[aclug-L] Re: BeOS? What is it?
[Top] [All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
Lots of confusion here, and I may not be much help, given that
I have no interest in BeOS, NeXT, or anything Apple-related,
and limited knowledge thereof. But:
1) Mach is what's called a "microkernel", which is a different,
more modular approach to building kernels than the old standby,
the belatedly named "monolithic kernel". For examples, Linux
and BSD are monolithic kernels; GNU Hurd is based on a micro-
kernel (probably Mach). All of these look pretty much the same
to the outside world, but are different inside.
2) NeXT is based on Mach. Although Mach has been used to create
some genuine Unix-like kernels (e.g., OSF-1 and MkLinux), Mach
can just as well support very un-Unix-like kernel interfaces.
Ergo, NeXT is not Unix-like simply because it is based on Mach.
Nor is NeXT's kernel equivalent to Mach, so it is a bit dis-
ingenuous for NeXT to refer to its kernel as Mach.
3) I think BeOS is a monolithic kernel, but am not sure. (I've
never looked at it.) However, since Be likes to talk about
how "modern" the design of BeOS is, it probably has some
overarching modularity similar to microkernel designs. (NT
is an example of a kernel which likes to think it's micro-
kernel based, but isn't really.)
4) What makes NeXT and BeOS somewhat Unix-like is that both are
Posix.1 compatible. Posix.1 is a standard loosely based on
legacy Unix systems: it includes a shell (like bash), shell
commands, system calls, and libraries. In a real Unix system,
Posix.1 is a subset of the native command line and programming
interfaces. However, there are several systems which claim to
be Posix.1 compatible, but do so with gerry-rigged libraries
that make them second-class interfaces (e.g., NT, VMS). NeXT
and BeOS are Posix.1 compatible; that may make them look like
Unix, but one needs to dig deeper to get to the real story.
5) There are other standards as to what a Unix system is, such
as the Unix95 and Unix98 specifications from X/Open. These
are effectively a much-extended superset of Posix, largely
based on Unix SVR4. The Unix TM is owned by X/Open, which
permits use on certified Unix98-conforming systems. Neither
Linux nor BSD meet these requirements (partly because some
of them are pretty dumb).
6) As someone mentioned, NeXTSTEP is just a GUI layer. I don't
know how closely it is bound to NeXT's kernel, but it has
been ported elsewhere, so it's probably cleanly layered.
7) Apple has something called OS X, which uses a lot of BSD
code, but I don't know what that means. In any case, it
is different from MacOS. I don't know whether MacOS is
based on Mach nowadays, but if it is, that would explain
why MkLinux is Mach-based.
8) BeOS originally ran on Apple hardware, but does not run on
more recent Apple hardware. Apple stopped documenting their
hardware, and Be was forced to switch to Intel hardware.
Despite all the hype, Be is just another closed source,
proprietary software company, trying to trap people into
a product which is far less useful and less valuable than
a free alternative: Linux.
9) Be and NeXT are basically cultural satellites of Apple. Why
anyone would feel any emotional attachment to a company like
Apple mystifies me, but evidently there are people who at
long last realize that Apple is only out to screw them who
still feel they must embrace something Apple-like; first
NeXT, now Be. (There is a similar cloud around VMS, which
resulted in many/most VMS customers choosing NT over OSF-1
or Linux; now that Microsoft has killed NT-on-Alpha, these
same fools are heading back to VMS to avoid Unix.)
If anyone wants a novel kernel to play with, check out GNU Hurd.
At least it's free. Or if you're really ambitious, track down
Plan-9 (Ken Thompson's post-Unix OS). However, many of us could
still stand to learn more about Linux.
--
/*
* Tom Hull * thull@xxxxxxxxxxx * http://www.ocston.org/~thull/
*/
- [aclug-L] Re: BeOS? What is it?, (continued)
- [aclug-L] Re: BeOS? What is it?, Tony Scarpelli, 2000/01/22
- [aclug-L] Re: BeOS? What is it?, lowell, 2000/01/22
- [aclug-L] Re: BeOS? What is it?, phrostie, 2000/01/22
- [aclug-L] Re: BeOS? What is it?, lowell, 2000/01/22
- [aclug-L] Re: BeOS? What is it?, Jonathan Hall, 2000/01/22
- [aclug-L] Re: BeOS? What is it?, Jesse Kaufman, 2000/01/22
- [aclug-L] Re: BeOS? What is it?, Jesse Kaufman, 2000/01/22
- [aclug-L] Re: BeOS? What is it?, Jesse Kaufman, 2000/01/22
- [aclug-L] Re: BeOS? What is it?, lowell, 2000/01/22
- [aclug-L] Re: BeOS? What is it?,
Tom Hull <=
- [aclug-L] Re: BeOS? What is it?, lowell, 2000/01/23
- [aclug-L] Re: BeOS? What is it?, Jonathan Hall, 2000/01/23
- [aclug-L] Re: BeOS? What is it?, John Reinke, 2000/01/23
- [aclug-L] Re: BeOS? What is it?, Tom Hull, 2000/01/23
- [aclug-L] Re: BeOS? What is it?, John Alexander, 2000/01/24
|
|