Windows simply not up to the task

"zurg" <zurg@fakeaddress.com> wrote in message
news:090120040153560959%zurg@fakeaddress.com...
> In article <btl656$8eith$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>, Edwin
> <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > Mac OS X is just a form of BSD Uniz.
>
> Didn't say otherwise, did I?

But you did list Mac OS X as if it were a separate entity from BSD Unix.

> > If it weren't for BSD Unix, nothing
> > with a "Mac OS" in it would be on that list.
>
> Doesn't explain why none of the top 5 supercomputers are running
> Windows.

Because MS didn't bother to make it's own implimentation of BSD Unix as
Apple did.

> Can you explain that instead of explaining why OS X *does*
> make the top 5?

I already gave the explanation. Reread my answer in context of what you
snipped out.

Edwin

"Sandman" <mr@sandman.net> wrote in message
news:mr-D34150.10560209012004@news.fu-berlin.de...
> In article <btl656$8eith$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>,
> "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > "zurg" <zurg@fakeaddress.com> wrote in message
> > news:080120040115384802%zurg@fakeaddress.com...
> > > Look what OSes are running on the top 5 supercomputer in the world.
> > >
> > > http://www.top500.org/
> > >
> > > 5. Linux
> > > 4. Linux
> > > 3. Mac OS X
> > > 2. Unix
> > > 1. Unix
> > >
> > > Any of you Windbags care to explain what's missing.
> >
> > Mac OS X is just a form of BSD Uniz. If it weren't for BSD Unix,
nothing
> > with a "Mac OS" in it would be on that list.
>
> But now MacOS is on that list, and Windows is not.

So BSD Unix appears on the list twice. That's all you've said. No glory
for Apple for using Berkeley's work.

Edwin

In article <btuvgf$bgo4m$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>,
"Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:

> "Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message
> news:alangbaker-3E2F80.23514308012004@news.telus.net...
> > In article <btl656$8eith$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>,
> > "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
> >
> > > "zurg" <zurg@fakeaddress.com> wrote in message
> > > news:080120040115384802%zurg@fakeaddress.com...
> > > > Look what OSes are running on the top 5 supercomputer in the world.
> > > >
> > > > http://www.top500.org/
> > > >
> > > > 5. Linux
> > > > 4. Linux
> > > > 3. Mac OS X
> > > > 2. Unix
> > > > 1. Unix
> > > >
> > > > Any of you Windbags care to explain what's missing.
> > >
> > > Mac OS X is just a form of BSD Uniz. If it weren't for BSD Unix,
> nothing
> > > with a "Mac OS" in it would be on that list.
> > >
> > > Edwin
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Hilarious.
>
> That Apple had to use someone else's OS to finally get a modern OS, they
> couldn't make one of their own? Yes, that is indeed amusing.
>
> > You can't even remember when you insisted that Mac OS X was *not* a BSD
> > Unix, can you?
>
> I never made any such "insistence."

Let me help you:

<http://groups.google.com/groups?sel...40ID-56786.news.
dfncis.de&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain>

"It is Mac OS X, not BSD."

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect
if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard."

"Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message
news:alangbaker-80ADA1.12331112012004@news.telus.net...
> In article <btuvgf$bgo4m$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>,
> "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > "Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message
> > news:alangbaker-3E2F80.23514308012004@news.telus.net...
> > > In article <btl656$8eith$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>,
> > > "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > "zurg" <zurg@fakeaddress.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:080120040115384802%zurg@fakeaddress.com...
> > > > > Look what OSes are running on the top 5 supercomputer in the
world.
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.top500.org/
> > > > >
> > > > > 5. Linux
> > > > > 4. Linux
> > > > > 3. Mac OS X
> > > > > 2. Unix
> > > > > 1. Unix
> > > > >
> > > > > Any of you Windbags care to explain what's missing.
> > > >
> > > > Mac OS X is just a form of BSD Uniz. If it weren't for BSD Unix,
> > nothing
> > > > with a "Mac OS" in it would be on that list.
> > > >
> > > > Edwin
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hilarious.
> >
> > That Apple had to use someone else's OS to finally get a modern OS, they
> > couldn't make one of their own? Yes, that is indeed amusing.
> >
> > > You can't even remember when you insisted that Mac OS X was *not* a
BSD
> > > Unix, can you?
> >
> > I never made any such "insistence."
>
> Let me help you:
>
> <http://groups.google.com/groups?sel...40ID-56786.news.
> dfncis.de&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain>
>
> "It is Mac OS X, not BSD."

