holidayssoftgo.blogg.se

1. Major differences between unix for windows and mac mac os x#
2. Major differences between unix for windows and mac code#
3. Major differences between unix for windows and mac license#
4. Major differences between unix for windows and mac free#

Major differences between unix for windows and mac code#

Variants of UNIX all grew out of the UNIX code base. They are two very different animals.įirst, Linux is not a variant of UNIX in any sense. If you read Linus’s biography, he is clear that he thought very little of Minix… The Minix kernel is based on a micro kernel design while the Linux kernel is based on a monolithic design. Its a kernel clone of minix, while gnu tools are clone’s of unix tools that run on top of linux.Īctually, no, that is not correct. Just as the toyota could be called a ‘clone’ of ford (in other words ford came up with the model a, and toyota used that basic idea in the future, as in the design architechure). Strictly speaking, linux is a clone of unix. Linux is no more a ‘variant’ of unix then toyota is a ‘variant’ of ford. This is a big, unwieldy concept for a lot of people and I want to make sure to get things straight, so thanks again for the help. I’ve filtered out the parts about my inability to cohesively grasp all of the available information, but your comments - even the aggressive ones, provided they also contain some sort of helpful information - are warranted and appreciated because I’ll be the first to admit that I’m definitely not an expert when it comes to this stuff. Thanks to those of you who have left constructive and insightful comments. Here are some corrections I’ve gotten from our readers.

Major differences between unix for windows and mac free#

I’m sure there are many of you out there who know a lot about the differences between Linux and UNIX, so please feel free to leave a comment below if I’m missing something important or I haven’t covered something accurately (see below). Most IT managers would have a hard time selling UNIX over Linux. Linux is much more mainstream now than it used to be, so the line between what UNIX can do versus what Linux can do gets blurrier all the time. Most Linux applications are available for free, while UNIX applications generally cost money. As such, most people have tinkered with Linux while few have tried UNIX (although when you get into using the Linux command line, it’s very similar to UNIX). UNIX-based systems generally require proprietary hardware configurations and can cost thousands of dollars. Linux can run on “regular” off-the-shelf computers.

Major differences between unix for windows and mac mac os x#

Mac OS X Leopard is built upon UNIX code and certified under the Single UNIX Specification, which is “the collective name of a family of standards for computer operating systems to qualify for the name ‘Unix'”, according to Wikipedia. UNIX has variants (Linux is actually a UNIX variant based somewhat on Minix, which is a UNIX variant) but the proper versions of the UNIX system are much smaller in number.

Linux has hundreds of different distributions. The Linux kernel itself is licensed under the GNU General Public License.

Major differences between unix for windows and mac license#

Apparently Red Hat doesn’t pay the license (as of 2005) but companies like Novell do pay. Companies that use the term “Linux” for commercial distributions are apparently supposed to pay him a yearly licensing fee between $200 and $5000 for use of the name but there’s some dissension as to whether or not they actually pony up. The Linux trademark is owned by Linus Torvalds.

Systems that pass can be called UNIX, systems that don’t can be called UNIX-like or UNIX system-like. The group exists mostly to enforce standards. The UNIX trademark is currently owned by The Open Group, which is made up of members from a bunch of different companies like HP, IBM, NEC, Hitachi, Fujitsu, and even the US Department of Defense and NASA. Can Linux stand on its own without UNIX? Not really - although I’m sure it could be argued differently much in the same way that Windows doesn’t actually rely on DOS anymore even though DOS provided the initial foundation for Windows. Torvalds lent his first name to Linux by swiftly and deftly replacing the S with an X, so it could be argued that Linux, proper, was officially born in the early nineties.Ĭan UNIX stand on its own without Linux? Yes. The GNU operating system was announced in 1983 by Richard Stallman and started in 1984, while the Linux kernel came about in 1991 courtesy of Linus Torvalds. Linux came about in either 1983 or 1984 or 1991, depending upon who’s holding the knife. It was developed back in 1969 by AT&T employees working at Bell Labs.

Let’s just say that BSD, Bawls, and 21-inch CRT monitors don’t mix. It saved my ass back in ’99 but that’s another story for another time. If you’re no more interested in the differences between UNIX and Linux, then the simple UNIX is to DOS as Linux is to Windows phrase should be enough to keep you from getting knifed at a LAN party. That’s a grossly oversimplified answer to a complex question and I’ll no doubt get flamed by some of the more advanced UNIX and/or Linux users out there but in the interest of keeping things simple, let’s go with the above italicized sentence.