Subj : Re: Open Source Leaving Microsoft Sitting on the Fence? To : comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux From : rsteiner Date : Fri Jul 23 2004 09:58 pm Here in comp.os.linux.misc, swift@TheWorld.com (Peter Lu) spake unto us, saying: >In article , >Linønut wrote: > >>MS has you snookered into thinking Windows is more than one platform. > >Interesting. Do you think the various Linux distributions are different >platforms, then? One could perhaps argue that Linux kernels running on multiple hardware platforms are in fact different platforms (since the software which is running on them isn't binary-compatible between processors). Of course, one can also argue that they aren't. It all depends on one's definition of a "platform"... >Windows does have 2 families, the 9x/Me and NT/2k/Xp ones. They trade >off backward-compatibility (DOS) support against system protection. Actually, system protection and DOS compatibility can exist together. The system I'm using here (OS/2 Warp 4) has provided evidence of that for over ten years, as have products like VMWare and Virtual PC. The line you cite is Microsoft's excuse for not making Windows 95 and its ilk a real 32-bit operating system, choosing instead to take the easy (and profitable) road, but it wasn't a hard requirement. >But the substantial part of the Win32 API works on both families, >which is a tribute to good organization. The Linux kernel API works well on both families as well, and it takes things one better: one can compile such software on an x86 PC, a older 68k Mac, a newer PowerPC Mac, and a Sparc box, and it will run on all four of them. Windows isn't so flexible... -- -Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Eden Prairie, MN OS/2 + eCS + Linux + Win95 + DOS + PC/GEOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven! Applications analyst/designer/developer (14 yrs) seeking employment. See web site above for resume/CV and background. .