>Actually, I like them both for what they are. CP/M is nice because it is
>simple. No libraries, no shared files, all files that are needed for an
>application are usually in one directory and not strewn across the
>directory structure. (But, it doesn't TCP/IP. DAMN!)
>
>Linux on the other hand is GREAT for it's multi-user, multi-tasking and
>networking abilities! I love every one of my Linux boxes! But, it is a
>flavor of Unix and therefore has endless numbers of library files (that
>somehow are never the right version) and an application's needed support
>files are strewn across 50 different directories.
You make the "real world" sound like it's a competition between
Microsoft products and Unix-derived products. In reality, there
are many OS's out there which fall into neither category and are
more than capable (and in all cases more capable than Unix-like
or Microsoft OS's) to do the real-world jobs that they do. And many
of these OS's run quite nicely on classic hardware, to boot.
Anyone who thinks that the OS issue is entirely limited to Unix-alikes vs
Microsoft vs CP/M is putting on a very limiting set of blinders as to
what is out there doing the real work in banks, offices, factories,
labs, and hospitals.
--
Tim Shoppa Email: shoppa_at_trailing-edge.com
Trailing Edge Technology WWW: http://www.trailing-edge.com/
7328 Bradley Blvd Voice: 301-767-5917
Bethesda, MD, USA 20817 Fax: 301-767-5927
Received on Tue Mar 09 1999 - 10:38:38 GMT