🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.arch
Article #10756

Re: <None> (Should be Open Systems, bloody NEWS system...)

#10756
From: Peter Mayne
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 01:14
53 lines
2845 bytes
In article <id.2K0W.G37@ferranti.com>, peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva) writes:

>You seem to have a strong opinion about this, so could you explain to me
>precisely how the UNIX API is lacking, and what specific features of NT
>would be impossible under a UNIX API.

Which UNIX API? (Here we go again. :-)
Asynchronous I/O.
Waiting for multiple synchronisation objects.
ACLs on objects.
Quotas.

>Why did Microsoft have to create
>a completely new API from scratch, and implement it in such a way that
>programs using it are entirely insulated from their UNIX API environment
>(POSIX shell)?

Which new API? POSIX 1003.1, which is a standard and therefore hardly new?
1003.1 is an API standard, not a shell standard.

>
>Well for UNIX, where access to virtually all system resources is provided
>through the filestore, I would agree. But NT has half a dozen different
>mechanisms for interacting with the system... how can multiuser security
>be managed if it only protects a minor part of the system?

All interactions with the NT kernel go through the object manager, and hence
through the security subsystem.

>Since OS/2 and NT have virtually the same level of backwards-compatibility
>with DOS, how do you make out that the OS/2 approach is any way diferent?

NT uses the protected subsystem approach made popular by Mach. OS/2 provides
a DOS API, but the NT kernel knows nothing about DOS, since DOS (and OS/2, and
POSIX, and...) APIs are provided by the subsystems.

>I'm sorry, but you seem to be discussing a completely different set of
>software packages than I'm familiar with or have been discussed in the
>media.
>-- 
>Peter da Silva                                            `-_-'
>Ferranti International Controls Corporation                'U` 
>Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012 USA
>+1 713 274 5180                            "Zure otsoa besarkatu al duzu gaur?"

We seem to have moved into software architecture. :-)

PJDM
--
Peter Mayne                     | My statements, not Digital's.
Digital Equipment Corporation   |
Canberra, ACT, Australia        | "AXP!": Bill the Cat
Technical Details
Message-ID: <1992Dec22.011414.21727@ryn.mro4.dec.com>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!howland.reston.ans.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!sdd.hp.com!decwrl!deccrl!news.crl.dec.com!news!nntpd.lkg.dec.com!ryn.mro4.dec.com!news
References: <jdd.724022716@cdf.toronto.edu> <1992Dec14.191335.2834@lsl.co.uk> <BzGL07.2wK@dscomsa.desy.de> <id.2K0W.G37@ferranti.com>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!howland.reston.ans.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!sdd.hp.com!decwrl!deccrl!news.crl.dec.com!news!nntpd.lkg.dec.com!ryn.mro4.dec.com!news
From: pjdm@chmeee.enet.dec.com (Peter Mayne)
Subject: Re: <None> (Should be Open Systems, bloody NEWS system...)
Message-ID: <1992Dec22.011414.21727@ryn.mro4.dec.com>
Lines: 54
Sender: news@ryn.mro4.dec.com (USENET News System)
Reply-To: Peter.Mayne@cao.mts.dec.com
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
References: <jdd.724022716@cdf.toronto.edu> <1992Dec14.191335.2834@lsl.co.uk> <BzGL07.2wK@dscomsa.desy.de> <id.2K0W.G37@ferranti.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 01:14:14 GMT