[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: Origin of UNIX
- From: "A. John Peters" <ajpeters ajpconsult com>
- To: <redhat-install-list redhat com>
- Subject: Re: Origin of UNIX
- Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 10:31:04 -0500
I know Unix and MultiCs is not the same os. The goals were not the same but
a few of the concepts are. Unix survived multics didn't. Multics was
bought by GE and then Honeywell which killed it. Unix kept much of its
development in the university environment.
On 10/6/02 9:24 PM, "David Kramer" <david thekramers net> wrote:
> On Sunday 06 October 2002 01:34 pm, A. John Peters wrote:
>> On 10/6/02 10:05 AM, "Mark Knecht" <markknecht attbi com> wrote:
>>> http://www.unixhub.com/oldunix/unixname
>>>
>>> Google is your friend
>>
>> MIT had a research project in 1968 called Multics. It stands for Multiplex
>> something or other. Bell labs broke off and started Unix is Uni something
>> or other. or other.>
>
> Unix Is Not multiX
>
> Yes, it doesn't really fit, but it started a long tradition of
> self-referential acronyms.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> DDDD David Kramer david thekramers net http://thekramers.net
> DK KD "Light is meaningful only in relation to darkness, and truth
> DKK D presupposes error. It is these mingled opposites which people our
> DK KD life, which make it pungent, intoxicating. We only exist in terms
> DDDD of this conflict, in the zone where black and white clash."
> - Louis Aragon (1897-1982)
>
>
>
>
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]