> Marko Vojinovic wrote:
>> On Tuesday 29 December 2009 18:21:01 John R Pierce wrote:
>>> Marko Vojinovic wrote:
>>>> You mean new to the concept of files and directories? This is not
>>>> Linux-only. The . and .. existed even in MS-DOS back in the 80's.
>>> having an actual . and .. file in a directory is a distinctly Unix
>>> practice.
>>
>> I was not trying to say that . and .. were *invented* in MS-DOS. I was
>> just commenting that it is not Linux-specific (or Unix-specific).
<snip>
>> terminal, unlike Linux. Therefore, the fact that someone is confused by
>> the existence of . in some directory is mainly the fault of
>> GUI-for-everything philosophy of Windows.
And Macs. I agree. To quote a friend, "your momma dresses you funny, and
you need a mouse to delete files!"
>
> MS-DOS 2.0 added subdirectories, I/O redirection, pipes, filters and a
> few other features copied from Unix. Of course they were mere shadows of
> the actual Unix features and lacked most of the standard capabilities,
> but it was a step in the right direction. It is one of the few steps in
> that direction Microsoft ever took.
Yeah, and 3.0 broke a number of things that were in 1.0 and 2.0; one of
the biggest mistakes M$ ever made was not introducing in 3.0 at least
foreground/background multitasking (you couldn't print and do anything
else!) and virtual memory. If they'd done that then, WinDoze wouldn't have
been the disaster it became with the 95 line.
mark "the other, of course was putting the GUI in ring 0"