Re: spatial stuff detail

On Sep 21, 2003, at 5:19 PM, Hongli Lai wrote:
John Siracusa wrote:
I see it, but I don't agree with it. First, Linux is no more "pluggable" than any Unix-ish OS, including OS X (i.e. both have loadable kernel modules, file system plugins, shared libraries, etc.).

That's not the kind "pluggable" he's talking about. He's talking about how developers treat their software. On non-open source systems like MacOS X and Win32, software are usually large and monolithics do-it-alls with (almost) no dependancies or bundle all dependancies with them. That's because those operating systems don't encourage code sharing as much.

Er, how do you figure? Both OSes use shared libraries extensively. I don't see one as "more shared" than the other. The fact that most of the GUI-related shared libraries in OS X are provided by Apple doesn't make OS X any more "monolithic" than Linux in anything but the political sense of the word.

(and this is ignoring the Darwin side of things...)

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]