J Sloan wrote:
OTOH, those who know the unix nature know full well that linux and bsd are certainly unix.
Get it? "UNIX" (TM) != unix
Heh, of definitions.. pointless waste of time ;-) What i ment to say was that while Linux was based on the concepts of Mimix (which in turn was based on UNIX System V, which was derived from UNIX Time-Sharing-System Seventh Fifth Edition), it is an 'alike' implimentation and not 'Unix' internally... just as linux is 'almost posix compliant' but not 'posix'. The internals that make linux != unix. (thus my statement that BSD is more 'unix' then linux since it does share a lot of the internal concepts and workings). Thus also my statement on comparing OS/2 and windows, since they come from the same tree (when ibm & ms started that project) and still share some internals.
owell, i agree 'unix' by now has become a pop-art term for anything that looks, feels or smells like 'UNIX' type systems, thus almost become interchangable, however it's worth remebering that linux is 'only' a unix-alike and not a re-implimentation of unix.