Thanks for the out of context quote. The issue under discussion was if BSD
applications counted as Mac OS X applications. Even more of BSD Unix (such
as X Windows) has been added to Mac OS X since Rick and I had that argument.

Your embarrassment over Mac OS X being nothing more than Apple's copy of
someone else's work must be deep, for you to try to shift the discussion
from operating systems to a personal attack on me.

Edwin

"Sandman" <mr@sandman.net> wrote in message
news:mr-AAAABC.22060812012004@news.fu-berlin.de...
> In article <btl656$8eith$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>,
> "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > > Look what OSes are running on the top 5 supercomputer in the world.
> > >
> > > http://www.top500.org/
> > >
> > > 5. Linux
> > > 4. Linux
> > > 3. Mac OS X
> > > 2. Unix
> > > 1. Unix
> > >
> > > Any of you Windbags care to explain what's missing.
> >
> > Mac OS X is just a form of BSD Uniz. If it weren't for BSD Unix,
nothing
> > with a "Mac OS" in it would be on that list.
>
> How is that possible, when a Mac OS X system doesn't run any BSD
applications?

Go to www.apple.com and tell them what liars they are.

Edwin

"Sandman" <mr@sandman.net> wrote in message
news:mr-7A478E.22042512012004@news.fu-berlin.de...
> In article <btuvgf$bgo4m$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>,
> "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > > You can't even remember when you insisted that Mac OS X was *not* a
BSD
> > > Unix, can you?
> >
> > I never made any such "insistence."
>
> You have stated that applications running on Mac OS X aren't BSD
applications.

Can you run Carbon or Cocoa or Aqua on other types BSD Unix? Applications
written to Apple's proprietary OS layers won't run on other BSD Unix
variants.

Edwin

"Sandman" <mr@sandman.net> wrote in message
news:mr-9F3311.22030312012004@news.fu-berlin.de...
> In article <btuvpe$br83k$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>,
> "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > > > If it weren't for BSD Unix, nothing
> > > > with a "Mac OS" in it would be on that list.
> > >
> > > Doesn't explain why none of the top 5 supercomputers are running
> > > Windows.
> >
> > Because MS didn't bother to make it's own implimentation of BSD Unix as
> > Apple did.
>
> Is BSD Unix required to be fast?

BSD Unix is required to use a large number of processors as nodes. That's
what makes a supercomputer.

> A pity MS choose not to use it, then.

MS Windows boxes are not intended to be nodes in a supercomputer, and their
users wouldn't be able to do the kind of work on them they do, if they were.

> > > Can you explain that instead of explaining why OS X *does*
> > > make the top 5?
> >
> > I already gave the explanation. Reread my answer in context of what
you
> > snipped out.
>
> Mac OS is on the list. Windows isn't.

Mac OS is not on the list. Mac OS X is, which is just listing BSD Unix
twice.

Edwin

"Sandman" <mr@sandman.net> wrote in message
news:mr-748576.22021012012004@news.fu-berlin.de...
> In article <btuvvi$b2gag$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>, "Edwin"
> <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> http://www.top500.org/
> >>>>
> >>>> 5. Linux 4. Linux 3. Mac OS X 2. Unix 1. Unix
> >>>>
> >>>> Any of you Windbags care to explain what's missing.
> >>>
> >>> Mac OS X is just a form of BSD Uniz. If it weren't for BSD Unix,
> >>> nothing with a "Mac OS" in it would be on that list.
> >>
> >> But now MacOS is on that list, and Windows is not.
> >
> > So BSD Unix appears on the list twice. That's all you've said. No
> > glory for Apple for using Berkeley's work.
>
> MacOS is on the list once,

No it isn't.

