What was wrong with Unix in the past? Why a "bad" guy?

John



--- William Chops Westfield <westfw@mac.com> wrote:

> 
> On Jan 11, 2006, at 2:24 PM, Peter wrote:
> >> [multicast vs broadcast, and "broadcast storms."]
> > Ok, my confusion. Point taken wrt. Unix being
> broken ;-) When was
> > that and which *nix was broken ?
> 
> Mid to late 1980s.  It was 4.2BSD that had "odd"
> ideas about
> internet addresses and such; that was about the only
> network-aware
> unix that existed at the time, and everyone who
> could was copying
> their network code.   I was working at Stanford at
> the
> time, and the big offenders as far as machines went
> were the early
> SUN workstations, which were found there in
> abundance.  (SUN being
> a Stanford spinoff...)
> 
> It was about that time that the unix-haters mailing
> list was
> active, mainly holding mainframe and lisp machine
> people who
> were decrying the unix philosophy of ... ignoring
> other philosophies.
> It was/is very disorienting that unix is now "the
> good guy."
> 
> BillW
> -- 
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist