> And where will the rest of that money go?: to > investment; to research; to newer jobs, etc.
It seems to me that this is where the argument fails - you assume that investment will go back into the *US* economy. But there is nothing to gaurantee that. In fact, as the offshore centers become the technology hot centers and they become more autonomous, I would imagine more and more of the investment itself will be offshore.
It's an interesting point that is brought up often. Here's a tidbit from http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.as p?url=/library/en-us/vccore98/html/_core_port_from_unix_ to_win32.asp
"The first option UNIX programmers look at is the Windows NT POSIX subsystem. However, it only supports POSIX 1003.1, which was the only POSIX version standardized when Windows NT was created. Since then, there has been little demand for extending this subsystem, because most applications have been converted to Win32. The 1003.1 system is of limited interest for fully featured applications, because it does not include many capabilities (such as those in 1003.2, network support, and so on). Full featured applications run under the Windows NT POSIX subsystem do not have access to Windows NT features available to Win32 applications, such as memory-mapped files, networking, and graphics."
Well not really, MS claimed POSIX compliance when the standard was so young that it didn't mean much (no fork() call for example). Unless you're talking about the newer POSIX emulation layer (which is extra cost I think (?)) that most code doesn't use (none of the mentioned software uses the posix emulation). The point of the government's POSIX requirement was that the *software* that was written for these systems would be *portable* so the government wouldn't be tied to a particular vendor, whereas it looks to me like they are going to be using Win32 software on these systems.
Well, that's great.
(1) Government requires purchased OS's to adhere to new set of standards called POSIX.
(2) UNIX vendors jump through hoops for a decade or more to develop and meet the standards.
(3) Government buys MS instead.
Slashdot Mirror
> And where will the rest of that money go?: to
> investment; to research; to newer jobs, etc.
It seems to me that this is where the argument fails - you assume that investment will go back into the *US* economy. But there is nothing to gaurantee that. In fact, as the offshore centers become the technology hot centers and they become more autonomous, I would imagine more and more of the investment itself will be offshore.
> NT is POSIX compliant
s p?url= /library/en-us/vccore98/html/_core_port_from_unix_ to_win32.asp
It's an interesting point that is brought up often.
Here's a tidbit from
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.a
"The first option UNIX programmers look at is the Windows NT POSIX subsystem. However, it only supports POSIX 1003.1, which was the only POSIX version standardized when Windows NT was created. Since then, there has been little demand for extending this subsystem, because most applications have been converted to Win32. The 1003.1 system is of limited interest for fully featured applications, because it does not include many capabilities (such as those in 1003.2, network support, and so on). Full featured applications run under the Windows NT POSIX subsystem do not have access to Windows NT features available to Win32 applications, such as memory-mapped files, networking, and graphics."
Well not really, MS claimed POSIX compliance when the standard was so young that it didn't mean much (no fork() call for example). Unless you're talking about the newer POSIX emulation layer (which is extra cost I think (?)) that most code doesn't use (none of the mentioned software uses the posix emulation). The point of the government's POSIX requirement was that the *software* that was written for these systems would be *portable* so the government wouldn't be tied to a particular vendor, whereas it looks to me like they are going to be using Win32 software on these systems.
Well, that's great. (1) Government requires purchased OS's to adhere to new set of standards called POSIX. (2) UNIX vendors jump through hoops for a decade or more to develop and meet the standards. (3) Government buys MS instead.