4 ms·
NT was a huge disappointment. To wit, they've never had a shell that even approximates Unix sh from years ago.
by magwa101 8y ago
NT was a huge disappointment. To wit, they've never had a shell that even approximates Unix sh from years ago.
- nxc18 8y agoAre you kidding? Check out WSL - they've got the full bash working just like it does on Linux.
- diroussel 8y agoWith lots of caveats and gotchas. See comment from Microsoft guy linked here. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18783525 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18783525
- ThrowawayR2 8y agoDave Cutler was the kernel architect and a shell has almost nothing to do with the quality of the kernel it's running on. Does WSL running on Windows magically make its kernel better? Would the old CMD shell running on Linux make its kernel worse? No.
- anth_anm 8y agoIt's a kernel, not an OS.