"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:md5hljdbugn0ua9h6a17m23bflmb7tm2r3@4ax.com...
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>> I'm not hiding that I'm aware of the enemies, if that's what you're
>>> saying.
>>
>>The fact that you think of them AS "enemies" is what gives you away.
>
>
> Microsoft doesn't hire programmers who misunderstand the game, Apple
> does.

Ah, so that's your problem.. Apple wouldn't hire you because you
misunderstood the game.

"Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in message
news:vja6ul$142bm$2@dont-email.me...
> On 2024-12-10 11:27, Joel wrote:
>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> I'm not hiding that I'm aware of the enemies, if that's what you're
>>>> saying.
>>>
>>> The fact that you think of them AS "enemies" is what gives you away.
>>
>>
>> Microsoft doesn't hire programmers who misunderstand the game, Apple
>> does.
>
> Another statement intended to avoid actual meaning.

I don't now. Sounds like Joel is pissed because he couldn't get a job with
Apple because he doesn't understand what Apple is doing.

... but it could be he's just not much of a programmer either. I mean if his
coding skills are no better than his hardware skills, why would anyone hire
him?

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ca8hljla2uuualcmvo83e7emr33tvvf28b@4ax.com...
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> I'm not hiding that I'm aware of the enemies, if that's what you're
>>>>> saying.
>>>>
>>>> The fact that you think of them AS "enemies" is what gives you away.
>>>
>>> Microsoft doesn't hire programmers who misunderstand the game, Apple
>>> does.
>>
>>Another statement intended to avoid actual meaning.
>
>
> Why doesn't Apple have its own kernel?

It does. UNX

Yet further evidence that Joel is just a poser.

"Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in message
news:vja7u9$142gg$2@dont-email.me...
> On 2024-12-10 12:15, Joel wrote:
>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> I'm not hiding that I'm aware of the enemies, if that's what you're
>>>>>> saying.
>>>>>
>>>>> The fact that you think of them AS "enemies" is what gives you away.
>>>>
>>>> Microsoft doesn't hire programmers who misunderstand the game, Apple
>>>> does.
>>>
>>> Another statement intended to avoid actual meaning.
>>
>>
>> Why doesn't Apple have its own kernel?
>>
>
> Before you ask "why doesn't"...
>
> ...you should really ask "does".
>
> As in "Does Apple have its own kernel?"
>
> You should go out and answer that for yourself.

At this point.. it would be to little to late to recover from his assertions
as being a computer elite.

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:qhahlj5b5ltf1qfn94g29gt9ibi93f683b@4ax.com...
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>> Why doesn't Apple have its own kernel?
>>
>>Before you ask "why doesn't"...
>>
>>...you should really ask "does".
>>
>>As in "Does Apple have its own kernel?"
>>
>>You should go out and answer that for yourself.
>
>
> So Mach is entirely Apple's own creation?

Why are you asking him? Are you saying you don't know?

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:i2chljhe455u39p00mkfgjih8kipl035na@4ax.com...
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> Why doesn't Apple have its own kernel?
>>>>
>>>> Before you ask "why doesn't"...
>>>>
>>>> ...you should really ask "does".
>>>>
>>>> As in "Does Apple have its own kernel?"
>>>>
>>>> You should go out and answer that for yourself.
>>>
>>> So Mach is entirely Apple's own creation?
>>Apple doesn't use the Mac kernel.
>>
>>Try again.
>
>
> Your typo of "Mac" is funny, in that it would mean Apple's Mac
> computers don't use *their own* kernel, but yes the macOS kernel is
> derivative of Mach:
>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach_(kernel)
>
> Mach's derivatives are the basis of the operating system kernel in GNU
> Hurd and of Apple's XNU kernel used in macOS, iOS, iPadOS, tvOS, and
> watchOS.

Just like virtually all computer operating systems are a derivatives of
Unix?

