Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!rice!uw-beaver!fluke!ssc-vax!bcsaic!paula
From: paula@bcsaic.UUCP (Paul Allen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: dosread.c again
Message-ID: <16230@bcsaic.UUCP>
Date: 25 Oct 89 20:02:01 GMT
References: <3717@ast.cs.vu.nl> <3a18.2536ede8@ibmpcug.co.uk> <3721@ast.cs.vu.nl> <6627@ficc.uu.net> <9830@attctc.Dallas.TX.US>
Reply-To: paula@bcsaic.UUCP (Paul Allen)
Organization: Boeing Computer Services AI Center, Seattle
Lines: 25

In article <9830@attctc.Dallas.TX.US> chasm@attctc.Dallas.TX.US (Charles Marslett) writes:
>
>Minix is hardly useful as a programming environment (for example, it is not
>even on my hard disk now, Xenix has displaced it, but DOS is always there,
>because I cannot work without it -- My MINIX kernel is, of course, compiled
>under DOS).  

At last!  Something in this thread that applies to Minix!

Minix is a cheap alternative for hackers who have always wanted
a Unix source license.  It was intended to be instructive, rather
than 'useful' in the sense that I think Charles means.  It is most 
certainly useful enough to compile itself!  What more do you want?  :-)

I invite everyone to choose the machine/OS that fits their 
own personal definition of 'useful' and then take this "my OS is 
better than yours" discussion someplace else.  Please?

Thanks!

Paul
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul L. Allen                       | pallen@atc.boeing.com
Boeing Advanced Technology Center   | ...!uw-beaver!bcsaic!pallen