Questions" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Re[2]: Tiny starter configuration for FreeBSD
Message-ID:  <007001c162c5$c4792e80$0a00000a@atkielski.com>
References:  <00c801c162c0$727e3080$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ted writes:

> There IS NO UNIX UI!!!

UI = user interface.  All operating systems have a UI.  In the case of UNIX, the
default UI is the system console, a simple alphanumeric display with keyboard
entry of command lines.

> Your talking about the UNIX UI as though it's something
> defined and generally accepted.

It is.  See above.

> There is absolutely no standard as how your UNIX desktop
> can look, you can make it look like anything you want.

UNIX doesn't have a desktop, although you can install a desktop-like UI, if you
want one.

> BOTH Windows and UNIX are much more than just a UI.

As are all operating systems.

> Windows is an operating system that has ONE available UI.

Actually, it has at least two: the GUI and the command-line interface, the
former being the default (and thus the native) interface.

> UNIX is an operating system that has a UI that's
> totally defined by the user.

The default UI is a simple command-line interface.  This is typical of most
multiuser timesharing systems.

> Your confusing the UI with the operating system.

No, I know exactly what I'm talking about.

> This is understandable because Microsoft didn't design
> Windows so that the UI is a separate piece, instead
> it's integrated into the OS.

In Windows NT, the GUI is a separate piece, not a part of the kernel, although
integration was increased in later versions in order to mimic single-user
Windows versions and improve performance.  Still, NT potentially allows other
UIs to be installed--I don't know of any, however.

> UNIX is designed so that any UI you run on it,
> whether a shell or a graphical one that looks like Windows,
> or a graphical one that looks like KDE, is basically
> what you would term an "application" in Windows-world.

See above.  Most operating systems do this to some extent.

> Since UNIX has no "defined" UI, it's impossible for
> Windows to have a superior UI ...

When I installed UNIX, it came up with a command-line interface.  Looks pretty
defined to me.  It still does that every time it boots.

> They get attached for the same reason, because they
> spend a lot of time in them and people tend to get
> emotionally attached to inanimate things that they
> spend a lot of time with.

Some do.  I don't.  And it's difficult to discuss things like operating systems
objectively and usefully if emotions intervene.

> Would you now say in your enlightened state that your
> parents gave you a "necessary evil" stuffed bear
> when you were 6 months old?

I never had a stuffed bear.  I had half a Slinky once, but I straightened it.


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?007001c162c5$c4792e80$0a00000a>