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:apfhljtmag32kqlvrc29fc7i95n163ka33@4ax.com...
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach_(kernel)
>>>
>>> Mach's derivatives are the basis of the operating system kernel in GNU
>>> Hurd and of Apple's XNU kernel used in macOS, iOS, iPadOS, tvOS, and
>>> watchOS.
>>And XNU therefore isn't Mach and Mach is NOT the kernel that Apple uses.
>
>
> Uh huh.
>
>
>>So the answer is to the question, "Does Apple have its own kernel?"...
>>
>>...is:
>>
>>Yes. Apple uses a kernel called XNU that they developed from Mach and
>>other sources with huge amounts of their own work as well.
>>
>>Now, here's a question for you:
>>
>>Why is it even important which kernel Apple uses?
>
>
> They didn't build it from scratch, like Winblows NT did.

You think Windows NT was written totally from scratch? LMAO..

... some 'elite' you are turning out to be.

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:asahljdb194sgc3t8bgm858bqgnuhs86qb@4ax.com...
> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>>On 12/10/24 12:46 PM, Joel wrote:
>>> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>>>> On 12/10/24 11:01 AM, Joel wrote:
>>>>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rise above Apple's AirTag scheme.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are Tiles a "scheme"?
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't know what that is.
>>>>
>>>> <https://www.tile.com>
>>>>
>>>> Tiles are a bluetooth tracker 'fob' which has been on the market
>>>> for 3x longer than Apple's Airtags (10 years vs 3 years).
>>>
>>> Ludicrous product, really, although potentially useful.
>>
>>Hardly ludicrous at all: you've merely not grokked its utility.
>
>
> Grokked, maybe, understood definitely not. I see the occasional uses
> of them, but not to the extent they're being produced.

(Joel admitting he doesn't understand the whole market/supply thing)

They are being produced to that extent because the market demand supports
that extent.

"Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in message
news:vjaad8$14nas$3@dont-email.me...
> On 2024-12-10 13:00, Joel wrote:
>> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>>> On 12/10/24 12:46 PM, Joel wrote:
>>>> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 12/10/24 11:01 AM, Joel wrote:
>>>>>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Rise above Apple's AirTag scheme.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Are Tiles a "scheme"?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't know what that is.
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://www.tile.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tiles are a bluetooth tracker 'fob' which has been on the market
>>>>> for 3x longer than Apple's Airtags (10 years vs 3 years).
>>>>
>>>> Ludicrous product, really, although potentially useful.
>>>
>>> Hardly ludicrous at all: you've merely not grokked its utility.
>>
>>
>> Grokked, maybe, understood definitely not. I see the occasional uses
>> of them, but not to the extent they're being produced.
>
> So your claim is that you don't see a small object, which--for many of its
> use cases--should be concealed, proves that they're being bought but not
> used?
>
> Really?
>
> Look up the definition of "anecdotal".

I was thinking more of supply and demand.. but that works as well.

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:08ghlj9vrrr0tfekqpjm8jt72ttb5h152r@4ax.com...
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>> <https://www.tile.com>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Tiles are a bluetooth tracker 'fob' which has been on the market
>>>>>>>> for 3x longer than Apple's Airtags (10 years vs 3 years).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ludicrous product, really, although potentially useful.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hardly ludicrous at all: you've merely not grokked its utility.
>>>>>
>>>>> Grokked, maybe, understood definitely not. I see the occasional uses
>>>>> of them, but not to the extent they're being produced.
>>>>
>>>> So your claim is that you don't see a small object, which--for many of
>>>> its use cases--should be concealed, proves that they're being bought
>>>> but
>>>> not used?
>>>>
>>>> Really?
>>>>
>>>> Look up the definition of "anecdotal".
>>>
>>> OK, but why are you around all these organized thieves with your
>>> valuable gear, that would necessitate the AirTag? It's weird.
>>Why do you imagine that they're "organized thieves"?
>>
>>Do you agree that people lose/misplace things?
>>
>>Yes or no.
>>
>>Do you agree that airlines mishandle and/or lose checked bags?
>>
>>Yes or no.
>>
>>Do you agree that many people have valuable items stolen?
>>
>>Yes or no.
>
>
> Some travelers with particularly valuable luggage will want them, I
> get. The way Apple is spewing them to the public is weird.

