Thread View: comp.os.mach
3 messages
3 total messages
Started by Jeff Henshaw
Sat, 12 Dec 1992 00:02
Re: Mach vs. NT?
Author: Jeff Henshaw
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 00:02
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 00:02
32 lines
1624 bytes
1624 bytes
In article <Bz2LFA.7qM@eis.calstate.edu>,
cwilder@eis.calstate.edu (Charlotte Wilder) writes...
| reissell@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Juhani Reissell) writes:
| > Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I had the impression that Windows NT
| > was at least loosely based on mach. The meaning of this is a bit vague
| > to me, maybe it just means that NT is a microkernel based OS? I too
| > would like some poijnters on this.
|
| I don't know if NT is "loosely" based on Mach, but I do know that NT will
| be a microkernel based operating system.
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
to deal with specific modes of operation. For example, Win32
governs, while subsystems to handle Win16 (windows 3.x) apps,
OS/2 1.x character-mode apps, and POSIX apps are handled by
their respective subsystem.
A book entitled _Inside_Windows_NT_ is available at bookstores
and covers many of the NT concepts pretty well. Some may want
to have a look at it.
, |
|/\
______/| eff__/| / enshaw______________________________
|/ \/
/| jhenshaw@microsoft.com
\| not a microsoft spokesperson
Re: Mach vs. NT?
Author: Mark Garrett Internet: mark Phon...
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 07:58
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 07:58
52 lines
2002 bytes
2002 bytes
From article <1992Dec12.000250.14799@microsoft.com>, by jhenshaw@microsoft.com (Jeff Henshaw): > > In article <Bz2LFA.7qM@eis.calstate.edu>, > cwilder@eis.calstate.edu (Charlotte Wilder) writes... > | > | I don't know if NT is "loosely" based on Mach, but I do know that NT will > | be a microkernel based operating system. > > 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 Excuse my flames that are about to follow. WindowsNT is based on the Mach3.0 micro kernel!!!!!!!! I total pissed off that you can all sit there talking volumes about Windows NT vs Mach, and not one of you have a clue that :- 1. such a discussion is null and void since mach is not an operating system, and WindowNT is! 2. even worse, mach is part of windowsNT I'd suggest that you :- 1. Go and do some reading before hitting the keyboard with replies 2. Don't run about make replies unless you actual have some even small idea about the subject. No wonder the network suffers so much noise!!!! No wonder we are suffering bandwidth problems. Flame off! Cheers Mark :) ps. I just noticed that one of you ~~@#####rrrr #icks if from microsoft.com what is the world coming too, they don't even know their own product ??? Oh well... -- Mark Garrett Internet: mark@arvak.une.edu.au Phone: +61 66 20 3859 University of New England, Northern Rivers, Lismore NSW Australia.
Re: Mach vs. NT?
Author: gip2 course
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 10:33
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 10:33
31 lines
1618 bytes
1618 bytes
In <BzG3Gw.1s6@alsvid.une.edu.au> mark@alsvid.une.edu.au (Mark Garrett Internet: mark@arvak.une.edu.au Phone: +61 66 20 3859) writes: >From article <1992Dec12.000250.14799@microsoft.com>, by jhenshaw@microsoft.com (Jeff Henshaw): >> >> In article <Bz2LFA.7qM@eis.calstate.edu>, >> cwilder@eis.calstate.edu (Charlotte Wilder) writes... >> | >> | I don't know if NT is "loosely" based on Mach, but I do know that NT will >> | be a microkernel based operating system. >> >> 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!!!!!!!! Any references? > 1. such a discussion is null and void since mach is not an > operating system, and WindowNT is! Mach is an operating system, but not a 'complete' OS. I.e. it doesn't do everything but only several things. > 2. even worse, mach is part of windowsNT Again, can you give any proof? > 1. Go and do some reading before hitting the keyboard with replies Read what?
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads