From: fernande AT internet1 DOT net
Message-ID: <39FC7536.BC498889@internet1.net>
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 14:06:30 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: opendos AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Overclocking, Linux issues: was Re: About Micro$quash...
References: <20001026 DOT 023925 DOT -12411 DOT 0 DOT domanspc AT juno DOT com> <006801c03f76$98079b20$11fea8c0 AT dell> <001201c041bf$4700af00$6f1e0404 AT dbcooper>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: opendos AT delorie DOT com



Patrick Moran wrote:

They were probably aliased.  When I had an account at Western Michigan
University, they had quite a few VMS commands alised to familar DOS like
commands.

> The neat thing I liked about VMS was that you
> could just type in the first few unique characters of a command and execute
> it without typing the whole command. 

I have never heard of different versions of Unix called clones.  Unix is
bigger than one brand.  I have heard Linux called a Unix clone.  If I
remember what I read, Bell Labs (AT&T) code was the basis for all Unix
and has been modified by many.... in a nut shell.

> I read somewhere that Bell Labs released UNIX in 1976. Bell Labs developed
> the UNIX operating system. I think what he was ealking about is ATT SYSTEM V
> UNIX, SCO UNIX, MS XENIX, QNX and many other such UNIX like OSes. These are
> not really clones as you stated but neither are IBM PC clones, but this is
> the term generally used. Actually when you get down to it, the same is true
> for the many different DOSes available for the IBM PC. They could all be
> called clones of DOS. The only real difference between them are the kernels.
> The same is true for so-called UNIX clones such as SCO, QNX, LINUX, BSD, and
> XENIX to name just a few. In fact SCO (Santa Cruze Operating system) has
> made changes in thier kernel to be able to run Linux apps and software.

Chad Fernandez
Michigan, USA