[BBLISA] Desktop policies and UNIX-ish operating systems

[Dean Anderson]

Actually, some linux is Unix (tm). The trademark certification is done 
by The Open Group. 


> I think you should tell the Open Group lawyers to go sit on hedgehogs.
> From my point of view, UNIX is a philosophy of operating system design
> developed by Thompson, Ritchie, et al, and Linux is a UNIX
> implementation.

That's an interesting, if extralegal and revisionist, point of view.
Linux isn't a Unix implmementation, but a free OS based on Minix.  
Torvalds never set out to copy Unix, and didn't copy many things from
Unix that could have been copied, such as TCP/IP implmementation.  
"Linux" is just a kernel, a rewrite of the Minix OS kernel. The Minix
System and some Linux based OS integrate to varying extents GNU
utilities. The GNU utilities however were meant as an enhanced
replacement for similar Unix utilities.  But also, Thompson & Ritchie
weren't philosophers; and didn't invent a philosophy.  The wrote a piece
of code whose principal derivative is now owned by Novell/Caldera, while
the original Western Electric/ATT code is now free on SIMH.  T&R's
employer registered a trademark on the name Unix; that trademark is now
owned by The Open Group for branding operating systems. If an operating
system meets the standards for using the Trademark, The Open Group will
license the use of the trademark. Some linux's are branded as Unix.  
Others aren't.

But, my question is: Why do you want to distinguish Unix or Unix-like
operating systems from Windows?  Windows is a multi-user, posix
compliant operating system that can do everyhing 'nix can do.  If you
get sucked into OS details, your policies won't last very long. Separate
policy from implementation.  Policy is what the desktop must do (e.g.
suitable antivirus), what you will do for all desktops (e.g. ethernet,
wifi, IP services), and what you will do for some desktops (e.g.
antivirus s/w, applications, etc) Implementation is how you actually do
that (eg openoffice 1.3 for fedora 10,11,12 until 2013)

 		--Dean

On Thu, 28 Jan 2010, Patrick Cable wrote:

> In what may (or may not) cause a considerable amount of list traffic...
> 
> $WORK is trying to develop a set of policies around machines used as
> desktops* that happen to run a linux, solaris, freebsd, etc. as an
> operating system.
> (If you're interested in the policies, they're mostly just best
> practices for linux machines put down in official form)
> 
> $WORK would like to identify the ideal phrase that lumps all those
> operating systems together.
> 
> One individual suggested that you couldn't really just say UNIX,
> because Linux isn't UNIX. It would not include BSDs as well. You
> couldn't say POSIX-compliant, because can't you install some binaries
> on windows that make it POSIX-compliant, etc. Valid points for sure.
> 
> My question: Is there a way that I can identify all these UNIX-ish
> operating systems without specifically naming the brands? (Linux,
> Unix, BSD)
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> *Desktop is a oddly defined. Think "this is my primary computer that i
> access the internet on and check email on"
> 
> _______________________________________________
> bblisa mailing list
> bblisa at bblisa.org
> http://www.bblisa.org/mailman/listinfo/bblisa
> 
> 

-- 
Av8 Internet   Prepared to pay a premium for better service?
www.av8.net         faster, more reliable, better service
617 256 5494