Mac OS X is on the list, whcih is simply a second listing of BSD Unix.

> Windows isn't on the list at all.

That's because Windows isn't a copy of BSD Unix.

Edwin

In article <btuvvi$b2gag$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>, "Edwin"
<thorne25@juno.com> wrote:

>>>> http://www.top500.org/
>>>>
>>>> 5. Linux 4. Linux 3. Mac OS X 2. Unix 1. Unix
>>>>
>>>> Any of you Windbags care to explain what's missing.
>>>
>>> Mac OS X is just a form of BSD Uniz. If it weren't for BSD Unix,
>>> nothing with a "Mac OS" in it would be on that list.
>>
>> But now MacOS is on that list, and Windows is not.
>
> So BSD Unix appears on the list twice. That's all you've said. No
> glory for Apple for using Berkeley's work.

MacOS is on the list once, Windows isn't on the list at all.

--
Sandman[.net]

In article <btuvpe$br83k$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>,
"Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:

> > > If it weren't for BSD Unix, nothing
> > > with a "Mac OS" in it would be on that list.
> >
> > Doesn't explain why none of the top 5 supercomputers are running
> > Windows.
>
> Because MS didn't bother to make it's own implimentation of BSD Unix as
> Apple did.

Is BSD Unix required to be fast? A pity MS choose not to use it, then.

> > Can you explain that instead of explaining why OS X *does*
> > make the top 5?
>
> I already gave the explanation. Reread my answer in context of what you
> snipped out.

Mac OS is on the list. Windows isn't.

--
Sandman[.net]

In article <btuvgf$bgo4m$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>,
"Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:

> > You can't even remember when you insisted that Mac OS X was *not* a BSD
> > Unix, can you?
>
> I never made any such "insistence."

You have stated that applications running on Mac OS X aren't BSD applications.

--
Sandman[.net]

In article <btl656$8eith$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>,
"Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:

> > Look what OSes are running on the top 5 supercomputer in the world.
> >
> > http://www.top500.org/
> >
> > 5. Linux
> > 4. Linux
> > 3. Mac OS X
> > 2. Unix
> > 1. Unix
> >
> > Any of you Windbags care to explain what's missing.
>
> Mac OS X is just a form of BSD Uniz. If it weren't for BSD Unix, nothing
> with a "Mac OS" in it would be on that list.

How is that possible, when a Mac OS X system doesn't run any BSD applications?

--
Sandman[.net]

"Sandman" <mr@sandman.net> wrote in message
news:mr-7DD757.22250612012004@news.fu-berlin.de...
> In article <btv30n$bv4dm$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>,
> "Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > If it weren't for BSD Unix, nothing
> > > > > > with a "Mac OS" in it would be on that list.
> > > > >
> > > > > Doesn't explain why none of the top 5 supercomputers are running
> > > > > Windows.
> > > >
> > > > Because MS didn't bother to make it's own implimentation of BSD Unix
as
> > > > Apple did.
> > >
> > > Is BSD Unix required to be fast?
> >
> > BSD Unix is required to use a large number of processors as nodes.
That's
> > what makes a supercomputer.
>
> So Windows can't do this, but Macs can. Gotcha.

Put BSD Unix in a PC and it can do the same for less money.

> > > A pity MS choose not to use it, then.
> >
> > MS Windows boxes are not intended to be nodes in a supercomputer, and
their
> > users wouldn't be able to do the kind of work on them they do, if they
were.
>
> Sounds as MacOS, only that it can be used in supercomputers also.

Mac OS is not used in a supercomputer. You have it confused with the BSD
Unix variant called "Mac OS X."