What's weird about Apply supplying the demand?

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:mshhljpk8s0e7ih1rdpk5e4b70tad5jgf8@4ax.com...
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> why are you around all these organized thieves with your
>>>>> valuable gear, that would necessitate the AirTag? It's weird.
>>>> Why do you imagine that they're "organized thieves"?
>>>>
>>>> Do you agree that people lose/misplace things?
>>>>
>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>
>>>> Do you agree that airlines mishandle and/or lose checked bags?
>>>>
>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>
>>>> Do you agree that many people have valuable items stolen?
>>>>
>>>> Yes or no.
>>>
>>> Some travelers with particularly valuable luggage will want them, I
>>> get. The way Apple is spewing them to the public is weird.
>>
>>Oh, I see. Your elitism knows no bounds.
>>
>>"the public" can't have things they think are valuable.
>>
>>Got it.
>
>
> My "elitism", eh?

Well, you seem to feel you get to decide what other people should be able to
buy.

> Not Apple's?

They created a product that people want and are supplying the demand for
that product. I fail to see how that's an issue.

> What is the end game, here?

Probably the same as that of any corporation.

> How will
> the value of all these AirTags be realized?

By the use people put them to.

"Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in message
news:vjcn1m$1llu4$4@dont-email.me...
> On 2024-12-10 11:17, Scout wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>> "Apple is making these things like name tags" means... ...what?
>>>>>
>>>>> They want you to purchase them like they were stickers with a written
>>>>> name.
>>>>
>>>> And from what do you get that?
>>>>
>>>> They're clearly NOT "stickers with a written name", so why do you think
>>>> that would be?
>>>
>>>
>>> It meant that Apple is producing them such that they could be just
>>> ubiquitous.
>>
>> I think most companies want that for their products.
>>
>> So why do you think it's wrong for Apple to want that?
>>
>>
>>
>
> He seems to think that Apple's customers are so brainwashed that they'll
> just be buying the as collector's items.

Hmmmm.. Maybe Apple should start a 'secret' cooperation that doesn't show up
on paper as connected to Apple, and they simply sell repackaged apple
produces as 'rip offs' of apple products so that all the apple haters will
buy their apple products from them. They can even put on regular show
lawsuits where Apple claims the other company copied their designs and such,
only to find out that the chips weren't made with the apple logo or some
other silly excuse... Then people can buy their AirTags from that company
thinking they are sticking it to Apple, while Apple laughs all the way to
the bank.

I mean if there are enough people like Joel out there.. that could be
profitable for Apple

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:11pjljpu5c4vlva63scegivcu7ebfacncb@4ax.com...
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>He [JWC] seems to think that Apple's customers are so brainwashed that
>>they'll
>>just be buying the[m, AirTags] as collector's items.
>
>
> Not quite, but it would amount to that, you'd have piles of unused
> tags.

And yet, there is no evidence of these piles of unused tags you claim.

However, let's say that is the case.. that just hurts Apple, and I'm sure
you would like to see that.

"Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in message
news:vjahmv$165je$2@dont-email.me...
> On 2024-12-10 15:00, Joel wrote:
>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> why are you around all these organized thieves with your
>>>>>> valuable gear, that would necessitate the AirTag? It's weird.
>>>>> Why do you imagine that they're "organized thieves"?
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you agree that people lose/misplace things?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you agree that airlines mishandle and/or lose checked bags?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you agree that many people have valuable items stolen?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>
>>>> Some travelers with particularly valuable luggage will want them, I
>>>> get. The way Apple is spewing them to the public is weird.
>>>
>>> Oh, I see. Your elitism knows no bounds.
>>>
>>> "the public" can't have things they think are valuable.
>>>
>>> Got it.
>>
>>
>> My "elitism", eh? Not Apple's? What is the end game, here? How will
>> the value of all these AirTags be realized?
>
> In belongings not lost, but found.
>
> In belongings not stolen and gone, but recovered.
>
> The "end game" for Apple is selling something many, many, MANY people find
> useful.
>
> And yes: YOUR elitism.
>
> According to you, "the public" can't have anything worth the expense of
> safeguarding.

