Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 04:38:15 05/12/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 12, 2001 at 06:39:55, Graham Laight wrote: >In my head, I see unix as an OS which is architected from the bottom up to be >multi-user, and the overhead is massive - both in terms of all the disk space >this uses (for programs, directories, etc) and processing time (even if there's >only 1 user active, the multi-user code is almost certainly still working). I wonder how multi-user support implies that you have to use more diskspace. You mean the programs to handle logins? Yes, those 2 or 3 megabytes are going to make a world of difference. As for having the multiuser code working, the slowdown caused by that is also negligible IMHO. I do agree that a single user system will be more efficient than a multiuser system if it is being used by a single user only. I do not agree the overhead is massive though. Even then there is an advantage to having multiuser capability though. The seperation between user and root accounts makes it so hard to make effective Unix virusses. >>b) Multi-user capability has real practical value > >In all of the examples you give of the usefulness, you're talking about giving >computer power to groups of people. I'm sure the original poster was talking >about using the computer just for himself. I mostly use the computer just for myself too. But when I need more, I can have it. >Agreed. I can also go to any web browser anywhere, and get to my Yahoo home >page, with my personal calendar etc. I don't need to have a multi-user OS on >whatever device I use to access this on-line application. Ehm...remote X allows you do nearly everything you locally can. I doubt your Yahoo page can. >Fine - but again, you don't need a multi-user OS on whatever device you're >running x-windows on. Even Windows can run X-Window terminal emulators! Yes, but I cannot run applications on that Windows machine from my Unix system. >True. I just think that Windows is more appropriate for "personal" computing >than Linux for most people. For reasons, see above. I think this depends on personal requirements. >Whether or not X-Windows is better than a browser (I would regard them both as >"thin clients"), I think that the reality is that more people are going to >choose to use browsers. Because they are preinstalled and known, not because they are better. Better stop this thread now though :) This is not an advocacy forum. (I plead guilty) -- GCP
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.