on Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 05:39:13PM -0800, ben ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Sunday 20 January 2002 03:51 pm, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > > Assuming you've only got one of something sounds so...Microsoft. > > assuming that i've got only one...? sounds like a lame construction of > whatever point you're trying to make. unusual lack of cogency in this > post, karsten.
My point: there are a number of arbitrary limitations in legacy MS
Windows based on a number of assumptions, largely predicated on the
assumption that there would only be some limited number (often one) of a
resource or instance.
- Drive letters (yes you can map around them) restrict you to 26 disks.
Including remote maps. Driveletters move (often arbitrarially) when
devices are added and removed.
vs: partitions and mountpoints allow an arbitrary number of devices
to be added, within a single filesystem tree.
- The "single user" model results, among other things, in files being
scattered over the filesystem, including user-generated data, state,
configuration, and other information.
vs: a filesystem heirarchy standard providing for systems
configuration data (/etc), systems state data (/var), and user-level
data ($HOME, typically under /home). Local state is maintained
under /usr/local.
There are other examples, I'm really the wrong person to discuss this,
I've not used a legacy MS Windows OS significantly for three or four
years.
Peace.
--
Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Home of the brave
http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ Land of the free
We freed Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org
Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html
pgpqageGAIeun.pgp
Description: PGP signature