> > > > > Can you explain that instead of explaining why OS X *does*
> > > > > make the top 5?
> > > >
> > > > I already gave the explanation. Reread my answer in context of
what
> > you
> > > > snipped out.
> > >
> > > Mac OS is on the list. Windows isn't.
> >
> > Mac OS is not on the list. Mac OS X is, which is just listing BSD Unix
> > twice.
>
> Call them and alert them to their error.

Okay. "Hey Maccies..."

Edwin

In article <btv25p$booe2$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>,
"Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:

> > Let me help you:
> >
> > <http://groups.google.com/groups?sel...40ID-56786.news.
> > dfncis.de&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain>
> >
> > "It is Mac OS X, not BSD."
>
> Thanks for the out of context quote. The issue under discussion was if BSD
> applications counted as Mac OS X applications. Even more of BSD Unix (such
> as X Windows) has been added to Mac OS X since Rick and I had that argument.

Are Virginia Tech using BSD applications or Mac OS X applications?

> Your embarrassment over Mac OS X being nothing more than Apple's copy of
> someone else's work must be deep, for you to try to shift the discussion
> from operating systems to a personal attack on me.

--
Sandman[.net]

In article <btv2k4$ad3fl$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>, "Edwin"
<thorne25@juno.com> wrote:

>>>> Look what OSes are running on the top 5 supercomputer in the world.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.top500.org/
>>>>
>>>> 5. Linux 4. Linux 3. Mac OS X 2. Unix 1. Unix
>>>>
>>>> Any of you Windbags care to explain what's missing.
>>>
>>> Mac OS X is just a form of BSD Uniz. If it weren't for BSD Unix,
>>> nothing with a "Mac OS" in it would be on that list.
>>
>> How is that possible, when a Mac OS X system doesn't run any BSD
>> applications?
>
> Go to www.apple.com and tell them what liars they are.

You should, it's your claim:

"When they are recompiled for Mac OS X, they become Mac OS X applications,
not BSD applications"

--
Sandman[.net]

In article <btv2qk$bn65h$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>, "Edwin"
<thorne25@juno.com> wrote:

>>>> You can't even remember when you insisted that Mac OS X was *not* a
>>>> BSD Unix, can you?
>>>
>>> I never made any such "insistence."
>>
>> You have stated that applications running on Mac OS X aren't BSD
>> applications.
>
> Can you run Carbon or Cocoa or Aqua on other types BSD Unix?
> Applications written to Apple's proprietary OS layers won't run on
> other BSD Unix variants.

So what kind of applications are Virginia Tech using?

--
Sandman[.net]

"Sandman" <mr@sandman.net> wrote in message
news:mr-4FD0D2.22201812012004@news.fu-berlin.de...
> In article <btv2k4$ad3fl$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>, "Edwin"
> <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> Look what OSes are running on the top 5 supercomputer in the world.
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.top500.org/
> >>>>
> >>>> 5. Linux 4. Linux 3. Mac OS X 2. Unix 1. Unix
> >>>>
> >>>> Any of you Windbags care to explain what's missing.
> >>>
> >>> Mac OS X is just a form of BSD Uniz. If it weren't for BSD Unix,
> >>> nothing with a "Mac OS" in it would be on that list.
> >>
> >> How is that possible, when a Mac OS X system doesn't run any BSD
> >> applications?
> >
> > Go to www.apple.com and tell them what liars they are.
>
> You should, it's your claim:
>
> "When they are recompiled for Mac OS X, they become Mac OS X
applications,
> not BSD applications"

I covered the issue of Apple's proprietary APIs in another post.

If I say Mac OS X *is not* BSD Unix, you MacKooks disagree. If I say Mac
OS *is* BSD Unix, you MacKooks disagree.

One can only conclude that Mac advocacy is a special type of insanity...

Edwin

In article <btv34b$bfaun$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>,
"Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:

> > >>>> http://www.top500.org/
> > >>>>
> > >>>> 5. Linux 4. Linux 3. Mac OS X 2. Unix 1. Unix
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Any of you Windbags care to explain what's missing.
> > >>>
> > >>> Mac OS X is just a form of BSD Uniz. If it weren't for BSD Unix,
> > >>> nothing with a "Mac OS" in it would be on that list.
> > >>
> > >> But now MacOS is on that list, and Windows is not.
> > >
> > > So BSD Unix appears on the list twice. That's all you've said. No
> > > glory for Apple for using Berkeley's work.
> >
> > MacOS is on the list once,
>
> No it isn't.
> Mac OS X is on the list, whcih is simply a second listing of BSD Unix.

