Solaris: The Most Advanced OS?

[Derek Broughton]

David Strauss wrote:

> On Fri, 2005-11-04 at 10:41 -0400, Derek Broughton wrote:

>> That's hardly unique.  Not enough, in itself, to make it the "Most
>> Advanced OS".
> 
> Hence why I said it was only one feature that came to mind. It's far
> from the only one. Stop reading my posts with the mindset "naming one
> thing means there's only one thing" and you'll be on the right track.

Stop being so defensive.  You snipped the part where, in response to your
pointer to _other_ "unique features", I said I could live with considering
it "one of the most advanced" OS's.
> 
> And hardly unique? Name another operating system that supports process
> portability without tons of hardware support (think IBM zSeries).
 
No.  Whether the OS was written for an architecture with hardware support
makes no difference to whether process portability is unique amongst OS's. 
Tandem could do it over 20 years ago - relying very much on its hardware.
-- 
derek