Well if he can't have it.. then no one should.... I mean isn't that the
typical mindset of people like Joel?

On 2024-12-11, Scout <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>
>
> "Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:l7fhljpebkiqsiggkiea52a8fse06b6cp2@4ax.com...
>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Everything is finite except God.
>>>>>
>>>>> You can't answer straight. Got it.
>>>>>
>>>>> But that's still a "yes", so:
>>>>>
>>>>> Did you claim that the reason you think Apple is "quirky" was because
>>>>> their "hardware options are finite."?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>
>>>> It's not because they're finite but because they're *so* *quirkily*
>>>> finite.
>>>
>>>That's not what you said.
>>>
>>>What a shocker that you're changing your argument.
>>>
>>>So, what is, "quirkily* finite." supposed to mean?
>>
>>
>> If you want to run macOS, you have to have Apple hardware. The
>> options for such are limited.
>
> So? Are you telling us your cell phone is "quirky"?
>
> Further having an O/S matched to hardware means the incompatibilities and
> other issues are basically eliminated. The OS can be optimized for the
> hardware and the hardware can be optimized for the software.
>
> I don't see how either of those are a significant down side to someone
> looking to increased performance and higher reliability.
>
> Heck, I bet if you had an apple system you would never have had the issue
> with your monitor requiring you to buy additional hardware to correct.
>
> Seems like the computer that is "quirky" is yours.. as it has compatibility
> issues.
>
>
The biggest problem with Android phones is that they come pre-loaded with bloatware and adware some of which can
be difficult if not impossible to remove
You have to shop carefully to choose a phone with minimal bloatware.

--
pothead

All about snit read below. Links courtesy of Ron:

Example of Snit trolling in real time:

<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.os.linux.advocacy/c/biFilzgCcVg/m/eUcNGw6lP7UJ>

All about the snit troll:

<https://web.archive.org/web/20181028000459/http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/snit.html>
<https://web.archive.org/web/20190529043314/http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitlist.html>
<https://web.archive.org/web/20190529062255/http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitLieMethods.html>

On 2024-12-14 11:18, Howie Feltersnatch wrote:
> On 11 Dec 2024, "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> posted
> some news:vjcss0$1n5sn$6@dont-email.me:
>
>>
>>
>> "Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:lcahlj9gqq3i2tn8vh594or3tmm3haevp0@4ax.com...
>>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Dell offers a plethora of options that Apple fails to match,
>>>>> although with the MacBook line they're tolerable, and the mini/Studio
>>>>> line is usable.
>>>> And that is a difference of DEGREE.
>>>>
>>>> Let's try this one question at a time.
>>>>
>>>> Are the options that Dell offers "finite"?
>>>>
>>>> Yes or no.
>>>
>>>
>>> Everything is finite except God.
>>
>> We'll take that as a yes.
>>
>> So all you have is a difference of degree as Alan points out, which is
>> hardly the failing you seem to assert it is.
>
> Apple still sucks dick.
>

Because... ...why?

