Re: Mach vs. NT

Article View: comp.os.mach

Article #1040

#1040

From: Jeff Henshaw
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 20:32

42 lines
1385 bytes

Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: Re: Mach vs. NT
Distribution: world
Organization: Microsoft Corporation


In <BzG3Gw.1s6@alsvid.une.edu.au>,
mark@alsvid.une.edu.au (Mark Garrett) writes...

| From article <1992Dec12.000250.14799@microsoft.com>, 
| by jhenshaw@microsoft.com (Jeff Henshaw):
| > 
| > I think it would be safer to say that NT is "loosely based on
| > Mach concepts" since some of the ideas (like a microkernel
| > architecture) carry over.  NT also has a variety of subsystems
|
|	WindowsNT is based on the Mach3.0 micro kernel!!!!!!!!

...

|
|	2. even worse, mach is part of windowsNT 

...

|	1. Go and do some reading before hitting the keyboard with replies
|


I've done some reading.  I've read the sources for
both Mach and NT.

Is there anything else you'd suggest I read before
"hitting the keyboard with replies?"


       ,       |
               |/\
______/| eff__/| / enshaw______________________________
       |/        \/
      /|                         jhenshaw@microsoft.com 
      \|                   not a microsoft spokesperson

Technical Details

Message-ID: <1992Dec22.203221.20840@microsoft.com>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!microsoft!hexnut!jhenshaw

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!microsoft!hexnut!jhenshaw
From: jhenshaw@microsoft.com (Jeff Henshaw)
Subject: Re: Mach vs. NT
Message-ID: <1992Dec22.203221.20840@microsoft.com>
Date: 22 Dec 92 20:32:21 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation
Lines: 43