On Saturday, August 11, 2001, at 12:58 AM, albanread at mac.com wrote:

> Heard of Mac OSX?
> Its based on UNIX but looks good and comes with free objective C tools.
> I dont know objective C but I am learning it and it looks a lot like 
> smalltalk.
> (the programs it creates are reasonably sized and fast.)

Yes, in fact I have heard of OS X.  In fact, it's what I'm using now and 
what I used to post that message.  However, "Mac OS" usually means Mac 
OS <= 9.1, and when people wish to refer to Mac OS X, they usually 
specify that.  This is no doubt to their radical differences.

Given this, Mac OS's place, that is Mac OS <=9.1 on this list does seem 
odd, from the standpoint of OS desisgn.

Aaron

> On Saturday, August 11, 2001, at 03:58  am, Aaron wrote:
>
>> On Friday, August 10, 2001, at 03:55 PM, John Hinsley wrote:
>>
>>> Alan Grimes wrote:
>>>
>>> //snip//
>>>>
>>>>>> DOS is, unquestionably, the best OS in existance TODAY.
>>>>
>>>>> Uhh... that´s not what most people who know a litle bit about such
>>>>> things would say... (actually, from Computer Science perspective 
>>>>> it´s
>>>>> pretty bad).
>>>>
>>>> Absolutly.
>>>> Its miraculous that every other OS I've seen manages to be even 
>>>> worse,
>>>> often much much worse.
>>>>
>>>> Here's a top 5 list:
>>>>
>>>> 1. DOS
>>>> 2. Minix
>>>> 3. Mac OS
>>>> 4. QNX
>>>> 5. BeOS
>>>
>>> Interesting that all the OSs you mention (with the exception of Mac OS
>>> -- wonder how much longer they'll continue to support that?) have 
>>> pretty
>>> much made it into oblivion. BeOS struggles on, and I hear that Caldera
>>> (or a branch of Caldera) are still doing some interesting stuff with
>>> DRDOS, but really......
>>
>> Heh.  The best part of this is that Mac OS may only be the one to last 
>> much longer, but is one of the poorest design on that list, internally 
>> that is.  Second in poor design to only DOS. ;)
>>
>> Aaron
>>
>>
>