Talk:Unix wars

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Linux Low‑importance

	Linux portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linux, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Linux on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinuxWikipedia:WikiProject LinuxTemplate:WikiProject LinuxLinux articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sun & SysV

I wouldn't say that Sun worked with AT&T for the altruistic reason of unifying the unices; the general opinion I've heard was that Sun went to SysV to avoid getting sued. See BSD#Net/2 and legal troubles. --moof 08:33, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This was in the late 1980s; that was in the early 1990s - David Gerard 11:46, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup Request Added

The following text is difficult to understand:

In 1993, AT&T sold Unix to Novell, who assigned trademark rights to X/Open. That same year, the major participants in UI and OSF formed the Common Open Software Environment (COSE) alliance, effectively marking the end of the most significant era of the Unix wars.
In 1996, X/Open and the OSF merged to form the Open Group. COSE work such as the Single UNIX Specification, which is now the standard for branded Unix, are now the responsibility of the Open Group.

It's not clear what happened to OSF after the formation of the COSE alliance. Was it the OSF that merged with X/Open, or was it actually COSE? --59.167.114.116 23:18, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to note here that I fixed this in the article (I hope). OSF and UI merged, assimilating the COSE initiative's work, and it was this "new OSF" that merged with X/Open. --NapoliRoma 14:14, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Graphic inaccurate?

SunOS was based on BSD, but didn't Solaris 2 move to a SysV base? Therefore, shouldn't a dotted line be drawn to a separate tree on the SysV side? Or am I talking nonsense... It is 4:30am here. Alex 09:26, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Solaris 2 was based on SVR4, which was a merge of SunOS and SysVR3. Getting it all in there would make the drawing too complicated.--Per Abrahamsen 04:35, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See the discussion page for the picture, and discuss there. Thanks. --80.63.213.182 12:33, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another issue with the graphic

The graphic shows Linux (labelled 'GNU/Linux') in the same colour as the GNU Project. This suggests that Linux is part of the GNU Project or a descendant of it, which it not the case. The name 'GNU/Linux' is also out of place. According to sources cited in the 'GNU/Linux naming controversy' article, it is a rarely used term. It also, again, incorrectly suggests that Linux is part of GNU. In the main article on the Linux OS, it is referred to as 'Linux'. Faagel (talk) 23:35, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

odd article format

This article mentions significant events then gives few details of those events then moves on to another event and repeats the same mistake for most of the article. I just thought i'd point that out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.88.154.141 (talk) 20:04, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Missing o/s "TRU-64" UNIX , HP

Tru-64 UNIX, as run on the 64-bit DEC Alpha processor, is not included. I realize the processor was only made from about 1992 to a few years ago, but the o/s is relevant because at the time the processor came out, it was the fastest single chip out there because it ran 4 instructions per clock and had 90-100MHz clock speed to start. That advantage remained into the 2000's.

(side story: The Alpha, with blazing fast 64 bit math, made possible what some people called a 'desktop supercomputer', and soon became in huge demand, and so Intel was engaged for fabbing the Alpha in volume for DEC, and Intel stole some of the tech, which is why Pentiums suddenly increased in speed. DEC found out and sued Intel, and Intel paid a large penalty for that as well as making Alphas for DEC very cheaply to pay it off. The public benefit was a good improvement for Intel based PCs. just a footnote, as told by the late John Wisniewski of DEC, not so relevant to the UNIX article.) 208.190.133.202 (talk) 03:14, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is just a short article that doesn't attempt to enumerate all Unix variants. Best regards. Tengu800 02:16, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Linux

   During BSD's period of legal turmoil (1992–94),[6] the nearly-complete GNU operating system was made operational by the inclusion of the Linux kernel and lumped together under the label "Linux".

I don't know who wrote this but s.he will probably have a rms ghost haunting his.her family for a dozens generations. --77.107.218.170 (talk) 15:08, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]