You should call www.top500.com and tell them they misspellt "BSD Unix".

> > Windows isn't on the list at all.
>
> That's because Windows isn't a copy of BSD Unix.

Are only copies of BSD allowed as supercomputers?

--
Sandman[.net]

In article <btv30n$bv4dm$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>,
"Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:

> > > > > If it weren't for BSD Unix, nothing
> > > > > with a "Mac OS" in it would be on that list.
> > > >
> > > > Doesn't explain why none of the top 5 supercomputers are running
> > > > Windows.
> > >
> > > Because MS didn't bother to make it's own implimentation of BSD Unix as
> > > Apple did.
> >
> > Is BSD Unix required to be fast?
>
> BSD Unix is required to use a large number of processors as nodes. That's
> what makes a supercomputer.

So Windows can't do this, but Macs can. Gotcha.

> > A pity MS choose not to use it, then.
>
> MS Windows boxes are not intended to be nodes in a supercomputer, and their
> users wouldn't be able to do the kind of work on them they do, if they were.

Sounds as MacOS, only that it can be used in supercomputers also.

> > > > Can you explain that instead of explaining why OS X *does*
> > > > make the top 5?
> > >
> > > I already gave the explanation. Reread my answer in context of what
> you
> > > snipped out.
> >
> > Mac OS is on the list. Windows isn't.
>
> Mac OS is not on the list. Mac OS X is, which is just listing BSD Unix
> twice.

Call them and alert them to their error.

--
Sandman[.net]

"Sandman" <mr@sandman.net> wrote in message
news:mr-5D3E01.22404412012004@news.fu-berlin.de...
> In article <btv3uh$bs99m$1@ID-56786.news.uni-berlin.de>, "Edwin"
> <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> Is BSD Unix required to be fast?
> >>>
> >>> BSD Unix is required to use a large number of processors as nodes.
> >>> That's what makes a supercomputer.
> >>
> >> So Windows can't do this, but Macs can. Gotcha.
> >
> > Put BSD Unix in a PC and it can do the same for less money.
>
> So Windows can't do this, but Macs can. Gotcha.

Windows can't do it because it wasn't designed to do it. It wasn't designed
to do it because its purpose wasn't to maike your PC into a node in a
supercomputer.

The only reason a Mac can do it is because Mac OS X is BSD Unix. Put BSD
Unix on the PC you'll have a supercomputer that's far cheaper than one made
from Macs.

> >>>> A pity MS choose not to use it, then.
> >>>
> >>> MS Windows boxes are not intended to be nodes in a supercomputer,
> >>> and their users wouldn't be able to do the kind of work on them they
> >>> do, if they were.
> >>
> >> Sounds as MacOS, only that it can be used in supercomputers also.
> >
> > Mac OS is not used in a supercomputer. You have it confused with the
> > BSD Unix variant called "Mac OS X."
>
> Why can't Windows be used in supercomputers when Mac OS X can?

Because Mac OS X is BSD Unix.

> >>>>>> Can you explain that instead of explaining why OS X *does* make
> >>>>>> the top 5?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I already gave the explanation. Reread my answer in context of
> >>>>> what you snipped out.
> >>>>
> >>>> Mac OS is on the list. Windows isn't.
> >>>
> >>> Mac OS is not on the list. Mac OS X is, which is just listing BSD
> >>> Unix twice.
> >>
> >> Call them and alert them to their error.
> >
> > Okay. "Hey Maccies..."
>
> Are the people at Virginia Tech and www.top500.com Maccies? Cool.

Cool that Apple copied its OS from Berkeley? It would be even more cool if
BSD got the credit...

Edwin