Re: [SLE] Not So Fast: Linux on the Desktop
From: qrn_Hansen?= (orn.hansen_at_swipnet.se)
Date: 06/14/04
- Previous message: C Hamel: "Re: [SLE] Not So Fast: Linux on the Desktop"
- In reply to: Mike McMullin: "Re: [SLE] Not So Fast: Linux on the Desktop"
- Next in thread: John Andersen: "Re: [SLE] Not So Fast: Linux on the Desktop"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: suse-linux-e@suse.com Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 14:29:55 +0200
söndag 13 juni 2004 16:28 skrev Mike McMullin:
>
> Maybe they shouldn't have canned Xenix, but developed it. Then there
> would be a world wide Unix clone available, but I doubt that it would
> adhere to standards for too long if ever.
>
Yeah, going down to Xenix I always understood it to be a MS baby that got
canned until I read it was a SCO baby. Xenix never adhered to standards,
from the start ... but it was quite nice, as a cheap Unix clone. And at that
time, begin able to do ALT-Fn to get new console screens was a nice feature
in the days when there was no X, at least not for Xenix.
> Mike
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
- Previous message: C Hamel: "Re: [SLE] Not So Fast: Linux on the Desktop"
- In reply to: Mike McMullin: "Re: [SLE] Not So Fast: Linux on the Desktop"
- Next in thread: John Andersen: "Re: [SLE] Not So Fast: Linux on the Desktop"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]