From: "Paul Ranson" 

"Adam Flinton"  wrote in message
news:3e47e726{at}w3.nls.net...
> I think the network basically renders the OS down to the network services
it
> can/does provide. Hooking into SMB running on Linux or whatever & hooking
> into SMB running on Windows is one example.

Which makes OS somewhat irrelevant.

But which also means investing huge effort in competing with MS in their
current space may be futile, 'Unix' has a niche in the server end but I
think pursuing if for general purpose desktops on PCs is a hobby.

And X is a terrible base for a user interface. Hobbling oneself to
emulations of the tty design error and X-Windows will always make 'Unix'
ugly.

> Because the PC as a piece of standardized piece of commodity hardware is
the
> industrial way. I also think that one OS is to choice & innovation what a
> one party state is to developing good political ideas.

You shouldn't care what OS you are running. We're not there yet. But I
don't see a Unix base as the solution we'll all be using in 10 years time.

When I read the Tanenbaum book back in the mid 80s I thought 'cool'. To me
it's a real shame that Linus didn't.

Paul

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4