On 2024-12-14 11:53, Howie Feltersnatch wrote:
> On 11 Dec 2024, pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> posted some
> news:vjctev$1n7b7$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> On 2024-12-11, Scout <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:l7fhljpebkiqsiggkiea52a8fse06b6cp2@4ax.com...
>>>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>> Everything is finite except God.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You can't answer straight. Got it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But that's still a "yes", so:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Did you claim that the reason you think Apple is "quirky" was
>>>>>>> because their "hardware options are finite."?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's not because they're finite but because they're *so*
>>>>>> *quirkily* finite.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's not what you said.
>>>>>
>>>>> What a shocker that you're changing your argument.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, what is, "quirkily* finite." supposed to mean?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you want to run macOS, you have to have Apple hardware. The
>>>> options for such are limited.
>>>
>>> So? Are you telling us your cell phone is "quirky"?
>>>
>>> Further having an O/S matched to hardware means the incompatibilities
>>> and other issues are basically eliminated. The OS can be optimized
>>> for the hardware and the hardware can be optimized for the software.
>>>
>>> I don't see how either of those are a significant down side to
>>> someone looking to increased performance and higher reliability.
>>>
>>> Heck, I bet if you had an apple system you would never have had the
>>> issue with your monitor requiring you to buy additional hardware to
>>> correct.
>>>
>>> Seems like the computer that is "quirky" is yours.. as it has
>>> compatibility issues.
>>>
>>>
>> The biggest problem with Android phones is that they come pre-loaded
>> with bloatware and adware some of which can be difficult if not
>> impossible to remove You have to shop carefully to choose a phone with
>> minimal bloatware.
>
> Apple is worse and they intentionally make it difficult to see what is
> actually open and running.
>

1. "Apple is worse" is an incomplete thought. "Worse" than what?

2. How do you find out what is "open and running" on your system? I find
it very easy to see what is open and running on my Mac.

"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:apfhljtmag32kqlvrc29fc7i95n163ka33@4ax.com...
>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Why is it even important which kernel Apple uses?
>>
>> They didn't build it from scratch, like Winblows NT did.
>
>You think Windows NT was written totally from scratch? LMAO..
>
>.. some 'elite' you are turning out to be.

I don't think Windows NT 3.x began from scratch, I *know* it did. You
are an idiot.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

>Sounds like Joel is pissed because he couldn't get a job with
>Apple because he doesn't understand what Apple is doing.
>
>.. but it could be he's just not much of a programmer either. I mean if his
>coding skills are no better than his hardware skills, why would anyone hire
>him?

I would need to learn more about programming to become a hired
developer in commercial software - I am capable of doing that without
formal education, but having such does give one credentials. That
having been said, I use my computer skills for hardware assembly and
software management, instead of programming.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 2025-01-02 11:40, Joel wrote:
> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>> "Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:apfhljtmag32kqlvrc29fc7i95n163ka33@4ax.com...
>>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Why is it even important which kernel Apple uses?
>>>
>>> They didn't build it from scratch, like Winblows NT did.
>>
>> You think Windows NT was written totally from scratch? LMAO..
>>
>> .. some 'elite' you are turning out to be.
>
>
> I don't think Windows NT 3.x began from scratch, I *know* it did. You
> are an idiot.
>

Reusing concepts from VMS means it wasn't really written "from scratch".

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>On 2025-01-02 11:40, Joel wrote:
>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>> "Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:apfhljtmag32kqlvrc29fc7i95n163ka33@4ax.com...
>>>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Why is it even important which kernel Apple uses?
>>>>
>>>> They didn't build it from scratch, like Winblows NT did.
>>>
>>> You think Windows NT was written totally from scratch? LMAO..
>>>
>>> .. some 'elite' you are turning out to be.
>>
>> I don't think Windows NT 3.x began from scratch, I *know* it did. You
>> are an idiot.
>
>Reusing concepts from VMS means it wasn't really written "from scratch".

