Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!cbmvax!amix!ford From: ford@amix.commodore.com (Mike "Ford" Ditto) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: SVR4 vs OSF/1 (Was Re: A3000UX competition) Message-ID: <599@amix.commodore.com> Date: 9 Dec 90 01:31:27 GMT References: <2346@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca> <1990Dec7.201504.11469@Neon.Stanford.EDU> Reply-To: ford@amix.commodore.com (Mike "Ford" Ditto) Organization: Commodore-Amiga Unix Development Lines: 25 In article mwm@fenris.relay.pa.dec.com (Mike (My Watch Has Windows) Meyer) writes: >It's even more ironic when you consider a list of really nice features >of AmigaDOS: [ ... ] user-mode mountable (and dismountable) >device drivers; I'll have to disagree there. AmigaDOS does NOT have user-mode device drivers. AmigaDOS does not have user-mode anything. In AmigaDOS, every byte of code that ever runs runs in the equivalent of kernel mode, with access to every bit of physical memory and every hardware register. This is exactly the sort of thing that Mach avoids, making Mach superior to "traditional" Unix kernels and AmigaDOS in its entirety. >OSF1 has all those things. VR4 may have one, but it's not required to >meet the SVID. What does that mean? That OS features aren't important unless they're in the SVID? I don't think any real user gives a flying fart about the SVID. Besides, SVR4 has all of "those things" that you mentioned (I'm stretching a bit on "application-controlled hooks in the input stream", which sounds like a window-system function, not an O.S. one). -=] Mike [=-