From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Apr 20 08:07:17 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA25468 for chat-outgoing; Sun, 20 Apr 1997 08:07:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.konnections.com (mail.konnections.com [192.41.71.11]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA25462 for ; Sun, 20 Apr 1997 08:07:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from castle (root@ip214.konnections.com [192.41.71.214]) by mail.konnections.com (8.8.3/8.8.3) with SMTP id JAA26617; Sun, 20 Apr 1997 09:06:06 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <335B8F21.23D249EB@konnections.com> Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 09:00:33 -0700 From: mike allison Organization: Publisher -- Burning Eagle Book Company X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (X11; I; Linux 2.0.0 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Richards CC: "Jordan K. Hubbard" , jack , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Price of FreeBSD (was On Holy Wars...) References: <5354.861482487@time.cdrom.com> <335AD6EC.7306BE6D@konnections.com> <87lo6enjw2.fsf@originat.demon.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-chat@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Paul: Yeah, I've toyed with the idea of doing a NTterm sorta program and I know the hooks exit. I just wonder why it was never part of the original. What you described from OpenNT reminds me of NeXT. You open up a command line terminal from Mach to do Unix-y things while the NeXT GUI is running. It is almost like you have parallel interfaces going. At least that's the feel. Really I think a number of programs use this sorta like the `Dos' window. The work and take over part of the resources then return them when done. -Mike Paul Richards wrote: > > mike allison writes: > > > They aren't mutually exclusive, rather complementary. The point was > > sacrificing one for the other at Microsoft. They took away our low > > level access and tried to replace it with GUI programs which are still > > too abstract to allow what you need. If the GUI is in the way, having a > > program under the GUI isn't going to let you fix it.....Unless it's > > built more like X or even Win3.x which is merely an app on the OS not > > the whole OS... > > > > NT needs an NTterm where you can attack the machine.... > > Well, not to appear to come out in Microsoft's defence but actually > they haven't. The shipped usr interface may be a GUI but that doesn't > mean you can't write a more unix like interface, in much the same way > that you add a GUI on top of the unix CLI. > > Anyone looked at OpenNT? I took a look at a web page of theirs > someone showed me and it looks very interesting. They've built a > parallel Unix clone alongside the Windows GUI and they've done it from > a low level of the NT structure, from the diagram they've built on top > of the kernel rather than hooking above or into the Win32 system. > > Dr Paul Richards, Originative Solutions Ltd. > Internet: paul@originat.demon.co.uk > Phone: 0370 462071 (UK Mobile)