UNIX vs Linux: Differences & Similarities Explained
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 05. 2024
- This video compares the similarities and differences of UNIX vs Linux operating systems.
Here are some of the topics that we will cover in this video:
Firstly, we look at the origins of both UNIX and Linux to place them in the evolution of operating systems.
Then, we will look at the POSIX standard that makes sure Linux and UNIX share similar commands, filesystem navigation, and other important OS elements.
Finally, we quickly look at some famous UNIX systems, such as IBM AIX, HP UX, Solaris, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and contrast them with the new kid on the block, the GNU Linux.
For a complete and comprehensive course on the Linux command-line, visit:
courses.pikuma.com/courses/li...
SUBSCRIBE @pikuma to learn more about computer science topics.
Follow me on Twitter:
/ pikumalondon
A very insightful, clear and rigorous lecture compacted in a small amount of time. Very much appreciated sir, thanks for the video!
Awesome. I appreciated how you accompanied your explanation with the history.
im not an older and im dont remeber this times when the unix starting growing up so finally i found the anserws :) very short and easy to understand thanks :)
Perfect Video , it is very clear i understood everything , Thank You
Much appreciated, thanks for sharing this!
Awesome video well explained
Thank you
Awesome!
A lot of BS about main frames and mini computers. I'm started in IT in 1969 and main frame had already Operating Systems, first DOS (single programming system) and later IBM-OS-MFT or MVT (multi programming systems). End sixties we started introducing time-sharing systems, that allowed to work/develop software on many terminals (Teletype ASR33 or CRT displays) on one system. The mini computers just transferred the ideas developed on the main frames to e.g the PDP11, the main frames would handle say 50 to 100 terminals, but the mini computers were often limited to 5 to 20 terminals.
A famous and well defined OS for 16-bits minis was RSX/11M from DEC and later for the 32-bits minis it was VAX-VMS. The VMS designers later switched to Microsoft and developed Windows NT, using just the next letter in the alphabet VMS - WNT :) All systems developed in the seventies were supporting virtual memory, pre-emptive multi-tasking and were written in a programming language like Pascal, RTL/2, SPL or later C, just like Unix and Linux. The OS system I worked on in the early seventies, were using a subset of PL/1 called SPL as programming language. In the 2nd part of the seventies I switched to a company using the Real Time Language 2 (RTL/2).
The big advantage for 95% of the home users was, that Linux and later Unix/BSD were free, like in "free beer". From the home users 5% are respectable idealists and they believe in free available source improved by anyone, who feels the need to improve the module. However in reality 2/3 of the changes in the Linux kernel are developed by companies like IBM/Red Hat, Oracle, Huawei, Canonical, Intel, AMD, etc, etc.
Muito bom!
thank you!
ok which is better UNIX or Linux ? 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔
As always, this type of question has no clear answer. Linux is clearly heavily supported and maintained, and runs on many more devices. But we still see companies running other Unix systems on their servers and machines. Netflix is one example of company that uses FreeBSD to serve solutions.
I came to dislike videos like this. The claim that modern BSDs are "UNIX" or the true "heirs of UNIX" is just plain and utterly wrong. This is, what the AT&T .vs. Berkeley lawsuit clearly settled: The release of the BSD 4.4lite, upon which all modern BSDs have been rebased on, contains no AT&T source code. In fact, several files containing AT&T code have been removed from BSD 4.3-net2 sources, leading to the final 4.4-lite release. Therefore, BSD is as much UNIX as Linux is. Both contain no AT&T code and both re-instatiate what interfaces UNIX had during it's lifetime (POSIX, SVID, SuS, etc).
Thanks for the extra info.
Linux is NOT an operating system, it is a kernel. the combination of the kernel, filesystem, and GNU Utilities "distribution" is the operating system.
If it lives in userspace it's not part of the operating system. This redefinition of OS for political reasons is wrongheaded, and I say this as someone deeply appreciative of RMS's contribution to free software. The OS is a kernel (the FS abstraction included) plus drivers, nothing more, nothing less.
It's in the name. It literally tells you that Linux Is Not UniX.
Well, that saved everyone's time then. 😅
@@pikuma LOL, no, the video is very informative, very well structured and accurate (from my point of view at least). It will surely help people who are just discovering Unix or GNU/Linux and are interested.
@@vdochev No worries. This is a very old video, but I think the main idea still holds true. 🙂
Well upUnix is a trademark belonging to the open group, so whatever they sey is unix is. I'dont thing they have granted that 'privilege" to linux, mainly because neither the gnu project not Mr torvalds have been willing tomoay for ther lelevant certs. Is Linux Unix like? Yes most definitely. Is it posix compliant ( we will ignore the systemd haters for the moment) for the most oart yes. I keave it up to the rest of you good people in the comment to tell me where my thinking is wrong or that I nit pic on a legal point and miss the point of the video, which i probably do