"Concepts" != "code", *doofus*.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 2025-01-02 16:51, Joel wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>> On 2025-01-02 14:05, Joel wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think Windows NT 3.x began from scratch, I *know* it did. You
>>>>> are an idiot.
>>>>
>>>> Reusing concepts from VMS means it wasn't really written "from scratch".
>>>
>>> "Concepts" != "code", *doofus*.
>>
>> So if I write a novel about a Canadian secret agent with a "sanction to
>> kill"...
>>
>> ...Ian Fleming's estate won't come around?
>
>
> Yeah. It's your new language, your new creation. Just as
> Windows NT's core components are, they are obviously going to emulate
> what another comparable OS has done, this is of course why it's so
> easy to have literal interoperability with the OSes, I'm using
> Forte Agent under Linux without a VM of Windows, not only VMS but Unix
> isn't so different from NT. This is why I used to be a Winblows
> fanboy, myself, when I came to COLA. I liked having Windows 10 and 11
> on my current machine, at first, but time marches on, and Linux
> rescues one from bloat damnation.
They completely copied VMS, dude!

That's a fact. Unix is completely different from both VMS and Windows NT.

And interoperability was in no way a part of why they did it.

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

>>>>>> I don't think Windows NT 3.x began from scratch, I *know* it did. You
>>>>>> are an idiot.
>>>>>
>>>>> Reusing concepts from VMS means it wasn't really written "from scratch".
>>>>
>>>> "Concepts" != "code", *doofus*.
>>>
>>> So if I write a novel about a Canadian secret agent with a "sanction to
>>> kill"...
>>>
>>> ...Ian Fleming's estate won't come around?
>>
>> Yeah. It's your new language, your new creation. Just as
>> Windows NT's core components are, they are obviously going to emulate
>> what another comparable OS has done, this is of course why it's so
>> easy to have literal interoperability with the OSes, I'm using
>> Forte Agent under Linux without a VM of Windows, not only VMS but Unix
>> isn't so different from NT. This is why I used to be a Winblows
>> fanboy, myself, when I came to COLA. I liked having Windows 10 and 11
>> on my current machine, at first, but time marches on, and Linux
>> rescues one from bloat damnation.
>They completely copied VMS, dude!
>
>That's a fact. Unix is completely different from both VMS and Windows NT.
>
>And interoperability was in no way a part of why they did it.

None of that contradicts my point, doofus.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 2025-01-02 18:23, Joel wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>>> I don't think Windows NT 3.x began from scratch, I *know* it did. You
>>>>>>> are an idiot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Reusing concepts from VMS means it wasn't really written "from scratch".
>>>>>
>>>>> "Concepts" != "code", *doofus*.
>>>>
>>>> So if I write a novel about a Canadian secret agent with a "sanction to
>>>> kill"...
>>>>
>>>> ...Ian Fleming's estate won't come around?
>>>
>>> Yeah. It's your new language, your new creation. Just as
>>> Windows NT's core components are, they are obviously going to emulate
>>> what another comparable OS has done, this is of course why it's so
>>> easy to have literal interoperability with the OSes, I'm using
>>> Forte Agent under Linux without a VM of Windows, not only VMS but Unix
>>> isn't so different from NT. This is why I used to be a Winblows
>>> fanboy, myself, when I came to COLA. I liked having Windows 10 and 11
>>> on my current machine, at first, but time marches on, and Linux
>>> rescues one from bloat damnation.
>> They completely copied VMS, dude!
>>
>> That's a fact. Unix is completely different from both VMS and Windows NT.
>>
>> And interoperability was in no way a part of why they did it.
>
>
> None of that contradicts my point, doofus.
>

They copied VMS.

They hired the guy who wrote VMS...

....he he just copied what he'd previously done, wholesale.

That is not building a program "from scratch".

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

>>> They completely copied VMS [to generate Windows NT in the 1990s], dude!
>>>
>>> That's a fact. Unix is completely different from both VMS and Windows NT.
>>>
>>> And interoperability was in no way a part of why they did it.
>>
>> None of that contradicts my point, doofus.
>
>They copied VMS.
>
>They hired the guy who wrote VMS...
>
>...he he just copied what he'd previously done, wholesale.
>
>That is not building a program "from scratch".

"Copied what [was] previously done, wholesale" is nonsense.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.